Ryanair not paying compensation

mikey72

clairbear wrote: »

I would agree, in this instance with MOL,just as some able bodied person can claim thousands for tripping over a few millimetres of paving or a murderer could get off because a policeman filled out a form incorrectly or someone can write off thousands of creditcard debt because of a technicality.Doesnt mean regulations are FAIR to both parties.
In THIS instance I think AIRLINES being treated unfairly when OTHERS have questions to answer

I don't know, I quite like the pavement one, I've paid a fortune to the council over the years. Same as claiming for pothole damage in the car.

clairbear_3

Pothole damage should be payable if Council neglected to repair roads but what did RYANAIR neglect?They were TOLD not to fly.
Its like getting a £100 quote from a decorater to wallpaper your chimney breast but when he removes old paper the plaster falls off and large cracks revealed,suggesting subsidence.Would you force him to repair everything and then paper for £100??

mikey72

Cityboy wrote: »

This is just the cost of doing the business of operating an airline. Whether that airline chooses to insure against such eventualities or to self-insure for such an event is a business decision for them alone.

Businesses cannot pick and choose which regulations they will abide by and which they will ignore. That leads to anarchy.

Probably more of an oligarchy.

JamesU

clairbear wrote: »

I would agree, in this instance with MOL,just as some able bodied person can claim thousands for tripping over a few millimetres of paving or a murderer could get off because a policeman filled out a form incorrectly or someone can write off thousands of creditcard debt because of a technicality.Doesnt mean regulations are FAIR to both parties.
In THIS instance I think AIRLINES being treated unfairly when OTHERS have questions to answer

Just like MOL, who could reschedule flights if there were not enough passengers, bump you on to a different flight as felt fit to save on costs etc etc. And MOL could do this every day, not just when there is a volcano. Where do you draw the line. Customers need to be protected, if MOL does not like the regulations, he can set up a business in something else, somewhere elsewhere. Rest assured extortionate customer claims will not be accepted anyway, but there has to be a balance somewhere along the line. And that balance is being set fairly with customer protection.

Welcome to the real world Ryanair:rotfl:

JamesU

wave_rider_2

clairbear wrote: »

This is ridiculous RYANAIRs aim is to get you from A to B,if there is a few hours delay then a few £ for food should be offered.
Anything else SHOULD be payed from INSURANCE thats their purpose.
Sadly Low Cost Airlines WILL be a thing of the past if forced to PAY for Large Bills outside their control

Clairbear, please put yourself in the position of the airlines' customers - left stranded hundreds, or even thousands, of miles from home. EU261/2004 will have been their only saviour from having to spend night after night in an airport departure lounge - if their airline has bothered to tell them about their rights, that is!

Whilst EU261 may not seem fair to the airlines in these situations, but it's currently the only thing that stops them (well the EU ones anyway) from abandoning their customers to their fate! Unlike insurance policies, it has no small print, no exclusions, not even any limits - until the airline can get you home, the basics of life, - your food and accomodation, are taken care of. How many insurance policies do you know that will do that without exceptions!

exel1966

Hopefully once the 'washup' is done these regulations will be ammended to also give the airlines some protection. I'm sure we all want to keep flying as cheaply as possible, but faced with claims in their thousands some airlines may resort to higher fares in future to insure against such losses.

They are clearly not designed nor fit for this purpose, but for now as the law stands they are liable as mentioned above and should reimburse all pax accordingly.

reformedEffortMaker_2

It's funny how most of the people who are supporting Ryanair are doing so from the comfort of their own home, having not had to spend a penny because of the volcano shenanigans, not spent an hour, let alone 4 days sleeping on airport floors, not used up any annual leave that was already planned for something else, not missed any school etc etc......

It's all well and good telling the consumer to have adequate insurance. Why hasnt Micheal O'Learly got suitable insurance to cover for events like this then??

IMO, as has already been said, none of this matters, O'Learly has probably been silenced by the news that the government will be bailing him, and the other airlines out....in the same way they helped the banks, and the farmers.....so we'll just pay for all of this in increased taxes anyway

mikey72

reformedEffortMaker wrote: »

It's funny how most of the people who are supporting Ryanair are doing so from the comfort of their own home, having not had to spend a penny because of the volcano shenanigans, not spent an hour, let alone 4 days sleeping on airport floors, not used up any annual leave that was already planned for something else, not missed any school etc etc......

It's all well and good telling the consumer to have adequate insurance. Why hasnt Micheal O'Learly got suitable insurance to cover for events like this then??

IMO, as has already been said, none of this matters, O'Learly has probably been silenced by the news that the government will be bailing him, and the other airlines out....in the same way they helped the banks, and the farmers.....so we'll just pay for all of this in increased taxes anyway

Who do you think would pay in the end if it was covered by insurance?

reformedEffortMaker_2

mikey72 wrote: »

Who do you think would pay in the end if it was covered by insurance?

So if you're implying the taxpayer would be footing the bill regardless of whether the airline or the insurance company are held responsible, what is the point of this debate/thread?

mikey72

reformedEffortMaker wrote: »

So if you're implying the taxpayer would be footing the bill regardless of whether the airline or the insurance company are held responsible, what is the point of this debate/thread?

If no one pays, all the customers who benefited from the cheap tickets take the hit.
If ryanair pay, the cost is passed onto future tickets, and paid for by the future passengers who don't get as quite cheap tickets.
If the insurance pay, all the future insurance customers pay in increased premiums.
If the eu pay, we pay higher taxes.
End of the day, the customer/taxpayer pays, just the individual amount varies.

(and what's the betting ryanair include an "insurance" surcharge shortly)