Travel – Page 14 – The NEN – North Edinburgh News

Airlines ignoring EU guidance on voucher refunds

British Airways and EasyJet are going against EU guidance and refusing to refund unused vouchers for flights cancelled during the pandemic, Which? can reveal.

Some passengers willingly accepted vouchers in place of cash refunds when their flights were cancelled because of coronavirus, believing they were helping the airlines. But others claim they weren’t told they were entitled to cash refunds, or that they were misled into accepting vouchers they didn’t want.

The European Commission issued guidance in May recommending that airlines automatically refund any unused vouchers 14 days after they expire. However, this is only guidance, not a legal requirement.

While Ryanair says its vouchers can be refunded at any time, BA and Easyjet insist that once issued, their vouchers can not be exchanged for cash. That means passengers could be left hundreds of pounds out of pocket if they do not use them by the time they expire.

When flights are cancelled by an EU airline or by an airline flying from an EU airport, passengers are entitled to a cash refund under EU Regulation 261 within seven days of the cancellation. But after the pandemic grounded most flights leaving the UK earlier this year, all of the UK’s biggest airlines failed to meet this legal requirement, and many passengers were given vouchers instead.

At the height of the pandemic earlier in the year, many customers with cancelled flights struggled to contact airlines to ask for their money back. BA customers in particular complained after the airline removed its online refund form from its website and directed people to its overwhelmed customer service line, which played an automated message before hanging up on the passenger.

Some BA passengers have also complained to Which? that they automatically received vouchers for cancelled flights when they thought they’d applied for refunds through the website’s ‘Manage my booking’ page.

Jackie Harbridge says when she called BA to request a refund a recorded message directed her to Manage My Booking on BA’s website, but when she clicked on the refund button, she says she received a voucher for £2,118 for the flights to San Francisco.

She tried to call BA immediately, but struggled to get through. When she eventually got to speak to an agent she was told that since she had requested vouchers the decision could not be reversed.

“I was completely misguided by the instruction in BA’s Manage My Booking, which specifically quoted ‘Refund’ but turned out to be for a voucher, which is completely useless to us,” said Jackie. She and her 83-year-old husband no longer plan to travel so they can’t make use of the vouchers.

BA denies its claims process is misleading, saying that it has issued more than 2.1 million cash refunds. It said it is clear that customers must call to request cash refunds, and insists that they only get a voucher if they fill out a form that clearly states they are requesting a voucher.

While Easyjet passengers can request a refund online when their flight is cancelled, some willingly accepted vouchers to help support the airline.

But some passengers now may not be able to use their vouchers because the airline has cut back on some routes in recent months, and Easyjet has said it will only refund vouchers in “exceptional circumstances as a gesture of goodwill”.

An Easyjet spokesperson said: “For passengers who have chosen a voucher as compensation for their cancelled flight, we would only reverse this and offer a refund in exceptional circumstances as a gesture of goodwill if the customer’s circumstances justify it (eg. A school group no longer able to re-travel).”

A number of Easyjet’s flight routes have yet to restart, and a number of routes passengers were initially booked on have been dropped since vouchers were issued, after the airline pulled out of Southend Airport and dropped a number of routes from Newcastle and Stansted airports. Easyjet’s vouchers are only valid for a year, meaning many passengers may be left with vouchers they cannot use.

BA has dropped 60 per cent of its flights up to the end of this year and also pulled out of the Isle of Man. However, it has extended the validity of its vouchers so they can be used any time up to April 2022.

Additionally, BA and Easyjet both say vouchers are transferable, so passengers can pass them on to family and friends if they are unable to use them.

On top of ignoring guidance on refunds for unused vouchers, BA and EasyJet have also said that they will not be offering refunds for flights that operate as scheduled, meaning many passengers will only have the option of rebooking their flight to a later date if they cannot fly due to England’s latest lockdown. Ryanair has also said it will not offer refunds for flights that are not cancelled while passengers are in lockdown.

Which? believes the Civil Aviation Authority should be doing a better job of making it clear to airlines that they should be following legal guidance on vouchers and refunds, but without powers to issue fines or take swift action, it has struggled to get a grip as airlines have played fast and loose with the rules during the pandemic.

To help restore trust in the travel industry, the government must urgently review the CAA’s powers as part of its aviation recovery plan, to ensure passengers have an aviation regulator with the powers it needs to stand up for their rights.

Rory Boland, Editor of Which? Travel, said: “As we head into a winter that is bound to bring more flight cancellations, it’s extremely concerning to see the UK’s biggest airlines disregarding European guidance and letting their passengers down when it comes to their refund rights.

