'Is it fair for Ryanair to pay compensation?' poll discussion

bylromarha

You wonder why you bother to get travel insurance...it should be them who pay up, not the airlines.

mogadon

rizla01 wrote: »

The Insurance Co's are covered by the 'Act of God' situation and so they should be.

Why should they be? Travel insurance is supposed to cover you for additional costs caused by unforeseen events, why should Act of God be excluded?

The insurance companies want to exclude because they prefer to cover events where someone is at fault, so they can reclaim their costs, but sometimes things just happen, and there is no person or organisation that can be blamed for it.

Aside from medical emergencies, I can't think of a situation that it's more appropriate for travel insurance to pay out on.

rizla01 wrote: »

For pity's sake. I got a puncture the other day. Wouldn't have got it if the shopkeeper had served me quicker because someone else would probably have copped that nail.

What if you had specifically bought insurance that was supposed to cover your immediate and related costs in the event that your tyres got damaged? Then found out it only covers the cost of the puncture if you could prove who left the nail there. Wouldn't that grate just a little bit?

Ephemera

hallmark wrote: »

Of course the airlines should foot the bill.

Goverments do not pay for anything; taxpayers do. Thus the choice is not whether Ryanair or some Government should pay, it's whether Ryanair or the taxpayer should pay. (Insurers never pay for anything by the way, they simply increase premiums. That's the whole reason Ryanair are arguing for the taxpayer to stump up the money....)

There is no reason whatsoever why the taxpayer should have to pay towards the costs of either Ryanair or that part of the public that chooses to fly.

The airlines must pay, there is no other remotely fair answer. If Ryanair etc need to increase the cost of their tickets to fund situations like this then so be it. This volcanic ash situation has highlighted one hitherto unthought of way in which air travel can be a more expensive business than previously supposed and a slight premium on prices in future may well be necessary. But to expect the general public to watch Companies like Ryanair clean up in the good times then have to bail them out when things go wrong is ludicrous.

The airlines must pay. It's the cost of doing business.

Well said.

Why should the taxpayer, especially a non-flying taxpayer, bail out a company that can make huge profits???

The whole economy is in dire straits, with most people having to tighten their belts already, why place an additional tax burden on them?

There is a third way...

Pay the airlines what they want if they need it to stay in business, with the caveat that it is a LOAN from the taxpayer, and must be repaid, with interest, when things pick up. And that from this day the airlines will have to insure against such things happening again.

oooh... I think I saw a flying pig... :):)

adammouse

Ryanair is a 'no frills' airline. People can't expect the best of both worlds when buying cheap airline tickets.

I am all for the cheaper tickets that provide less service & security!

teddyco

Ironically, it's the large corporations who consistently push closer ties with Europe and a push to get Britain into the Euro, but then they whine and moan when that same organization throws a regulation that forces them to pay up for grounded planes caused by another European regulatory group.

That leads me to another item: The European Union is not a 'government' it's a corporation, just like IBM, General Motors, or British Airways. The EU has its' own articles of incorporation (Lisbon Treaty), they have their own security force to keep people in line, and they have their own corporate shares of stock (Euro). Unbeknownst to the Britain, the people are forfeiting their liberties and freedom's to be a member of the EU Corporation and be told how to live, think, and behave. We fight to collect idiotic Nectar points and earning minimal amounts back from Quidco, while the living guts are being ripped out of our economy and billions paid into that corrupt organization.

What folks don't seem to understand about Britain being in the EU is the amount of money that we are all having to shell out, and for what? These millions that Ryanair pays out now, will be passed on to future fliers in higher ticket prices.

Don't believe the fear mongering that bad things will happen if we get out of the EU, Britain cannot afford to stay in the EU!

NumeroDeux

I think the really cheeky thing about Ryanair's actions, isn't just that they tried to shirk their legal responsibilities, but how late they did it.

They announced, what, 4 or 5 days after the flight ban, that they were unwilling to pay the bills. Not when it happened, but 5 days after. Imagine they had pulled this stunt off, all the people who would have been out of pocket thinking that Ryanair would have some scruples and comply with their legal responsibilities.

Bottom line: The law was there, clear as the light of day, before Ryanair took these bookings, if they didn't want to operate under those conditions, fine, don't take any bookings.

rizla01

mogadon wrote: »

Why should they be? Travel insurance is supposed to cover you for additional costs caused by unforeseen events, why should Act of God be excluded?

