terbangalways

Not sure if there is such SQ Compensation post in the past.
I thought I would like to chime on my recent not so good flights/services which resulted in miles or voucher as compensation / service recovery.
This post is aim to share. Flight experiences/services might differ or hit-miss even for an excellent airline such as SQ.
Amount should not be used as benchmark as there are other factors such as status, class, etc for consideration.

1. Malfunctioning seat in A380 old Suites, voucher SGD 300. Seat does not recline fully.
2. Malfunctioning remote control in A350 PEY, voucher SGD 150.
3. Rimowa polycarbonate cracked, SQ play hardball by trying to fix it. Went over to Rimowa and sales agent advised to claim a brand new suitcase as there is no way to fix. Reimbursed SGD 500 instead. And SQ kept damaged suitcase.
4. Baggage delayed for 24 hours, had to push very hard to get cash at airport. SGD 80.

lesocw

edited

sure.

lokijuh

I am not sure if wholesale publishing of recovery amounts publicly is such a good idea. That's between the airline and the passenger. The more public these sort of things become, there's only one way for these things to go, and that's in the wrong direction.

lingua101

Just curious, does airlines liables for airlines damage? I had case when the zipper of my Samsonite luggage was ripped after Jetstar flight and the airlines wrote to me that they do not cover this damage..... Have another incident that one of my wheel was totally ripped off when I took it off in ORD. CX staff said technically they will not cover this but agreed to compensate me with USD50.

So are those claim that airlines not liable for the damage true?

garykung

No.

Whenever DOT regulations applies, DOT has specified that airlines can't reject this kind of claims. Airlines have been fined previously because of that.

Also, the Montreal Convention does not explicit exclude this kind of damage.

So it is more like the airlines' CYA policy rather than truth.

lokijuh

I can sort of see why the airlines are trying to limit liability for damage with the wheels. From their point of view you "choose"* to have a case that has wheels that stick out - and therefore much likely to be damaged during handling - you take the risk.

* Unfortunately for passengers, in the meantime the luggage companies have removed the choice as basically the old-fashioned two wheelers aren't available for purchase any more .

terbangalways

Well, I hope this post won't go in opposite direction.
Read some post on "Compensation Clinic" and thought of sharing that sometimes is hard to get the airline to:
1. fix/compensate damaged suitcase when checked.
2. issued petty cash for delayed suitcase.
All these would require a bit of pushing. And time wasted. Which should not be a hardball.
And Airline typically throw the liability to consumer travel insurance in most cases.

terbangalways

I am not sure as to what extent airline is liable of. As GaryKung pointed out that Montreal C is in place for us based outside US.
Typically they would have to fix it, Especially if the suitcase is beyond repair (exclude minor dents/wear/tear).
As in the case with my cracked polycarbonate Rimowa.
SQ refused to compensate fully (1 on 1 exchange), they wrote a letter and throw the liability to consumer travel insurance.
Which in most cases, since airline has compensated SGD500 in my case, travel insurance will not cover for the excess cost of the Rimowa.

garykung

What I can say is baggage claim is similar to EC261 compensation - airlines will try to avoid paying them as much as possible.

But bottom line - when you get serious, they will eventually pay you.

I took the liberty to look at SQ's CoC. SQ does list the common problems as excluded. However, the problem is there is no domestic flight in Singapore. So basically all flights are under Montreal. Because Montreal did not specify such exclusion, any exclusion, per DOT's interpretation, is a contravention of the purpose of Montreal.

So here you have it - they are liable. It is a question if you can push them enough to make them pay.

terbangalways

edited

terbangalways

Thank You!
Your explanation is very helpful.

carrotjuice

lokijuh

I think it's constructive to hear about and discuss luggage compensation, and good to see that. Less so about compensation for service recovery, which is much more subjective (and really the target of my original post), and more prone to being pared back if information is shared to freely, creating expectations.

terbangalways

3. SGD500 barely enough to buy halve of Rimowa
4. I mean petty cash to buy your bare necessity. Once given, then i'm not entitled to claim with airline. And go through travel insurance.