“BA and Easyjet must immediately make it clear that passengers will not face losing their money if they are unable to use a voucher, while all airlines should be offering cash refunds to passengers prevented from travelling by lockdown laws.

“Major airlines have acted shamefully and without fear of consequences during this pandemic – the government must urgently review the CAA’s powers as part of its aviation recovery plan to ensure passengers have a regulator that can effectively stand up for them.”

Some passengers have successfully secured refunds for vouchers they claim they didn’t ask for by going through their airline’s ADR scheme.

The CAA recommends anyone who had a voucher forced upon them, or whose airline is refusing to refund them should do the same – BA uses CEDR, while EasyJet uses CDRL.

Passengers whose airline isn’t a member of an ADR scheme should seek redress through the CAA’s Passenger Advice and Complaints team.

Kim Norris received a cash refund of £1,099 after taking her case of an unwanted voucher to BA’s alternative dispute resolution service, CEDR. It said that, on the balance of probabilities, she had not agreed to accept a voucher.

BA said that Kim applied for a voucher via its website, but it only provided CEDR a screenshot of the type of form it says she filled out, not her specific form. BA acknowledged that Kim had asked twice for a refund, by phone and by email. CEDR found that when BA issued the voucher, it was unlikely that Kim had voluntarily consented to accept it.

In its ruling, CEDR also pointed to a recommendation from the European Commission that if vouchers haven’t been redeemed by the end of their validity period they should be automatically reimbursed within 14 days.

A British Airways spokesperson said: “We do not auto-issue vouchers, they can only be issued when a customer has requested them by filling out the form. Our website is clear that when filling out the form it is to apply for vouchers.

“Customers are always entitled to a cash refund if their flight has been cancelled, and must call us to do this, which is clearly displayed on our website. Customers have up to a year after their flight was due to operate to get in touch with us for a cash refund – and we have processed over 2.1 million cash refunds to date.

“If a customer uses a voucher to make a new booking which is then subsequently cancelled by us, they would be entitled to choose either a cash refund (if the original booking was paid for in cash), or a voucher in a similar way as before.”

More than £1 billion in refunds being illegally withheld for cancelled holidays

More than £8 billion worth of package holidays are estimated to have been cancelled since the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak, with just over £1 billion still estimated to be outstanding in refunds, according to new research from Which?.

Millions of people have had a package holiday cancelled by their provider since the UK went into lockdown in March, with refunds for one in five (21%) holidays where a cash refund was requested still outstanding at the beginning of October.

Which? surveyed more than 7,500 people who have had a package holiday cancelled as a result of the pandemic to understand how the situation around refunds has developed since the UK first entered lockdown.

An estimated total of just over £1 billion is being illegally withheld in partial or full refunds from customers who requested their money back, with the survey suggesting the average cancelled holiday cost £1,784.

Under the Package Travel Regulations 2018, if a package holiday is cancelled by the provider, the customer is legally entitled to a full refund within 14 days. A package holiday is a booking comprising at least two types of travel or travel-related services made through the same source, most commonly flights and accommodation.

Around 9.4 million people are estimated to have had a package holiday cancelled by their operator since the pandemic hit the UK. The backlog of refunds for cancellations caused by the coronavirus pandemic meant that the majority of operators struggled to refund within the legal time limit, with customer service lines overwhelmed by travellers trying to contact them to ask about their refunds.

Some package providers reported delays in receiving refunds back from airlines, many of which – despite making commitments to the aviation regulator – continue to break the law on refunds. This has meant package holiday operators have often only been able to process partial refunds for customers.

But while some companies have managed to get on top of the backlog caused by these delays, several other major providers have continued to leave passengers out of pocket, with Which? still receiving huge numbers of complaints from customers waiting for refunds.

The average amount of time spent contacting package holiday companies about cancelled trips was around 15.5 hours. For more than four in 10 (43%) of the cancelled holidays reported to Which?, customers said they waited longer than a month to get their money back.

During the summer, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) launched an investigation into package travel companies’ handling of cancellations and refunds. Following pressure from Which? and the CMA, Tui agreed to refund all customers by the 30th of September. The regulator also recently confirmed that Virgin Holidays has also committed to processing refunds for all holidays cancelled up to the end of October by 20 November.

Nearly four in ten (37%) people who have had a package holiday cancelled by their provider since the beginning of the outbreak said the experience has had a negative impact on their confidence in the travel industry.

Which? is calling on the government to outline how it will support the travel industry through the rest of the pandemic, and is urging it to introduce a travel guarantee fund to support package holiday providers that are struggling to fulfil their legal obligations to refund customers. It should also conduct a review of passenger protections following the coronavirus outbreak.

