News story: Ryanair bans passengers who got Covid Chargeback refunds

michael1234

yncx said:

While I agree that chargeback was not the correct way to get the money back, companies shouldn't be allowed to bully consumers the way Ryanair is now.

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. There are further legal ways for them to reclaim the debt, such as taking the consumers to small claims court. Even blacklisting these customers by not accepting any new bookings would be viewed as reasonable by many -- although probably borderline from a consumer-law viewpoint, especially if the debt is denied.

However, allowing the consumers to make further bookings only to deny service before departure amounts to a bullying tactic in my books. I hope it will be shot down quickly by the authorities.

I agree with all of that except your first paragraph. Charge back is exactly the right way to obtain a refund if the company you are dealing with is unscrupulous and won't stand by their obligations.

eskbanker

michael1234 said:

yncx said:

While I agree that chargeback was not the correct way to get the money back, companies shouldn't be allowed to bully consumers the way Ryanair is now.

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. There are further legal ways for them to reclaim the debt, such as taking the consumers to small claims court. Even blacklisting these customers by not accepting any new bookings would be viewed as reasonable by many -- although probably borderline from a consumer-law viewpoint, especially if the debt is denied.

However, allowing the consumers to make further bookings only to deny service before departure amounts to a bullying tactic in my books. I hope it will be shot down quickly by the authorities.

I agree with all of that except your first paragraph. Charge back is exactly the right way to obtain a refund if the company you are dealing with is unscrupulous and won't stand by their obligations.

'Obligations' being the key word here - in the scenario covered by this article and thread, Ryanair was under no clear legal or contractual obligation to refund passengers....

Thrugelmir

yncx said:

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. 

In the midsts of a global pandemic. That's somewhat unlikely. Companies unsurprisingly don't have admin staff sitting around twiddling their thumbs at the best of times. The more that the world becomes automated, the less resources they are to deal with crisis situations. Expectatations these days as to what is achievable border on the unrealistic on a frequent basis. 

[Deleted User]

Thrugelmir said:

yncx said:

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. 

In the midsts of a global pandemic. That's somewhat unlikely. Companies unsurprisingly don't have admin staff sitting around twiddling their thumbs at the best of times. The more that the world becomes automated, the less resources they are to deal with crisis situations. Expectatations these days as to what is achievable border on the unrealistic on a frequent basis. 

They should have involved the regulator early on. Got a clear decision made, send a copy in response to every chargeback. The banks would have followed the regulator's opinion on the matter.

They didn't do that because they knew that there was a very good chance they would have been told to offer refunds. Government advice, muddled as it was, was that refunds should be issued.

bagand96

Thrugelmir said:

yncx said:

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. 

In the midsts of a global pandemic. That's somewhat unlikely. Companies unsurprisingly don't have admin staff sitting around twiddling their thumbs at the best of times. The more that the world becomes automated, the less resources they are to deal with crisis situations. Expectatations these days as to what is achievable border on the unrealistic on a frequent basis. 

I expect that's also the reason so many of these chargebacks got through. The banks didn't have the admin staff or capacity to investigate in much detail either.

In more normal circumstances if I booked a non refundable flight with an airline and then couldn't travel I would not expect a chargeback to be successful. 

eskbanker

rigolith said:
Government advice, muddled as it was, was that refunds should be issued.

Please post a link to UK government advice saying that "refunds should be issued".

The CMA did investigate the matter, in the specific context of travel not being possible due to UK lockdown laws, but was careful to include caveats such as:

It should not be assumed at this stage of the CMA’s investigation that any airline has breached consumers’ rights. The CMA has not reached a view on this issue and, ultimately, only a court can decide whether this has occurred.

and dropped its investigation last week:

After a thorough examination of relevant law, and the evidence it had gathered during its investigation, the CMA has concluded that the law does not provide passengers with a sufficiently clear right to a refund in these unusual circumstances to justify continuing with the case.

michael1234

eskbanker said:

michael1234 said:

yncx said:

While I agree that chargeback was not the correct way to get the money back, companies shouldn't be allowed to bully consumers the way Ryanair is now.

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. There are further legal ways for them to reclaim the debt, such as taking the consumers to small claims court. Even blacklisting these customers by not accepting any new bookings would be viewed as reasonable by many -- although probably borderline from a consumer-law viewpoint, especially if the debt is denied.

However, allowing the consumers to make further bookings only to deny service before departure amounts to a bullying tactic in my books. I hope it will be shot down quickly by the authorities.

I agree with all of that except your first paragraph. Charge back is exactly the right way to obtain a refund if the company you are dealing with is unscrupulous and won't stand by their obligations.

'Obligations' being the key word here - in the scenario covered by this article and thread, Ryanair was under no clear legal or contractual obligation to refund passengers....

In my view the MoneySavingExpert article about the subject is the most balanced. They say that the legal situation is unclear. They also quote several prominent lawyers who say Ryanair behaved very badly by denying boarding due to an alleged debt as that is unlikely to be grounds to deny boarding.

I suspect most folk would be far better off reading this article than reading many of the posts in this section of the forum.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2021/10/repay-amounts-won-by-chargeback-or-you-can-t-board-your-upcoming/

eskbanker

michael1234 said:

eskbanker said:

michael1234 said:

yncx said:

While I agree that chargeback was not the correct way to get the money back, companies shouldn't be allowed to bully consumers the way Ryanair is now.

