Jan@BRU

We have booked a reservation on Vuling BRU-AGP-BRU in 3 weeks.

The first segment was canceled and we are suggested a rebooking to a flight leaving about 6 hours earlier, but that is a transfer flight via Barcelona. We cannot take that flight, as it's leaving too early.
The return segment wasn't canceled, but retimed, also leaving approx. 5 hours earlier than scheduled. We could theoretically take that flight, but it's not really convenient.


For the first segment, there is a direct flight on Ryanair, leaving 30 mins later than the initially scheduled Vueling flight. However, Vueling says they cannot book us on that flight, only refund the ticket. The Ryanair flight, so close to the departure is a lot more expensive than the refund we are getting from Vueling. After speaking to the thrid agent at Vueling, he confirmed they would refundn the fare difference in that case. However, he said he "didn't have the time, to confirm that in email". Apart from the appaling customer service, I'm experiencing. - I was wondering what the actual obligations of the airline are in both cases.

I understand, we cannot claim compensation for the inconvenience of the cancelation, but I was under the impression that it's Vueling's obligation to propose a flight at similar transport conditions, which would include a flight on a different airline. The several customer agents said that this was "by definition" excluded, because they can never accommodate on a different airline ... "It' impossible, I'm telling you", the guy yelled at me.

marconess

I'd be very surprised if Vueling refunded you the difference on a Ryanair flight with so much notice and the flight still getting you to your destination on the same day, without a fight.

Are there any IB flights that might suit your timeline? They might be more willing to accommodate that?
​​​

craigthemif

I am not aware of EC261 rules applying when airlines reschedule you to arrive earlier than planned. (even if that makes the trip much longer than originally booked) And you are outside the 2-week window when a flight cancellation would involve compensation.

I believe that your options are:

1. Accept the VY re-route for 1 or both flights
2. Accept the VY refund for 1 or both flights and book yourself onto Ryanair
3. Take VY to small claims court for reimbursement of the Ryanair fare difference

VY is definitely never going to rebook you themselves on another airline. It's always up to you to do and then sue for reimbursement.

Koby

For me, that's one of the disadvantages of flying low cost airlines: no rebooking on other airlines.

And indeed: with any changes more than 2 weeks in advance there is not a lot that you can do.

Jan@BRU

The real question is, what are they obliged to do under relevant legislation? Those options exist, independently of any advance notice. (The 14 days advance notice period only comes into play, for compensation, which I'm not claiming for the moment).

In this case, I opted for solution (b) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity;
There is zero doubt that the Ryanair flight (which has seats available) is the appropriate alternative (when compared to a transfer flight leaving 6 hours earlier (in the middle of my working day) or a transfer flight with an overnight stay in Barcelona (for which the airline refuses to pay as well).

In the EU guidelines for the 261/2004 regulation (here) good practices are stated.
Unfortunately not. But the (more senior) unhelpful customer service agent was adament about this: Vueling NEVER rebooks on another airline, which includes other IAG airlines.

Jan@BRU

Well the two weeks window, is about whether you can claim the flat rate compensation, which I'm not.

You are absolute right 1, 2, 3 are the options and I will, of course bite the bullet on the Ryanair flight first. I was a bit reluctant to accept the refund, as this foregoes the right to re-routing under similar transport conditions. So I send them an email, asking for the refund, as they were unable or unwilling to abide by their obligation to transport us 'under similar conditions at the earliest opportunity'. They have already started the refund process and I will now lodge a claim wiht them on the fare difference. Whether I can take that to court in Belgium ... I really don't know, whether that is worth our while

SK AAR

You have no right to request to rebooked OAL /to Ryanair if your flight is retimed 3 weeks out and you are offered a departure 6 hours earlier. If that is inconvenient to you that is your problem. Accept the refund and book with FR despite the higher costs, Vueling is not going to do that for you.

Jan@BRU

Thanks for your answer. What is that assertion based on, when the EU directive states the opposite?

Just for clarification: Both segments of our flight were affected differently:

- The first was one canceled (that's the one, where the Ryanair alternative exists).and where the provider suggests a flight via another routing, leaving 6 hours earlier. I did in the meantime book the Ryanair flight to avoid the cost to go up even further, as the flight departure appraoches.
- The second one has been retimed to 6h30 earlier, while maintaining the original flight number. There, we didn't receive an email (3 weeks earlier), but found out about it, when I was debating the first segment's rebooking. We are still considering, whether to take that flight, as there no realistic other options exist on the same day.

etiene

I don't think the above is correct - the two weeks is indeed for compensation, but VY still have to offer suitable alternative options. The issue is almost certainly that the agents have no way of booking those, so they're only wrong if they're claiming that it's outside of the regulation. Normally in such a situation, what you have to do is not take the refund - that would be the end of their obligation to you. Instead, you have to book the Ryanair flight then claim a refund of that full price from VY [you end up paying only the original price which VY keep]. Of course, you may not want to take that risk, or have the patience to persue VY for the refund in the [fairly likely] event that they refuse the payment. They may well claim that their proposed alternative was adequate, though I think the usual standard there is the time limits from the compensation regulation.

I'd advise looking through the BA forum thread on this topic - AFAIK it's the most comprehensive on FT, whereas the Other European Airlines forum doesn't get a lot of traffic. Myself I've had reimbursement from easyJet for train replacements, though that was a same day cancellation. They actually didn't dispute anything and paid pretty promptly.