While the CMA has already secured commitments to process refunds from some companies, it is clear that some firms are not improving their practices of their own volition. The competition regulator must continue to closely monitor operators and secure further undertakings from those that flout the law, to prevent trust in travel being damaged any further.

Which?’s advice to anyone looking to book a future holiday is to book with a provider that can be trusted to refund their money promptly if they can’t travel, and to consider booking a package over a flight-only booking, to ensure they have greater legal protections if they cannot travel because of coronavirus.

Rory Boland, Editor of Which? Travel, said: “Since Which? first highlighted the issue of holiday companies delaying or denying refunds for holidays cancelled due to coronavirus, some operators have continued to flout the law and the sums of money being illegally withheld from holidaymakers are staggering.

“It’s simply unacceptable that some of the UK’s largest operators are still getting away with breaking the law, but without meaningful intervention from the government and the regulators in this space, many people will struggle to get their money back.

“The CMA must take firm action against any operators that are continuing to drag their feet on refunding holidaymakers, and the government must urgently set out how it will support travel companies in fulfilling their legal obligations to passengers.”

2021 holidays – the tour operators and travel agents Which? recommends:

www.which.co.uk/news/2020/10/holidays-in-2021-the-tour-operators-and-travel-agents-which-recommends

HOLIDAYMAKERS IN EDINBURGH OWED NEARLY £8 MILLION IN WITHELD REFUNDS

LOCAL MSP SAYS REGULATOR MUST DO MORE TO SUPPORT CUSTOMERS

SNP MSP for Edinburgh Pentlands has demanded action after the latest estimations from Which? suggested people in Edinburgh could be owed £7,858,609 in withheld refunds for cancelled trips.

Customers across the UK are waiting on more than £1 billion in refunds according to the results of the survey of more than 7,500 people who had a package holiday cancelled as a result of the pandemic.

Expressed a proportion of population, the findings of the survey suggest that holidaymakers in Edinburgh could be owed nearly £8 million.

Holiday companies are required to refund money within 14 days but the huge number of cancellations has left many of firms overwhelmed. 21% of those surveyed who requested a refund in March were still waiting at the beginning of October.

The research also found that the average cost of a cancelled holiday was £1,784.

During the summer, the Competition and Markets Authority launched an investigation into package travel companies’ handling of cancellations and refunds.

Commenting on the figures, local SNP MSP Gordon MacDonald said: “For many people, this saga has rumbled on for far too long – it’s time for the UK government and the market regulator to get a hold of this situation.

“Times are tough financially for many local families, and while I appreciate holiday companies were inundated with refund requests earlier in the year, we are now in November.

“We aren’t talking about spare change here – the average cost of a cancelled holiday was £1,784 according to this survey.

“While we all recognise the travel industry’s acute financial difficulties, there can be no excuse for them hoarding the hard-earned cash of their hard-pressed customers.

“As a matter of urgency, the UK government needs to set out how travel companies will be supported financially to fulfil their legal obligations to passengers – and take firm action against those who continue to drag their feet.

“I would urge anyone in Edinburgh Pentlands who is still waiting on a refund from March to get in touch with my office – I will offer any support I can to make sure you get your money back.”

Grounded: Edinburgh Airport numbers slashed following ‘turbulent summer’

The number of people travelling through Edinburgh Airport over the normally busy summer months has fallen by 91% due to the impact of Covid-19.

785,000 people passed through the airport between April and September, down from 8.4 million in 2019 and well down on initial 2020 estimates of 8.8 million made at the end of last year. The ever-changing situation and near constant changes to quarantine exemptions means forecasting for 2021 is almost impossible.

The numbers demonstrate the stark situation the aviation industry is in, the huge challenge it faces to recover and the importance of finding solutions to aid the airport’s recovery.

Gordon Dewar, Chief Executive of Edinburgh Airport said: “It’s been an incredibly difficult time for all of us and the scale of the recovery challenge that faces us is now really hitting home. These figures highlight the huge impact Covid-19 has had and continues to have, something that is being felt across the travel and tourism industries and the economy as a whole.

“Scotland’s recovery will be protracted and tough, and the aviation industry will face similar challenges to ensure it can reconnect the country to the world. There are still many unknowns which make that difficult to chart.”

The airport has previously confirmed the unfortunate loss of almost a third of its workforce due to the continued impact of Covid-19 and the quarantine policy that is in place. Talks continue with the Scottish Government on the prospect of a robust testing regime and the possibility of a pilot scheme to evaluate risk mitigation and protection of public health.

Gordon Dewar added: “We have spent years building growth in our passengers, routes and infrastructure, so to see all of that fall back is a concerning position for us to be in. Losing valued friends and colleagues has been difficult for us and we still face an uncertain future as we continue to grapple with this awful virus.

