KLM refuses to pay out volcanic ash compensation

[Richard from Rotterdam]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10972969" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


14 August 2010 Last updated at 09:48 GMT Share this pageFacebookTwitterShareEmailPrint
Dutch airline KLM holds out on ash cloud compensation

The ash cloud grounded flights across Europe for 18 days in April and May
Hundreds of British families are still waiting for compensation from Dutch airline KLM for delays caused by the volcanic ash cloud earlier this year.

According to EU rules, passengers must get hotel and meal costs reimbursed for the whole time they are stranded but KLM says it will only pay for 24 hours.

The EU has threatened legal action unless the airline complies.

KLM said it restricted payments to ensure a quick resolution for its thousands of customers across Europe.

Hundreds of thousands of people were affected when the ash cloud from an Icelandic volcano shut down much of Europe's airspace for 18 days in April and May.

Under EU regulations, passengers are entitled to claim back reasonable expenses - on meals and accommodation - for the time their flight was delayed.

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote

We've given them all our receipts but sadly they've failed to come up with a fair offer”

Alastair Caithness
KLM passenger
In some cases, passengers were held up for a week or more and families built up bills of thousands of pounds.

The European Commission has sent the airline a formal warning saying they must comply with EU laws, if they do not they could face legal action.

Alastair Caithness was stuck with his family in Athens, building up costs over the course of a week of £3,000. But KLM says it will only pay for one night's expenses.

Mr Caithness told BBC News: "We're really not very impressed at all. We've followed all KLM's online procedures. We've lodged the appropriate claim forms. And we've given them all our receipts but sadly they've failed to come up with a fair offer."

A European Commission spokeswoman said: "EU passenger rights are there to protect consumers. And they are there to act as a safety net for passengers - even in very difficult circumstances like this.

"So there is no grey area for us in this regard and those EU rights must be respected."

'Not their fault'
Many airlines are unhappy with the rules as they stand as there is no limit on the amount of compensation they have to pay - even if the delays are beyond their control.

Financial Times travel editor, Tom Robbins, said: "Obviously it's a nightmare for the travellers but this is one of the very rare occasions when you can see the airline's perspective.

"I mean if they're selling a ticket that's £100, but then they have to pay out £1,000 or £10,000 in compensation for something that wasn't their fault, then that's a very hard way to run a business really."

Simon Calder, travel editor of the Independent, said airlines were not insured and were very upset when the rules were brought in five years ago.

"This was designed for the odd flight from Frankfurt to Stockholm being cancelled on a Friday night, it wasn't designed for the full-scale close down of European airspace."

Members of the European consumers' organisation BEUC said they had received complaints from passengers who were not receiving compensation.

Rochelle Turner from Which? Holiday consumer magazine said hundreds of people had contacted them.

She said: "A lot of people are having trouble getting their money back, and a lot of people are having trouble getting as much money back as they thought they were due."

Ryanair had also held out from paying full compensation to its passengers.

Initially, Ryanair said it would only pay expenses up to the value of the ticket passengers had bought, although it is now abiding by EU rules.

[aviodromefriend]

Maybe the EU should not have been so quick at pointing out these rules were not applicable to the ash thing (within 24 hours after it all started). As it was the EU (so NOT the airlines) that closed down all airspace, I think it should be the EU that compensate, if any compensation will be given at all. I would not be surprised if a judge would rule like this too.

[Stefan]

Maybe the EU should not have been so quick at pointing out these rules were not applicable to the ash thing (within 24 hours after it all started)

When and where did they do that? Any link you can share with us?

Regards,
Stefan

[aviodromefriend]

When and where did they do that? Any link you can share with us?

Regards,
Stefan

At a press conference in Brussels at the day they closed the airspace. One day after that it was in the newspapers. (Sorry, don't have a link, Internet is not the only source I use to follow the news.)

[Rockville]

When and where did they do that? Any link you can share with us?

Just doing a Google search [EU sluiting luchtruim] will give you enough food for thought.

[Stefan]

When and where did they do that? Any link you can share with us?

Just doing a Google search [EU sluiting luchtruim] will give you enough food for thought.

Well, it did'nt. All I know and found is that the EU still enforces it own regulation (as they should). Maybe it was an individual speaking(as in; not representing the EU)?

Regards,
Stefan

[P.Terlouw]

The EU again demands KLM/Air France to take actions according to EU regulations

see news report Telegraaf http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/7414 ... html?p=6,1

[streep]

The EU is good at causing confusion.
Reading this Q&A KLM is doing the right thing, published by the EU.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer ... day_en.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Question 1, paragraph 4, .....Hotel for the night...

This could be explained by hotel for the first night, or hotel for as long as it takes.

Question 2, extra money... NO.

[Stefan]

The EU is good at causing confusion.

That just depends on how well you read the regulation and how you chose to interpret it.

Reading this Q&A KLM is doing the right thing, published by the EU.

There has always been a distinction between compensation and 'taking care of your customers'. In this case no compensation indeed, but the obligation to 'take care'.

If they are doing the right thing, British Airways is clearly overdoing it (by giving full compensation, like they did back in April, plus also lending a helping hand by providing hotels for stranded customers).

Regards,
Stefan

[streep]

The EU rule that started all this....

in Dutch
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/sit ... 010007.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
or in english
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex ... 007:en:PDF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Says it all....
Article 5 Cancellation of flight
Par. 3
An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.

[streep]

The EU is good at causing confusion.

That just depends on how well you read the regulation and how you chose to interpret it.

If it is that easy to interpret it completely different, means it is confusing.

Reading this Q&A KLM is doing the right thing, published by the EU.

There has always been a distinction between compensation and 'taking care of your customers'. In this case no compensation indeed, but the obligation to 'take care'.

In the EU rule, taking care of and providing compensation are two seperate issues.
All passengers were given assistance, though because of the extreme nature of this event not all were given a hotel, as they were clearly not avaiable in these numbers. The lack of information provided by the airlines, regarding solutions, were mainly caused by the fact that nobody knew when the airspace would be reopened.

Streep

[Stefan]

In the EU rule, taking care of and providing compensation are two seperate issues.

Which is exactly what I said...

All passengers were given assistance, though because of the extreme nature of this event not all were given a hotel, as they were clearly not avaiable in these numbers. The lack of information provided by the airlines, regarding solutions, were mainly caused by the fact that nobody knew when the airspace would be reopened.

Yeah right... then we must have been the only exceptions to this rule

Regards,
Stefan

[Lars]

http://www.klm.com/travel/nl_en/about/a ... 1002007204" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[streep]

I remembered you were stuck in Japan, so just read the story on your website.
This is really bad, pure lack of support or information.
What did your travel insurance say ?

[ehusmann]

There was a story in ´Het Parool´ today about this. It seems that Camiel Eurlings (the secretary for transport) forgot to send a letter to parliament and to KLM. That letter was from the EC and stated the summary of a meeting of 4 May 2010 in which the European secretaries for transport decided that the restitution for delays would also be applicable for the situation during the ash cloud.

In other words, KLM should pay based on this decision, but can claim not to have been aware of it because the letter was never sent to them.

Erwin