Dec 10, 2020, 7:55 pm
Last edit by: Adam Smith
As of April 13, 2021 (in conjunction with the federal government bailout), AC is providing refunds for flights cancelled due to COVID, which applies to tickets with travel after February 1, 2020, and purchased before April 13, 2021. This includes flights cancelled by customers rather than AC.
Going forward (i.e. tickets purchased on or after April 13, 2021), cancelled flights will be refunded if AC does not offer a re-booking option with departure +/- 3 hours from the original time.
AC refund portal
Online refund request form
Press release on the bailout
Going forward (i.e. tickets purchased on or after April 13, 2021), cancelled flights will be refunded if AC does not offer a re-booking option with departure +/- 3 hours from the original time.
AC refund portal
Online refund request form
Press release on the bailout
Master thread Air Canada Refunds vs credits; Class action lawsuit filed
Jul 14, 2020, 1:54 pm
#841
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,359
Jul 14, 2020, 2:42 pm
#842
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,810
But that's not my point, which refers to contract law which the wording conflicts with. To start with, the clause already excluded transborder itineraries. And in any event, the issue with contract law presumably would hold just the same in the US.
Jul 14, 2020, 4:57 pm
#843
Moderator, Air Canada; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: YYC
Programs: AC SE MM, FB Plat, WS Plat, BA Silver, DL GM, Marriott Plat, Hilton Gold, Accor Silver
Posts: 16,781
Jul 16, 2020, 9:09 am
#844
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,810
Positive experience this time.
Last time, I wanted to cancel a latitude ticket, it took four months and something like four phone calls. This time, a more expensive ticket that now falls within the rules for full reimbursement, a single call, the agent (actually a concierge) knew the rules, and in two days the amount was back in my amex account.
That's the last ticket needing being dealt with. At leats with AC. Wating on LH, in a case that involves a cancelled flight, P fare, not terribly expensive.
Last time, I wanted to cancel a latitude ticket, it took four months and something like four phone calls. This time, a more expensive ticket that now falls within the rules for full reimbursement, a single call, the agent (actually a concierge) knew the rules, and in two days the amount was back in my amex account.
That's the last ticket needing being dealt with. At leats with AC. Wating on LH, in a case that involves a cancelled flight, P fare, not terribly expensive.
Jul 16, 2020, 2:08 pm
#845
Join Date: Jun 2019
Programs: Marriott Titanium; WN A-list; UA Silver
Posts: 484
I have (had) an open jaw AC flight booked in late August with a return of late September from US to Japan.
On 3/5/2020 (I have impeccable timing), I bought SFO-YVR-NRT-FUK, CTS-NRT-YVR-SFO leaving early May, departing early June.
As covid became more clearly a world wide issue, on 4/1/2020, I changed the flight to the current SFO-YVR-NRT-CTS, FUK-NRT-YVR-SFO. The intra-Japan legs were operated by ANA (possibly ANAwings), YVR-SFO was operated by UA. All flights had an AC flight number. All flights except the intra-Japan flights are in P. Intra-Japan flights are in Y. I paid a fair difference of ~400USD to change.
This week I received notice the NRT-CTS flight was cancelled. It was not rebooked by AC, and looking at ANA's schedule, they have ended direct NRT-CTS flights.
Given that it is unlikely Japan will let me in in late August even with a Canadian passport (and even doing a 14d quarantine in Canada), it's probably time to let this one go.
Right now, AC is just giving me the two "not our fault" option of Aeroplan miles or a voucher for what i paid (265k mi or 4k USD). Seems to me that a flight cancellation of an AC flight numbered flight, even if operated by ANA, more than a month prior to the flight should be "within our control?"
I guess I'm not too pissed at the cert as it will last forever, AC seems unlikely to fail, and now seems to be able to be used for multiple flights, but principle (should) mean something, doesn't it?
On 3/5/2020 (I have impeccable timing), I bought SFO-YVR-NRT-FUK, CTS-NRT-YVR-SFO leaving early May, departing early June.