“Our own recovery will be difficult – we do not expect to break even until 2021 and we face tough choices to ensure we protect as many jobs as we can, and that will always be our main focus. Our business plans have been in a constant state of flux due to circumstances worsening, the introduction of and constant changes to quarantine, and of course all of this feeds into passenger confidence.

“We need to see a robust testing regime which will protect public health, provide reassurance and see travel and tourism begin to rebuild.”

Invisible Cities launches round-the-world subscription box for little travellers!

‘Invisible Cities World Tour’ boxes feature a selection of location-themed products

Invisible Cities, a social enterprise that trains people who have previously experienced homelessness to become walking tour guides of their own city, has launched an exciting new subscription box for would-be-adventurers!

Created in collaboration with Strawberry Lemonade Events and Party in the Post, each box is themed on one country and is delivered straight to your door every three months.

Month one sees a curated box that aims to ignite sentiments of Scotland, the birthplace of Invisible Cities.

For tiny travellers and eternal explorers, the first destination box includes:

Invisible Cities World Tour Passport, where pioneers can collect stamps for all the countries ‘travelled’ through the subscription box (Scotland will be the first stamp)
An activity book which includes a recipe card
A Unicorn Cookie Cutter
A colouring page and set of colouring pencils
A unique Scottish game
Exclusive story time with Paul (QR Code)
A Scottish postcard

With inclusivity, compassion and most importantly community at heart, for every box purchased Invisible Cities will be donating activity books and games to children in temporary accommodation as well as those currently living through tough situations.

Zakia Moulaoui Guery, Founder & CEO of Invisible Cities CIC said: “We believe everyone should learn in a fun and engaging way, no matter where they live, or what their circumstances.

“Through our boxes, we want to spark love for travelling in children and raise awareness of some of the issues countries are facing, whether that be homelessness or inequality. Each box is an adventure, it’s unchartered territory, it’s finding a second home – every child should get the opportunity to feel the excitement that brings.”

So, what do our voyagers think?

“We loved the story from Paul. We really need to do his tour in Edinburgh!“ – Nicola (mum).

“I’m really excited to be making cookies with my new cookie cutter. My favourite part of the box is the colouring sheet and I can’t wait to get my next box!” – Jessica (aged 8).

Each box will see games, gifts and unique items to collect, all themed around a new, must-visit country. Available for a one-off yearly subscription of £90 (for four boxes per year), or individually at £24.95, your round-the-world tour is just a hop, skip and a letter box away…

For more information visit https://invisible-cities.org/shop or join them on Facebook, Twitter (@CitiesWorldTour) or Instagram (invisiblecitiesworldtour).

Portugal and French Polynesia removed from exemption list

Travellers from Portugal and French Polynesia will be required to self-isolate at home, or another specified address, for 14 days on arrival in Scotland from 4am Saturday morning (5 September).

This is due to a significant rise in cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) in these places, and in Portugal’s case the level of test positivity, which means that the risk of importation into Scotland by people who have visited is too high to ignore.

The Scottish Government has carefully examined the scope of applying measures, such as regional targeting, but consider a whole country approach for Portugal is required. While regional variations in the pattern of cases and level of risk can often be identified in different countries, the Scottish Government is not confident there is strong evidence of clear controls in place limiting travel between different areas. A regional approach will be explored for future application but in the interests of safeguarding public health a whole country approach will be applied at this time.

Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf said: “We are in the midst of a global pandemic and the situation in many countries can change suddenly. Therefore, people should think very hard before committing to non-essential travel abroad.

“With Scotland’s relatively low infection rate, importation of new cases is a significant risk to public health. I would also encourage people who have returned to Scotland from Portugal or French Polynesia in the last few days to be particularly careful in their social contacts and to ensure they stick to the FACTS. I am also concerned by the level of infections in Gibraltar and we will be monitoring the situation there very carefully.

“Regular discussions continue with the other three governments in the UK. We continue to closely monitor the situation in all parts of the world and base the decisions we make on the scientific evidence available.

“It is a legal requirement to complete a Passenger Locator Form and provide it to Border Force, whether you have travelled from an exempt or non-exempt country. The requirement for travellers to quarantine for 14 days on arrival from a non-exempt country is vital to help prevent transmission of the virus and to suppress it – not doing so poses a significant risk to wider public health across Scotland.”

Quarantine measures introduced for travellers from Greece

Importation of new cases remains ‘significant’ public health risk

Travellers from Greece will be required to self-isolate at home, or another specified address, for 14 days on arrival in Scotland from 4am Thursday morning (3 September). This is due to a significant rise in cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) being imported into Scotland by people who have been in Greece.

