• Several travel cases on db.no/reise.
(Dagbladet): Norwegians travel more than before, and has been more travel adept. It also leads to the Norwegians complain more to tour operators, airlines and Appeal.
In many cases, arrange the matter between you and the airline or hotel. But not always. Then you may want to get help, although the number of complaints have been so many that appeal time now is up to one year.
Not all complaints are taken into account even if the traveling feel that appeal is more than justified.
– If something goes wrong on your trip you should first contact your tour operator or travel company. If you file a complaint and this is rejected you can appeal further to the Transport Appeals Board or Package Tribunal, says Marianne Stromme.
The Boards of Appeal
Stromme working in the secretariat of the Transport Appeals Board and Package Board.
The first committee takes care of complaints relating to aircraft and railway, and from April 1, it shall also deal with complaints from bus, tram and subway. About a year it shall also receive complaints from båtkryssningar.
Package Tribunal determines complaints that are about travel where transport and accommodation purchased simultaneously, such as charter flights.
– We have had a strong increase in the number of cases. This may be because people travel more and they are more familiar with their rights. In 2012 we had about 700 complaints relating to aircraft, but in 2015 that figure had risen to 1,700, says Stromme.
Long processing
– How quickly can you get answers to their complaints?
– We normally eight to twelve months examination of the complaint is received to the treated Secretariat. Thereafter, it shall be submitted to the Tribunal. The different committees have slightly different composition in relation to the means of transport used, says Stromme.
The Boards of Appeal only receives complaints via letter or a completed form on-line. In this process, think Stromme many unwarranted complaints falling out and that there may be unlike what a traveler feels he or she is entitled to, and what is actually justified.
– Sometimes ordering people tickets a little too fast, and maybe with some carelessness. Particularly in terms of what is realistic to implement in practice, says Stromme.
– Focus around rights
In Norway we are accustomed to that someone can arrange up to us if something does not go according to plan. It is not always possible abroad. When the number flyklager have gone aloft the number of railway complaints gone the opposite way.
– When it comes to packages we received around 300 complaints last year. Here we have seen an increase in recent years, but this may be because it is more focused around consumer rights, says Stromme.
By bankruptcy
If the tour operator, travel agency or airline sells packets traveling goes bankrupt is it Reisegarantifondet that should help you.
Members of Reisegarantifondet has provided a bank guarantee as security.
– During the last year there were two such failures that may assist in, says Signe Eriksen Reisegarantifondet.
If the company goes bankrupt before the journey has started can Reisegarantifondet ensure that money paid back.
– If one is on a journey consisting our job partly in helping you home again. If the journey is paid by credit card may also card issuer help you, says Eriksen.
Following tribunal decisions
– We were one of the driving forces in the establishment of what was then called Flyklagenemnda, said information officer at SAS Knut Morten Johansen.
He sees it as a great advantage to have a transport Appeals with legal expertise that can resolve matters, although SAS preferably want to solve them before they get that far.
It’s good to have an independent third body that can resolve issues where companies and travelers have different understanding, says Johansen.
– Although the decisions of the Board are advisory as we follow them up 100 percent, even if we disagree with the decision, he said.
According to Johansen there are also cases where SAS has changing its own guidelines so that they will be in line with the Transport Appeals Board’s understanding.
– A few exceptions
also Norwegian generally follows decisions of Transport Appeals Board:
– Transport Appeals Board has a broad expertise, and the general rule of ours is that we should follow the recommended decisions that come from there, says communications director Lasse Sandakerveien-Nielsen in Norwegian, however:
– There are a very few exceptions where we fundamentally have been opposed. Like when the Tribunal awarded the rating to 10 percent discounts on ticket price because we had to put up another aircraft than Dreamliner to avoid cancellations. We chose to take the matter to court, and won both the district court and the appellate court, he said.
– Delays and hotel standard
– We try, of course, not to be “squares” and we want to resolve matters in consultation with the guest. If the case ends in Package Tribunal, we follow the decisions that come from there, says communication Beatriz Rivera in Apollo.