As covid became more clearly a world wide issue, on 4/1/2020, I changed the flight to the current SFO-YVR-NRT-CTS, FUK-NRT-YVR-SFO. The intra-Japan legs were operated by ANA (possibly ANAwings), YVR-SFO was operated by UA. All flights had an AC flight number. All flights except the intra-Japan flights are in P. Intra-Japan flights are in Y. I paid a fair difference of ~400USD to change.
This week I received notice the NRT-CTS flight was cancelled. It was not rebooked by AC, and looking at ANA's schedule, they have ended direct NRT-CTS flights.
Given that it is unlikely Japan will let me in in late August even with a Canadian passport (and even doing a 14d quarantine in Canada), it's probably time to let this one go.
Right now, AC is just giving me the two "not our fault" option of Aeroplan miles or a voucher for what i paid (265k mi or 4k USD). Seems to me that a flight cancellation of an AC flight numbered flight, even if operated by ANA, more than a month prior to the flight should be "within our control?"
I guess I'm not too pissed at the cert as it will last forever, AC seems unlikely to fail, and now seems to be able to be used for multiple flights, but principle (should) mean something, doesn't it?
Jul 16, 2020, 2:16 pm
#846
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,359
I have (had) an open jaw AC flight booked in late August with a return of late September from US to Japan.
On 3/5/2020 (I have impeccable timing), I bought SFO-YVR-NRT-FUK, CTS-NRT-YVR-SFO leaving early May, departing early June.
As covid became more clearly a world wide issue, on 4/1/2020, I changed the flight to the current SFO-YVR-NRT-CTS, FUK-NRT-YVR-SFO. The intra-Japan legs were operated by ANA (possibly ANAwings), YVR-SFO was operated by UA. All flights had an AC flight number. All flights except the intra-Japan flights are in P. Intra-Japan flights are in Y. I paid a fair difference of ~400USD to change.
This week I received notice the NRT-CTS flight was cancelled. It was not rebooked by AC, and looking at ANA's schedule, they have ended direct NRT-CTS flights.
Given that it is unlikely Japan will let me in in late August even with a Canadian passport (and even doing a 14d quarantine in Canada), it's probably time to let this one go.
Right now, AC is just giving me the two "not our fault" option of Aeroplan miles or a voucher for what i paid (265k mi or 4k USD). Seems to me that a flight cancellation of an AC flight numbered flight, even if operated by ANA, more than a month prior to the flight should be "within our control?"
I guess I'm not too pissed at the cert as it will last forever, AC seems unlikely to fail, and now seems to be able to be used for multiple flights, but principle (should) mean something, doesn't it?
On 3/5/2020 (I have impeccable timing), I bought SFO-YVR-NRT-FUK, CTS-NRT-YVR-SFO leaving early May, departing early June.
As covid became more clearly a world wide issue, on 4/1/2020, I changed the flight to the current SFO-YVR-NRT-CTS, FUK-NRT-YVR-SFO. The intra-Japan legs were operated by ANA (possibly ANAwings), YVR-SFO was operated by UA. All flights had an AC flight number. All flights except the intra-Japan flights are in P. Intra-Japan flights are in Y. I paid a fair difference of ~400USD to change.
This week I received notice the NRT-CTS flight was cancelled. It was not rebooked by AC, and looking at ANA's schedule, they have ended direct NRT-CTS flights.
Given that it is unlikely Japan will let me in in late August even with a Canadian passport (and even doing a 14d quarantine in Canada), it's probably time to let this one go.
Right now, AC is just giving me the two "not our fault" option of Aeroplan miles or a voucher for what i paid (265k mi or 4k USD). Seems to me that a flight cancellation of an AC flight numbered flight, even if operated by ANA, more than a month prior to the flight should be "within our control?"
I guess I'm not too pissed at the cert as it will last forever, AC seems unlikely to fail, and now seems to be able to be used for multiple flights, but principle (should) mean something, doesn't it?
I'd probably wait to see some DOT results since there are a few interesting cases right now, and then submit a complaint to them.
Even now, you can see what AC's lawyers typically say, so you can pre-empt that in the initial complaint.
Jul 16, 2020, 4:13 pm
#848
Join Date: Jun 2019
Programs: Marriott Titanium; WN A-list; UA Silver
Posts: 484
Yes, but if you're happy with the voucher, is it worth your time to fight?