Evidence of virus importation, especially from the Greek islands, has led to the country being removed from the exemption list on public health grounds. It is believed prevalence of COVID-19 in Greece currently remains lower than 20 per 100,000, however, a number of cases of the virus in Scotland can be traced back to travel to Greece.

“With Scotland’s relatively low infection rate, importation of new cases from Greece is a significant risk to public health. I would also encourage people who have returned to Scotland from Greece in the last few days to be particularly careful in their social contacts and to ensure they stick to the FACTS.

“We continue to closely monitor the situation in all parts of the world and base the decisions we make on the scientific evidence available.

“Regular discussions continue with the other three governments in the UK.

“Requiring travellers arriving from a non-exempt country to quarantine for 14 days on arrival is vital to helping prevent transmission of the virus and to suppress it. More details about what this means can be found on the Scottish Government website.

“Wherever people have travelled from – an exempt country or not – it is a legal requirement to complete a Passenger Locator Form and provide it to Border Force officials. Failure to do so can also result in a fine since this, along with any failure to self-isolate where required, poses a significant risk to wider public health across Scotland.”

Chief Medical Officer Gregor Smith said: “There is a compelling public health risk around importation of the virus, especially given the number of imported cases linked to the Greek islands.

“The flow of travel between Scotland and Greece, and the behaviour we have seen from some of those travellers, means that on public health grounds there is a strong case – supported by public health directors – to remove Greece from the exemption list.”

Public health rules for international travel are an important part of Scotland’s wider response to the pandemic to limit the introduction of new chains of transmission.

To allow the appropriate arrangements to be put in place, following the laying of the regulations, the change will come into force at 4am on Thursday 3 September.

All international travellers arriving into Scotland, apart from a very limited number of individual exemptions, must complete a passenger locator form and provide evidence that they have done so on arrival in the UK if requested to do so by a Border Force official. This includes people arriving from countries where quarantine is subsequently not required. Individuals who do not complete the form and present it when asked on arrival may be fined £60. The fine can be doubled for each subsequent offence up to a maximum of £480.

Failure to comply with the requirement to quarantine may result in a fine of £480.

Those travelling abroad should check in advance for any local requirements to quarantine on arrival at their destination. Further information about the foreign travel public health rules, including quarantine requirements can be read on the Scottish Government website.

This includes the existing list of overseas destinations where those arriving in Scotland are exempt from self-isolation.

Travellers from France and the Netherlands to face quarantine

France and the Netherlands will be removed from the list of destinations exempt from quarantine requirements due to an increased number of cases of coronavirus (COVID-19).

Aruba, Turks and Caicos, Malta and Monaco will also be removed from the exemption list.

The decision made by the Scottish Government, and also made by the devolved administrations in Northern Ireland and Wales as well as the UK Government, is to reduce the risk of the transmission of the virus by those travelling from these countries.

The public health measures will come into effect at 4am tomorrow (Saturday 15 August) and will mean those arriving in Scotland from France, the Netherlands, Aruba, Turks and Caicos, Malta, and Monaco will be required to quarantine for 14 days.

Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf said: “We have always been clear we are closely monitoring the situation in all countries and that we may need to take action to remove a country from the list of places exempt from quarantine requirements should the virus show a resurgence.

“These are not decisions which we take lightly but on the basis of the evidence it is important that we take action to suppress transmission of the virus and protect public health.”

Public health rules for international travel are an important part of Scotland’s wider response to the pandemic, to limit the introduction of new chains of transmission as Scotland’s own infection rates have been falling.

All international travellers arriving into Scotland, apart from a very limited number of exemptions, must complete a passenger locator form and provide evidence that they have done so on arrival in the UK if requested to do so by a Border Force official. Individuals who do not complete the form and present it when asked on arrival may be fined £60. The fine can be doubled for each subsequent offence up to a maximum of £480.

Those travelling abroad should check in advance if there are any requirements to quarantine on arrival at their destination.

The existing list of overseas destinations where those arriving in Scotland are exempt from self-isolation can be found online.

The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) has also updated its travel advice to advise against all but essential travel to France, Monaco, the Netherlands, Malta, Turks and Caicos Islands and Aruba.

Rory Boland, Which? Travel Editor, said: “It’s understandable that the government wants to restrict travel to these countries at this time, but the burden of this decision disproportionally falls on holidaymakers – thousands of whom are likely to be left significantly out of pocket because their airline will refuse to refund them.

“Unlike tour operators, airlines now routinely ignore FCO travel warnings and refuse refunds because, they argue, the flight is still operating. Some major airlines, like Ryanair, won’t even allow customers to rebook without charging a hefty fee.

“The government wants us to act responsibly and not travel to countries with an FCO warning, but it needs to make it clear to airlines that they too need to act responsibly and not ignore government travel advice in an effort to pocket customer cash.”