The insurance companies want to exclude because they prefer to cover events where someone is at fault, so they can reclaim their costs, but sometimes things just happen, and there is no person or organisation that can be blamed for it.

Aside from medical emergencies, I can't think of a situation that it's more appropriate for travel insurance to pay out on.



What if you had specifically bought insurance that was supposed to cover your immediate and related costs in the event that your tyres got damaged? Then found out it only covers the cost of the puncture if you could prove who left the nail there. Wouldn't that grate just a little bit?

And how would YOU feel if your insurance company told you that they could not pay out on what would seemingly be a straightforward claim, because they don't have enough money as they have had to pay out for claims that they didn't forsee due to those claims being 'An act of god' I.E. something that in most people's wildest dreams, couldn't happen.

Or better stilll how would you feel if there were no insurance companies, full stop. because they certainly couldn't stay in business if they paid out for EVERYTHING - unless, of course, they charged premiums that you couldn't afford. Is that preferable?

Insurance is a 'Risk' business, sure enough, but it isn't a meant to be a gamble.

Insurance Co's are in BUSINESS to make money and they will assess a risk and charge the premium that they feel would cover that risk whilst ensuring that they stay in business.

And they in turn, are insured by Insurance Co's, remember.

What insurance company would insure a company that might have to pay out extreme amounts in the likelyhood of a claim against nature?

NO! Everyone has to be aware that things happen that are no-one's fault, therefore no-one will give you some money. Sometimes in this world you need to learn to stand on your own two feet instead of relying on this 'Compo' world that we see all around us.

It's truly a !!!!!, I know, but that is life!

mogadon

rizla01 wrote: »

And how would YOU feel if your insurance company told you that they could not pay out on what would seemingly be a straightforward claim, because they don't have enough money as they have had to pay out for claims that they didn't forsee due to those claims being 'An act of god' I.E. something that in most people's wildest dreams, couldn't happen.

Or better stilll how would you feel if there were no insurance companies, full stop. because they certainly couldn't stay in business if they paid out for EVERYTHING - unless, of course, they charged premiums that you couldn't afford. Is that preferable?

Insurance is a 'Risk' business, sure enough, but it isn't a meant to be a gamble.

Insurance Co's are in BUSINESS to make money and they will assess a risk and charge the premium that they feel would cover that risk whilst ensuring that they stay in business.

And they in turn, are insured by Insurance Co's, remember.

What insurance company would insure a company that might have to pay out extreme amounts in the likelyhood of a claim against nature?

NO! Everyone has to be aware that things happen that are no-one's fault, therefore no-one will give you some money. Sometimes in this world you need to learn to stand on your own two feet instead of relying on this 'Compo' world that we see all around us.

It's truly a !!!!!, I know, but that is life!

Insurance companies have reinsurance to cover them for exactly this sort of situation, i.e. very occasional huge unexpected payouts. The reinsurance companies are themselves reinsured, so the risk is spread out massively. The premiums the primary insurers and reinsurers pay for that cover is already passed on to consumers in the premiums they are already charged.

Insurance is taken against risk, not fault. Insurers aren't being asked to 'give' anyone money, people have already bought the cover. If insurers were only willing to cover predicatable events or those where the risk is offset because someone else is at fault, there would be no need for insurance. If that were the case we'd all know something was going to happen in advance, we could make our own arrangements, and then claim it back ourselves from whoever was at fault.

globalds

Surely it is up to airlines to buy insurance against this kind of eventuality.

As it is rare it would be fairly cheap ..The cost would be passed on to customers over time ..And any cut price airlines that saved on the insurance would face the risk of hefty payouts should they have customers claim for food and accommodation.

Maybe if the EU has enacted this kind of legislation it should have thought it through and made this insurance compulsory for an airline to have.

FATBALLZ

The fact people expect a flight for 2 shiny pennies and a packet of peanuts and then expect the airline to pay up for a week of hotel and food bills just shows how sites like this one have gone far too far in the 'something for nothing' campaign. If you can't look after yourself abroad - don't go. This sort of thing happens, take some responsibility and don't lump all your problems on an airline who run a business of transporting people from A to B.