– Our view is that Norwegians traveling not complain to any great extent, says Communications Elisabeth Larsen Vonstett in Winger .
She says Winger trying to convey that guests must tell right away if they are not satisfied, so the company can help them while they are on vacation.
– The complaints coming trades usually about delays or hotel standard. The general rule is that we follow the decisions of Package Board, says Larsen Vonstett.
FIVE COMPLAINTS WITH DECISION:
1 Snowfall gave off
A man was from Tromso to Copenhagen in March last year. The day before the trip was very many flights canceled due to heavy snowfall. This meant that the crew were in different places and man’s journey from Oslo to Copenhagen was canceled.
He accepted the shuttle but came to Copenhagen more than eight hours late.
Resolution: Extraordinary circumstances, and SAS is not liable.
2 mouse on board
Complaints were traveling with Norwegian from New York to Oslo in autumn 2014. the departure was delayed 4.5 hours because it was found a mouse on board an earlier flight.
Complaints believes such findings on an earlier departure can not be considered to be an extraordinary circumstance beyond the airline’s control.
– We rejected the claim for compensation because we deemed that a mouse board the plane was an extraordinary circumstance. We were clear on this in our feedback to those who protested, and the Tribunal agreed with us, says communications director Lasse Sandakerveien-Nielsen in Norwegian Dagbladet.
Resolution: The Tribunal is of believes that the mice in the aircraft should be regarded as an extraordinary circumstance in Regulation sense and gives no complaints upheld.
3 Long queues
Complaints were traveling with Norwegian from Budapest to Oslo in January last year. She met at the airport two hours before departure according to the airport’s recommended in not later.
It was a long queue at check in, in addition, the employee problems with printing luggage tag. At the security checkpoint there were also long queue. The complainant requested to drop by but were told by the staff to wait, which meant that she missed the plane.
In his response to the complaint, writes Norwegian that it is important to be early in connection with a journey. Here complaints had time to check in but have unclear reasons not come to end on time.
Resolution: The Tribunal is of the opinion that the complainant has done what can be expected. That she still missed the flight due to insufficient capacity in Norwegian, handling agent or the airport. Transport Appeals Board aircraft therefore recommends that Norwegian replaces complainant’s expenses on 9939 kroner for hotels and new tickets for the following day.
4 Recommended tripled replacement
Complaints booked a trip for two with accommodation in a two bedroom apartment with sea on Tenerife last winter.
Upon arrival received complaints allocated an apartment which consisted of two bedrooms with two beds in each room. The two extra beds occupied most of the space in the living room, and a loveseat and a table were pushed together in a corner of the room. The beds were too narrow and painful to lie on.
apartment was next door to where the garbage of the entire system was thrown into different containers. Complaints were living in this apartment for five days before they got moving.
Winger’s compensation offered complaints in 1000 was transferred to the account or a gift certificate of NOK 1000.
Resolution: The Tribunal following an overall assessment that the complainant should receive a discounted price. Two-week trip cost 31,960 crowns. It provides a daily rate of 2,283 kroner. The Tribunal recommends that the complainant receiving a discounted price equal to 30 percent of the daily rate for the first five days, a total of 3430 million.
5 Upgrade and replacement
Complaints and her traveling companions had even ordered a two-week trip a three star hotel in Santorini on Apollos sites. At the airport on arrival they were told that the hotel was overbooked and that they had to stay at another hotel.
After three nights, they were moved to the hotel they had booked. Complaints demanded ticket price refunded, in addition to compensation for telephone and destroyed summer.
Apollo lamented over the booking on arrival. In addition, the new hotel a four star hotel, and hence an upgrade in terms of standard.
Apollo has provided 3000 million in compensation over booking the first three days, and can not see that there is a basis for further compensation.
Resolution: Package Tribunal may not recommend it be given further price reduction in this case.
No comments:
Post a Comment