We want our money back!

Some airlines are still failing to refund passengers

Ryanair, Virgin Atlantic and Tui are failing to refund passengers in agreed timeframes, breaching recent commitments to the regulator that they would speed up their refund process.

Which? has seen evidence that the airlines are reneging on promises they made to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) about how they would improve their refund processes, including from some passengers who have been left out of pocket since March.

The findings come after the CAA reviewed airlines’ behaviour and identified several carriers that weren’t paying refunds ‘sufficiently quickly’, but opted not to take enforcement action after receiving commitments from the airlines to improve their performance.

However, Which? found that Ryanair, Tui and Virgin – all identified by the CAA as not processing refunds fast enough – are falling short of the promises they made to the regulator, prompting concerns from Which? that the regulator’s enforcement powers may not be fit for purpose.

The CAA told Ryanair it wasn’t satisfied that it was taking 10 weeks or longer to process refunds, and that airlines offering vouchers should also be offering passengers the choice of a cash refund. Following the regulator’s review, Ryanair published a commitment on its website that all refund requests up to the end of May would be cleared by 31 July.

But Which? has heard from Ryanair passengers who are still waiting for refunds from March, and who are still trying to get cash refunds after they were initially sent vouchers despite requesting cash refunds.

Virgin Atlantic told the CAA its maximum waiting time for refunds is 120 days, but some passengers have been trying to get refunds from the airline for longer than four months.

The consumer champion heard from two passengers who have been waiting over 130 days for refunds for flights that were cancelled in March.

Tui was reprimanded by the CAA for issuing vouchers and then making customers wait a further 28 days before they could apply for their money back. Tui told the CAA that “on average, cash refunds will be processed within 14 days”.

However, despite telling the regulator it is no longer automatically issuing vouchers, Tui still states on its website that customers must wait for a voucher before they can claim a cash refund.

Which? has heard from a passenger who is yet to even receive the voucher that she needs to claim her refund – or received any other communication from Tui – after her flight was cancelled in April.

Following its review, the CAA said a number of airlines have committed to speeding up the time it is taking to process refunds without requiring enforcement action, and that it would continue to monitor those airlines and continue to push for further improvements.

It said it would consider if enforcement action was appropriate if airlines failed to meet their commitments. However, it also highlighted that its enforcement powers are not well suited to swift action, and that it can take a considerable period of time for a case to come before the courts.

Which? is concerned that if airlines are continually allowed to openly break the law on refunds through this crisis, it will set a precedent that sees airlines continue to treat passengers unfairly without fear of consequence or sanctions.

Airlines have repeatedly been given the benefit of the doubt, but some have treated the regulator’s efforts to secure voluntary commitments with indifference. It is clear that more needs to be done to give the CAA the clout to effectively hold airlines to account.

Which? is calling for the government to enhance the CAA’s existing powers to allow it to more easily take swift and meaningful action against airlines that have repeatedly been exposed for disregarding the law and their passengers over the course of the pandemic.

The consumer champion believes this should be the first of a series of reforms to the travel industry, to help ensure the future of international travel from the UK and to help restore consumer trust in the sector.

Rory Boland, Editor of Which? Travel, said: “Time after time, Which? has exposed airlines breaking the law on refunds for cancelled flights due to the pandemic and treating their passengers unfairly, and we’re concerned that they now feel empowered to do as they please without fear of punishment.

“Passengers must be able to rely on a regulator that has effective powers to protect their rights – especially at a time of unprecedented turmoil. The government needs to step up and ensure the CAA has the tools it needs to hold airlines to account, or risk consumer trust in the travel industry being damaged beyond repair.”

Kirsty Ness requested a cash refund from Ryanair immediately after her flights were cancelled in late March, but on 20 April she received a voucher instead.

Kirsty has called Ryanair several times to cash in the voucher, but she has yet to receive her refund.

Palliative care nurse Jeanette Howard was sent a voucher for her Ryanair flights to Alicante that were cancelled on 20 March, even though she had applied for a cash refund.

She says she’s called the airline ‘on a daily basis’ since late April to ask to exchange the voucher for cash, but she’s still waiting for her money back.

Ryanair did not respond to Which?’s request for a comment.

Jeff Palmer and his wife were due to fly with Virgin Atlantic to Vegas on 9 April. He first requested a refund from Virgin on 31 March after they cancelled his flights, and told Which? he has tried ‘every method under the sun’ to contact them.

He received emails telling him it would be 90 days, then 50, then another 14, before receiving a refund for his flight but not his wife’s – despite it being part of the same booking. He told Which? he has contacted them several times since, and still no sign of a refund for her ticket.