I'd probably wait to see some DOT results since there are a few interesting cases right now, and then submit a complaint to them.
Even now, you can see what AC's lawyers typically say, so you can pre-empt that in the initial complaint.
I'd probably wait to see some DOT results since there are a few interesting cases right now, and then submit a complaint to them.
Even now, you can see what AC's lawyers typically say, so you can pre-empt that in the initial complaint.
Jul 17, 2020, 2:23 pm
#849
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: DTW
Programs: Alaska, Delta, Southwest
Posts: 1,663
Well, their answer to my complaint was posted today, and it's basically the same answer they gave Naomi Horovitz: https://www.regulations.gov/document...2020-0074-0004. They claim the voucher is consistent with their CoC and Tariff because the cancellation was outside their control even though that language isn't in the Tariff that applies to my ticket (purchased August 26 of last year).
Jul 17, 2020, 2:46 pm
#850
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bellevue, WA - AA EXP 3MM
Posts: 2,756
Jeffrey, I read your complaint and Air Canada's answer. Your complaint clearly specifies the date on which you purchased your ticket (your paragraph 3). Yet Air Canada seems to ignore that date and the tariff in effect as of that date. Air Canada quotes and discusses their current tariff as if that's the document that applies, when it plainly isn't. It would take a super-diligent reader to notice your early date of purchase, find the then-applicable tariff, and realize that the language AC quotes isn't there and wasn't added until months later.
If I were in your situation, I would want to make this easier for a reader -- lay it all out, including explicitly emphasizing the date of purchase, linking to the then-applicable tariff, quoting it inline in my submission, noting that the language AC cites is not present in the version as of that date, and if possible noting when AC's quoted language was added. This could be a Reply filed in the docket.
Best practice for filing a Reply is to seek the other party's consent, via a request to their counsel such as "I believe a further round of briefing could be useful to DOT to better clarify which contract provisions apply and when they took effect. I propose to file a reply not later than two weeks from today, not more than [number] pages. Will AC consent to such filing? Of course I will in turn consent to a surreply of the same length and timing." If AC says yes, you file your Reply with a brief first page statement indicating AC's assent. If AC says no, you'd still file the motion, along with a statement explaining the situation -- that you sought AC's assent, that good cause exists (key contract terms easily overlooked, AC changed the contract after you purchased, existing briefing does not lay this out clearly), and ask that DOT evaluate. In my experience DOT always accepts the additional filing.
An alternative approach is for you, or anyone interested, to use the Regulations.gov "comment" feature to make the point. That has the virtue of being super easy -- just a web browser, no Word, no PDF, no consultation with AC attorney. In my experience DOT staff usually read comments, but that is not guaranteed, compared to official briefing which is usually read with care. Hence my preference for filing a formal Reply.
A twist is that you (Jeffrey) should win, in my view, for a different reason than other complaints. You should win because the tariff in effect at the time of your purchase says full refund if AC cancels. Others should win because it is grossly unfair and hence impermissible, under US law and regulation, for an airline to establish a contractual regime wherein a passenger does not receive a full refund upon carrier cancellation. It would be a real shame if DOT recognizes only the former argument and not the latter. That said, everything we've seen from DOT to date suggests that they do recognize the importance of the latter.
If I were in your situation, I would want to make this easier for a reader -- lay it all out, including explicitly emphasizing the date of purchase, linking to the then-applicable tariff, quoting it inline in my submission, noting that the language AC cites is not present in the version as of that date, and if possible noting when AC's quoted language was added. This could be a Reply filed in the docket.
Best practice for filing a Reply is to seek the other party's consent, via a request to their counsel such as "I believe a further round of briefing could be useful to DOT to better clarify which contract provisions apply and when they took effect. I propose to file a reply not later than two weeks from today, not more than [number] pages. Will AC consent to such filing? Of course I will in turn consent to a surreply of the same length and timing." If AC says yes, you file your Reply with a brief first page statement indicating AC's assent. If AC says no, you'd still file the motion, along with a statement explaining the situation -- that you sought AC's assent, that good cause exists (key contract terms easily overlooked, AC changed the contract after you purchased, existing briefing does not lay this out clearly), and ask that DOT evaluate. In my experience DOT always accepts the additional filing.