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. There are further legal ways for them to reclaim the debt, such as taking the consumers to small claims court. Even blacklisting these customers by not accepting any new bookings would be viewed as reasonable by many -- although probably borderline from a consumer-law viewpoint, especially if the debt is denied.

However, allowing the consumers to make further bookings only to deny service before departure amounts to a bullying tactic in my books. I hope it will be shot down quickly by the authorities.

I agree with all of that except your first paragraph. Charge back is exactly the right way to obtain a refund if the company you are dealing with is unscrupulous and won't stand by their obligations.

'Obligations' being the key word here - in the scenario covered by this article and thread, Ryanair was under no clear legal or contractual obligation to refund passengers....

In my view the MoneySavingExpert article about the subject is the most balanced. They say that the legal situation is unclear. They also quote several prominent lawyers who say Ryanair behaved very badly by denying boarding due to an alleged debt as that is unlikely to be grounds to deny boarding.

I suspect most folk would be far better off reading this article than reading many of the posts in this section of the forum.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2021/10/repay-amounts-won-by-chargeback-or-you-can-t-board-your-upcoming/

There are two completely separate issues at play here, but you seem to be mixing them up.

1. Were Ryanair obliged to refund passengers who didn't travel on flights that operated?
2. Was it appropriate for them to recover chargebacks later on?

As I've said before, I'm not defending Ryanair's conduct in how they've belatedly looked to recover chargebacks, so am just looking at point 1 here.

I think everyone is agreed that there isn't any clear legal or contractual basis on which Ryanair should have been expected to refund, and I can't see any lawyers arguing anything else (or even addressing this) in the MSE piece - they're all specifically commenting about point 2. 

However, are you contending that Ryanair were obliged to refund, and if so, why?

michael1234

eskbanker said:

michael1234 said:

eskbanker said:

michael1234 said:

yncx said:

While I agree that chargeback was not the correct way to get the money back, companies shouldn't be allowed to bully consumers the way Ryanair is now.

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. There are further legal ways for them to reclaim the debt, such as taking the consumers to small claims court. Even blacklisting these customers by not accepting any new bookings would be viewed as reasonable by many -- although probably borderline from a consumer-law viewpoint, especially if the debt is denied.

However, allowing the consumers to make further bookings only to deny service before departure amounts to a bullying tactic in my books. I hope it will be shot down quickly by the authorities.

I agree with all of that except your first paragraph. Charge back is exactly the right way to obtain a refund if the company you are dealing with is unscrupulous and won't stand by their obligations.

'Obligations' being the key word here - in the scenario covered by this article and thread, Ryanair was under no clear legal or contractual obligation to refund passengers....

In my view the MoneySavingExpert article about the subject is the most balanced. They say that the legal situation is unclear. They also quote several prominent lawyers who say Ryanair behaved very badly by denying boarding due to an alleged debt as that is unlikely to be grounds to deny boarding.

I suspect most folk would be far better off reading this article than reading many of the posts in this section of the forum.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2021/10/repay-amounts-won-by-chargeback-or-you-can-t-board-your-upcoming/

There are two completely separate issues at play here, but you seem to be mixing them up.

1. Were Ryanair obliged to refund passengers who didn't travel on flights that operated?
2. Was it appropriate for them to recover chargebacks later on?

As I've said before, I'm not defending Ryanair's conduct in how they've belatedly looked to recover chargebacks, so am just looking at point 1 here.

I think everyone is agreed that there isn't any clear legal or contractual basis on which Ryanair should have been expected to refund, and I can't see any lawyers arguing anything else (or even addressing this) in the MSE piece - they're all specifically commenting about point 2. 

However, are you contending that Ryanair were obliged to refund, and if so, why?

I think on both points and for some reason you are framing the argument in Ryanairs favour. For example, your bolded statement is true but so is the converse. In particular it isn't 100% clear whether or not they should refund but for some reason you chose to focus on it not being clear that they _should_ refund.

The MSE article puts it in this way:
Ryanair wasn't necessarily wrong to refuse a refund in the first instance as this is a grey area. 

I think you've done the same again earlier with your two points. Point 2 isn't just about them trying to recover their chargeback but the manner that they did so - denying boarding in many cases. 

In general, the tone of yours and your colleague's commentary is markedly much more hostile to the passenger than MSE themselves and I don't understand why that is given that this is a consumer focused forum. I did find out that at least one person commenting here runs a travel agency so that would explain their view but not sure about the other "regulars". 8-)

Jumblebumble

[Deleted User] said:

Thrugelmir said:

yncx said:

Ryanair had an opportunity to dispute the chargebacks which in many cases they failed to do. 

In the midsts of a global pandemic. That's somewhat unlikely. Companies unsurprisingly don't have admin staff sitting around twiddling their thumbs at the best of times. The more that the world becomes automated, the less resources they are to deal with crisis situations. Expectatations these days as to what is achievable border on the unrealistic on a frequent basis. 

They should have involved the regulator early on. Got a clear decision made, send a copy in response to every chargeback. The banks would have followed the regulator's opinion on the matter.

They didn't do that because they knew that there was a very good chance they would have been told to offer refunds. Government advice, muddled as it was, was that refunds should be issued.

Why should Ryanair not handle this the way that is most beneficial to their business ?
Ryanair are probably not very interested in Government advice.
Their decision will make people obtaining chargebacks because the banks did not investigate properly  a bit more careful next time