A Virgin Atlantic spokesperson said: “The huge volume of refund requests we have received, combined with the constraints on our teams and systems during the pandemic, has meant that refunds have been taking longer than usual to process, and we sincerely apologise for this.

“Since April, we have been focussed on making improvements wherever possible. We’ve boosted the size of the team dedicated to processing refunds five-fold, with over 200 people now directly involved. This has increased our capacity to process a greater number of refunds, more quickly and we continue to minimise the wait time for existing refund requests.

“Thanks to the progress made, we are steadily reducing the maximum processing time for each new Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Holidays cash refund. For customers requesting a refund in August, we expect the maximum processing time to be 80 days, from the date the refund is requested. For those requesting a refund in September, we expect it to take a maximum of 60 days, and then reduce to 30 days for refunds requested in October, before returning to normal levels.

“Up until recently we have been committed to processing existing refunds within a maximum of 120 days, from the date the refund is requested, and we inform each customer when this is done by email. The timeframe begins from the date the refund is requested and acknowledged by a customer agent, not the date the flight is cancelled.

“We are aware that there are a portion of Virgin Atlantic bookings with pending refund requests which were incorrectly inputted and unfortunately now exceed 120 days for processing. This was an administration error and as soon as this was identified we urgently investigated. We are resolving this as a priority and any customers affected will have their refund processed as soon as possible.”

Kath Lowe’s Tui flight from Manchester to Tenerife was cancelled on 29 April, but she hasn’t received a voucher – or any other communication – from Tui and until she does she can’t claim a refund.

She says she’s tried calling Tui on many occasions but she’s never managed to get through to its call centre.

A Tui spokesperson said: “Customers with cancelled flight only bookings which were due to depart before 11 July were issued refund credit vouchers, and could then apply for a cash refund via our online form. These refunds were processed within 28 days.

“Customers with cancelled flight only bookings which were due to depart from 11 July onwards will automatically receive cash refunds. These refunds will be processed within 14 days.

“We’re really sorry to any customers who may have experienced delays in receiving their refund.”

Tui has also confirmed a voucher was sent to the case study in May but speculated it may have been lost in junk mail. They’ve now requested for this to be cancelled and a refund to be issued.

The CAA said: “We will review any supplementary evidence provided to us by Which? – beyond the 12,000 submitted to us during the review – but we will need to see individual examples in order to consider what further action is needed with the airlines.

“Throughout our review, alongside information received from airlines, we also used information from consumers and consumer groups, as well as mystery shopping from our consumer protection team, to determine what commitments were needed from airlines to improve performance.

“If we had not received such commitments during our review, then our next step would be to consider formal enforcement action. However, this enforcement process can take a significant period of time without providing short-term results for consumers. For example, the enforcement action we commenced against Ryanair in 2018 is not expected to come to court until at least 2021.

“While our initial review has finished, we have been clear that we will continue to monitor performance and should any airline fall short of the commitments they have made to us, we will take further action as required.”

Civil Aviation Authority reports on airline refunds review

But Which? says the CAA is failing the consumers it is supposed to protect

Review considered actions by airlines during the coronavirus pandemic
Civil Aviation Authority action has led to airlines making commitments to improve performance without requiring formal enforcement action
Quality of service and performance from most airlines has improved in response to bilateral engagement and the review, leading to refunds now being paid out faster
Civil Aviation Authority warns other European and international airlines that the consumers right to a refund must be protected

The UK Civil Aviation Authority has been reviewing the refund policies and performance of UK airlines and three of the largest international operators to the UK. A further five international airlines were included due to the level of consumer feedback and concerns that refunds were not being paid during the coronavirus pandemic.

The Civil Aviation Authority review is based on its own investigations, as well as information provided to us by consumers across email and social media, as well as through consumer bodies including the Competition and Markets Authority, the Northern Ireland Consumer Council and Which?.

At the start of the review, some airlines were not paying refunds, with others facing potential backlogs of numerous months.

We investigated airlines’ policies and practices to establish whether they were placing barriers in the way of consumers requesting refunds, through unclear messaging, difficult to navigate customer services and under-resourced call centres.

While we recognise that the coronavirus pandemic was an unprecedented situation for the aviation industry, our consumer team has worked to protect consumer rights and to influence airlines to change their processes and practices in order to improve performance in providing refunds.

The Civil Aviation Authority now has evidence that shows that since it launched its review, and its wide-ranging engagement programme with airlines, all UK airlines are now paying refunds. Call centre wait times have reduced, in some cases significantly, and customer service messaging has provided greater clarity on consumers’ rights to a refund for cancelled flights.