SK AAR

Correct, and a flight departing 6 hours earlier (despite having to connect at BCN) would normally be not the end of the world, and considered adequate and acceptable to most pax. There is no right to purchase ticket with another carrier and ask for reimbursement just because there is a better and more convenient flight to the pax; there is absolutely no basis for this in the EU reg. Not even legacy carriers would rebook OAL in this situation. Yes, the OP can try to argue that departing 6 hours earlier and rebooked to non-direct flights is not considered adequate, but I would not bet on the OP winning that complaint, i.e. it will certainly be risky.

etiene

For short breaks - and in many other instances - six hours difference would indeed be entirely useless. And don't forget that the compensation kicks in at only one hour earlier departure against four hours for tardy arrival. Which is not to say that there's no risk, and I have no idea how easy to use small claims channels are in BE - but I do think the regulation is on their side.

[Edited to add: which I think it should be. It shouldn't be acceptable for a company to retime a flight drastically and say that the consumer who has planned around the original is SOOL.]

SK AAR

Sure, and in that case you just ask for a full refund (which I believe Vueling will not and has not denied).

Refraining from asking for a (full) refund and purchasing a new ticket with FR expecting to get a full reimbursement subsequently, leads to a significant risk on the part of pax. Most would not be prepared to do that (and I would advise against it)

Jan@BRU

Thanks for clarifying, what you actually meant; this is entirely question, indeed: What's in this particular situation the definition of rerouting at the earliest opportunity.

In our situation, taking a flight that was booked and confirmed on a regular working day at 20:30, to be retimed at 14:15 is materially impossible to take, without inflicting additional damages and inconveniences over and above those already upon us, by the airline's unilateral decision of a flight cancelation.

This is the very reason, why the regulation in EU 261/2004 foresees other options than a full refund and imposes the requirement to provide the option of
b). re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity;

So it comes down to the question whether in suggesting the two flight options via Barcelona (one leaving 6 hours earlier, another one having an overnight stay not paid for by the airline and arriving 11 hours late), are in compliance with the airline's obligation to offer "re-routing at the earliest opportunity"; I would think - no, as the earliest opportunity is clearly the Ryanair flight mentioned, that leaves half an hour later than the originally scheduled.

This is not the situation here. First, arguably the Ryanair flight is not more convenient but less so, given both airline's general service level and comfort in comparison. But notably, the Ryanair flight is the only one that fulfills the re-routing obligation at the earliest opportunity.

It has been clarified over and over that this would of course include rerouting on other airlines (here for example and here) and that the airline is obliged to pay the fare difference, if they don't reroute themselves at the earliest oppportunity. The real question, it seems to me: where is the cut-off, when re-routing options are being considered "equivalent". It would be interesting to hear, whether any cases have been actually decided by a court of law on this.

In a related case the ECJ has decided that a retiming of more than one hour in advance, is equivalent to a cancelation (and gives rise to compensation along Article 7 -- I clarified before that we aren't claiming any compensation for the first segment); however it's important to see, that the ECJ rightfully is much stricter with the rules for bringing a flight forward than delaying it. And this situation is similar here. Had the airline suggested a flight leaving six hours later, we would have been annoyed, but with so much advance notice, you can cope with this adequately. (and if you can't,you take the refund). But bringing the flight forward (or suggesting a much earlier different flight) in lieu of a canceled one, is equivalent to not remedying the breach of contract the air carrier is engaging in.

Jan@BRU

The refund is a no brainer and, while mentioned as an obligation of the air carrier in the EU directive, is is a tautology of one of the fundamental principles of civil law: there is a contract, one party - for reasons entirely under their control - decides to not provide the service that has been previously confirmed: in that case, of course they have to refund.


Why are you presenting this, as if we were trying to take advantage of the situation in order to get something that is actually beneficial for us or to avail of "more convenience"? This is absolutely not the case.

The air carrier canceling a flight and not offering a viable re-routing option, in addition to the inconvenience caused, inflicts financial damage on us (because we have to pay a higher price than contractually agreed to get the service which we require).

I agree with you on the risk of Vueling refusing to compensate that damage. Trust me that was entirely obvious during the discussions I had with them.

We will not refrain from anything. As stated before, a refund for a service that is not and will not be provided, isn't some kind of special offer, which expires if not accepted in time. Since we'll have to book (and pay for) the Ryanair flights ourselves anyway, we will make a claim of the full Ryanair ticket price and ask them to keep the change. Otherwise, (as etienne has pointed out), we would indeed forego the possibility for that claim.

etiene

This is nonsense. The passenger may well have - entirely reasonably - booked other products and services based on the contract formed with the airline to leave A and reach B at specified times. Non-cancellable hotels being just one possible example. The passenger is not made whole by the mere refund - this is why the regulation specifies that the passenger gets to choose between refund or rerouting. If the airline can void the contract and merely refund, the contract is meaningless in the first place.

The risk involved is because airlines can and do push their luck on denying these claims, knowing that statistically they win when a certain percentage of people do not assert their rights. Given that there are no escalatory penalties for wrongful denials, that percentage doesn't have to be terribly high at all - and you're contributing to it.