An alternative approach is for you, or anyone interested, to use the Regulations.gov "comment" feature to make the point. That has the virtue of being super easy -- just a web browser, no Word, no PDF, no consultation with AC attorney. In my experience DOT staff usually read comments, but that is not guaranteed, compared to official briefing which is usually read with care. Hence my preference for filing a formal Reply.
A twist is that you (Jeffrey) should win, in my view, for a different reason than other complaints. You should win because the tariff in effect at the time of your purchase says full refund if AC cancels. Others should win because it is grossly unfair and hence impermissible, under US law and regulation, for an airline to establish a contractual regime wherein a passenger does not receive a full refund upon carrier cancellation. It would be a real shame if DOT recognizes only the former argument and not the latter. That said, everything we've seen from DOT to date suggests that they do recognize the importance of the latter.
Jul 17, 2020, 4:05 pm
#851
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 16
Ok, I decided to ring Customer Care (International) to request a refund, it only took a few minutes to get an agent. At first I was told that I could only get the voucher. I then questioned this and stated that rule has changed due to EU261. The agent then apologised and said I was correct. I waited on the phone for 20 minutes while he checked and then started the refund process. I was told I would receive email confirmation of the refund within a week and to ring back if I do not receive it in this time. After receiving the email, it would then take up to 2 weeks to issue back to my credit card.
So, I am very happy with this outcome but will wait until I get the email and credit card refund before I will celebrate....lol.
Thank you Adam Smith and all the other kind people who helped, I just hope the refund arrives.
I will keep you posted and THANK YOU all again very much.
Stay Safe
So, I am very happy with this outcome but will wait until I get the email and credit card refund before I will celebrate....lol.
Thank you Adam Smith and all the other kind people who helped, I just hope the refund arrives.
I will keep you posted and THANK YOU all again very much.
Stay Safe
Dear Mr. xxxxxx,
Thank you for your follow up email.
We have reconsidered your request for a refund and given your itinerary, or part of your itinerary, may be subject to the Regulation EC 261/2004 (EC261), and there was an involuntary change made to your itinerary, we have agreed to issue a refund for your unused ticket, should you still prefer this option over the alternatives we are offering.
To process your refund or learn more about your alternatives, if you made your booking with a travel agency, please contact them directly. They have recently been sent an updated message from Air Canada.
If you made your booking directly with Air Canada, on aircanada.com, with Kayak, Google Flights or Skyscanner, go to aircanada.com/mybookings to make your selection. If you are not able to access My Bookings or you receive an error message when making your selection, please reply to this email and we will be happy to assist you.
We hope that we may have a future opportunity to welcome you on board.
Sincerely,
Jul 17, 2020, 4:34 pm
#852
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: DTW
Programs: Alaska, Delta, Southwest
Posts: 1,663
Jeffrey, I read your complaint and Air Canada's answer. Your complaint clearly specifies the date on which you purchased your ticket (your paragraph 3). Yet Air Canada seems to ignore that date and the tariff in effect as of that date. Air Canada quotes and discusses their current tariff as if that's the document that applies, when it plainly isn't. It would take a super-diligent reader to notice your early date of purchase, find the then-applicable tariff, and realize that the language AC quotes isn't there and wasn't added until months later.
If I were in your situation, I would want to make this easier for a reader -- lay it all out, including explicitly emphasizing the date of purchase, linking to the then-applicable tariff, quoting it inline in my submission, noting that the language AC cites is not present in the version as of that date, and if possible noting when AC's quoted language was added. This could be a Reply filed in the docket.
Best practice for filing a Reply is to seek the other party's consent, via a request to their counsel such as "I believe a further round of briefing could be useful to DOT to better clarify which contract provisions apply and when they took effect. I propose to file a reply not later than two weeks from today, not more than [number] pages. Will AC consent to such filing? Of course I will in turn consent to a surreply of the same length and timing." If AC says yes, you file your Reply with a brief first page statement indicating AC's assent. If AC says no, you'd still file the motion, along with a statement explaining the situation -- that you sought AC's assent, that good cause exists (key contract terms easily overlooked, AC changed the contract after you purchased, existing briefing does not lay this out clearly), and ask that DOT evaluate. In my experience DOT always accepts the additional filing.