Our review found that a number of airlines were not performing adequately. We have gained immediate commitments from these airlines to improve their performance and the time taken to provide refunds to consumers, without requiring enforcement action.

This is the most immediate way of providing benefits to consumers as enforcement processes can take a considerable amount of time to complete given the potential for legal proceedings. We have previously called for stronger, more immediate, powers to act to protect consumer rights.

Other European airlines were not initially within the scope of our review due to discussions taking place between National Enforcement Bodies, European governments and the EU Commission. Engaging with these other EU airlines at that point would have potentially cut across these other discussions.

However, we have today written to a further 30 major European and international airlines that operate services to and from the UK to highlight the results of our review, and to warn them not to deny consumers their right to a refund. We will not hesitate to take further action against any airlines where necessary.

Commenting on the review, Richard Moriarty, Chief Executive of the UK Civil Aviation Authority, said: “The airlines we have reviewed have responded by significantly enhancing their performance, reducing their backlogs, and improving their processing speeds in the interests of consumers.

“Although we have taken into account the serious operational challenges many airlines have faced, we have been clear that customers cannot be let down, and that airlines must pay refunds as soon as possible.

“There is still work to do. We have required commitments from airlines as they continue the job of paying customer refunds. Should any airline fall short of the commitments they have made, we will not hesitate to take any further action where required.”

Summary statements for each airline are available on CAA website at the link below:

www.caa.co.uk/CAP1947

Rory Boland, Editor of Which? Travel, said: “The regulator is failing the consumers it is supposed to protect. The reality is that people are still owed millions of pounds in refunds, are facing financial and emotional turmoil, and continue to be fobbed off by a number of airlines who have been brazenly breaking the law for months.

“These airlines will now feel they can continue to behave terribly having faced no penalty or sanction.

“It is obvious that the CAA does not have the right tools to take effective action against airlines that show disregard towards passengers and the law, but more worryingly, it’s not clear the regulator has the appetite to use them.

“The government must use this opportunity to bring in much-needed reforms, including giving regulators greater powers to take swift and meaningful action, but consumers need assurances that these will actually be used against lawbreaking companies.”

Highway Code consultation: Make pedestrians the priority, says Living Streets

The Prime Minister has announced a consultation into the Highway Code. The consultation applies across England, Scotland and Wales and comes as the UK Government unveiled its ‘most ambitious plans yet to boost cycling and walking’.

Living Streets, the UK charity for everyday walking, says the changes are needed to encourage people to walk and cycle more.

A key feature of the proposals is the idea of a ‘hierarchy of responsibility’, with road users who cause the greatest harm having a greater responsibility to reduce the threat they pose to others.

There are also proposed changes at zebra crossings and junctions to give pedestrians priority and additional narrative on the dangers of speeding. At the heart of the proposed changes is the belief that “the purpose of the Highway Code is to promote safety on the road, whilst also supporting a healthy, sustainable and efficient transport system.”

Jenni Wiggle, Interim CEO, Living Streets, said: “The Highway Code currently treats all road users – from children walking to lorry drivers – as if they are equally responsible for their own or other people’s safety. However, people walking cause the least road danger but are often left paying the price.

“Pedestrians account for a quarter of road deaths, with the latest figures showing increases amongst vulnerable groups: children and older people. Road users who have potential to cause the greatest harm, such as the drivers of large motor vehicles, should also take the greatest share of responsibility to reduce the danger they pose.

“The renewed focus on unsafe speeding is welcome and incredibly timely. Lockdown saw a minority of people viewing quieter roads as an invitation to drive recklessly. Not only does speed kill but it creates an environment where only the brave dare use our streets to walk or cycle.

“Whether we choose to drive or cycle, we are all pedestrians. These proposed revisions will benefit all of us.”

Living Streets is part of the Walking and Cycling Alliance which has been calling for improved infrastructure for walking and cycling, along with changes to the Highway code.

For more information, visit livingstreets.org.uk/no1

Living Streets supports the plan to encourage more walking and cycling which was announced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday.

Living Streets Jenni Wiggle commented: “This announcement is fantastic news for walking and cycling. Investing in safe, convenient and attractive conditions for walking and cycling brings a range of benefits that will help deliver the Government’s priorities around obesity and climate change.

“Walking is the most accessible form of exercise and can help people maintain a healthy weight. Yet our streets don’t support walking. Placing walking and cycling at the heart of our transport system will allow us to emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic stronger and is essential for transport decarbonisation.

“Low traffic neighbourhoods, better crossings, 20mph limits, School Streets and segregated cycle lanes can all help reshape our streets into ones that promote healthier travel choices. Measures to reduce traffic in neighbourhoods and provide local authorities with new powers to enforce new schemes will further boost their effectiveness.”