An alternative approach is for you, or anyone interested, to use the Regulations.gov "comment" feature to make the point. That has the virtue of being super easy -- just a web browser, no Word, no PDF, no consultation with AC attorney. In my experience DOT staff usually read comments, but that is not guaranteed, compared to official briefing which is usually read with care. Hence my preference for filing a formal Reply.
A twist is that you (Jeffrey) should win, in my view, for a different reason than other complaints. You should win because the tariff in effect at the time of your purchase says full refund if AC cancels. Others should win because it is grossly unfair and hence impermissible, under US law and regulation, for an airline to establish a contractual regime wherein a passenger does not receive a full refund upon carrier cancellation. It would be a real shame if DOT recognizes only the former argument and not the latter. That said, everything we've seen from DOT to date suggests that they do recognize the importance of the latter.
If I were in your situation, I would want to make this easier for a reader -- lay it all out, including explicitly emphasizing the date of purchase, linking to the then-applicable tariff, quoting it inline in my submission, noting that the language AC cites is not present in the version as of that date, and if possible noting when AC's quoted language was added. This could be a Reply filed in the docket.
Best practice for filing a Reply is to seek the other party's consent, via a request to their counsel such as "I believe a further round of briefing could be useful to DOT to better clarify which contract provisions apply and when they took effect. I propose to file a reply not later than two weeks from today, not more than [number] pages. Will AC consent to such filing? Of course I will in turn consent to a surreply of the same length and timing." If AC says yes, you file your Reply with a brief first page statement indicating AC's assent. If AC says no, you'd still file the motion, along with a statement explaining the situation -- that you sought AC's assent, that good cause exists (key contract terms easily overlooked, AC changed the contract after you purchased, existing briefing does not lay this out clearly), and ask that DOT evaluate. In my experience DOT always accepts the additional filing.
An alternative approach is for you, or anyone interested, to use the Regulations.gov "comment" feature to make the point. That has the virtue of being super easy -- just a web browser, no Word, no PDF, no consultation with AC attorney. In my experience DOT staff usually read comments, but that is not guaranteed, compared to official briefing which is usually read with care. Hence my preference for filing a formal Reply.
A twist is that you (Jeffrey) should win, in my view, for a different reason than other complaints. You should win because the tariff in effect at the time of your purchase says full refund if AC cancels. Others should win because it is grossly unfair and hence impermissible, under US law and regulation, for an airline to establish a contractual regime wherein a passenger does not receive a full refund upon carrier cancellation. It would be a real shame if DOT recognizes only the former argument and not the latter. That said, everything we've seen from DOT to date suggests that they do recognize the importance of the latter.
Jul 17, 2020, 5:43 pm
#853
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,359
Except it's not outside their control.
The US has never stopped AC from flying. It was always their decision due to loads (or lack thereof).
The US has never stopped AC from flying. It was always their decision due to loads (or lack thereof).
Jul 17, 2020, 7:00 pm
#854
Join Date: May 2013
Location: west coast best coast
Programs: TINDER GOLD, STARBUCKS GOLD, COSTCO EXECUTIVE!!
Posts: 3,989
Jul 17, 2020, 7:23 pm
#855
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 767
So June 7th booked two flights using “I’m sorry“ credits for seat deflation. Plan was to convert soon to be expired credits into the gift card with no expiry - figured it was easier than bothering them to get the credits extended since hold times were crazy. Canceled them a couple of days later ensure plenty of time to give system time to profess. Terms and conditions said CANCEL FOR ANY REASON.
its said wait 3-4 weeks for the gift card. But still nothing and we’re well past that. Anyone had any success with getting the gift card for a cancelation these days? I assume the processing isn’t automatic.
its said wait 3-4 weeks for the gift card. But still nothing and we’re well past that. Anyone had any success with getting the gift card for a cancelation these days? I assume the processing isn’t automatic.
Last edited by bakersdozen; Jul 19, 2020 at 9:08 am