EU RANT Very boat related.

[andy_wilson]

Just printed my flight details for a trip to White_Lady in the Med. Noticed the carrier had slapped £4.46 on the bill for Ins/Wheelchair Access so queried it, and this is the reply........

Dear Mr Wilson,
I acknowledge receipt of your recent correspondence.

With regard to your query regarding the wheelchair levy charged to all passengers travelling with us.

Ryanair are acting on the recommendations of a consultation paper issued by the EU Commission, regarding the provision of reduced mobility assistance in European airports.
I enclose below, an extract from the EU Staff Working Paper - Issued January 2004.

38. The solution suggested would avoid these problems as the charge levied on each airline would be proportional to the total quantity of passengers that it embarked and disembarked at an airport. In this way, it would be independent of the number of passengers with reduced mobility carried. Such a scheme would not impose additional costs on the sector, except, but would change the way assistance at airports was organised and financed: certain responsibilities would be transferred from air carriers to the managing bodies of airports. However, the latter would not bear the cost themselves but rather charge it to the airlines using their airports. Airlines would pass the charge on to their passengers as a whole, so that it would be shared among a large number of citizens. And a person with reduced mobility would not be seen as an extra cost but welcomed as a passenger, at all stages from booking a ticket to arrival at destination.

As such Ryanair are acting in accordance with the general view held by the EU, with regard to the financing of reduced mobility access to airports.

Yours sincerely
For and on Behalf of
RYANAIR LIMITED

Maureen Noonan
Customer Services

Is this the norm for budget carriers to add a charge based on "the recommendations of a consultation paper issued by the EU Commission"? Hardly sounds like it's enshrined in any kind of law after all.....

At £4.46 X 120 or so passengers that's over £250 each way to deal with all the wheelchairs I'll be looking out for.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jhr]

Hm. There was a very public situation, a little while back, when one of the budget operators (possibly even Ryan Air) got some negative publicity for charging someone in a wheelchair a significant excess on their ticket price.

I suspect this is as much about damage limitation and PR on their part as it is about the EU. The case didn't do them any favours.

<hr width=100% size=1>Je suis Marxiste - tendance Groucho

 

[ChrisE]

Looks like Ryanair weaslin' their way out of the low price structure to me. I've not had this charge levied on me by any of the other 6 or so Euro carries I've flown with recently.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jhr]

Full sorry story

Is <A target="_blank" HREF=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3443739.stm>here</A>. I note that it speculates about a 50p per passenger surcharge. This now seems, as if by magic, to have become £4.46. Funny old thing, inflation......./forums/images/icons/crazy.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>Je suis Marxiste - tendance Groucho

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Low price = no fat

The impact of legislation induced cost is felt by all companies. The effect is much greater on smaller companies or high volume low margin companies. ie. one of my companies was quoted 8k or 5% of turnover to do it's Health & Safety compliance stuff. One of our larger clients spent 0.003% of turnover to get the same job done. You can relate the ratio to profit if you like but then the low margin guy takes the hit.

Because the EU directive and court case pissed off Ryanair they are documenting to each customer the exact cost as they see it. I'd like to see more companies show the breakdown of imposed cost that are being passed on to customers.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[andy_wilson]

Re: Low price = no fat

"I'd like to see more companies show the breakdown of imposed cost that are being passed on to customers."

Me too. Problem is they don't show it too well.

Just spoken to two fellow travellers (booked separately). They weren't aware of the charge either. It's a bit of a sneaky one Ryan Air stick on the bill at the end after you have fallen for the fare price.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mickshep]

I for one will not be using Ryan Air ever again. I took a budget flight aboard Easyjet from Newcastle to Stanstead with a rucksack full of sailing gear to catch a flight with Ryan Air accross to Eindhoven (No direct flight available) to bring my new boat home. The rucksack which was fine aboard Easy Jet was classed as too heavy for Ryan Air who charged me an extra £75 for the bag. Mike.

<hr width=100% size=1>My Mum say's I'm not a fat b@st@rd, just heavy boned.

 

[bob_tyler]

To be fair, Ryanair do state a baggage limit of 15kilos, against all othet airlines 20-23 kilos, on their web site. If your rucksack was over 15 kilos you should have expected to pay the surcharge.
Mind you, they do rather lay it on with their extras. My return flight Newquay-Stansted in January has a total return fare of £1.98 but with all the various surcharges, fares, admin,taxes etc came to just under £30 - still pretty cheap though.

Must remember not to buy anything heavy, no anchor or chain, at the Boat Show!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[EME]

'Extras' is a very nasty habit which is particularly prevalent in aviation. All do with 'hidden pricing' to some degree or another although Ryanair are taking it all to the absolute limit imho .. this thread demonstrates the various 'schemes' they use for charging extras. Phone them and you may well get a premium charge line etc..

The 'charge' you have suffered is unique to their goodselves as far as I know, and you can see the background.

As for transparent pricing by all airlines .. that is a joke. It is a case of 'what can we get away with ' in some cases or even internal politic in the case of BA adding LHR 'airport charges' some years ago. the shame of it is that the practice will continue to 'blossom' as marketing departments continue to strive for the ' Cheapest' headline fare.

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=blue>I am WHAT I say I am</font color=blue>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Thats hopeless

It should be in big letters with a fanfare.

The big weakness of the business model that these companies developed is they're a bit ticklish. The slightest touch by any outside influence and they must react straightaway.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AlexL]

Blimey You really cannot have 'low cost, no frills' and then bitch about the minimal service! If you want customer service, no surcharges etc. etc then fly BA and pay for it. Ryanair will fly you for 4 hours across europe for less than the price of a 5 mile taxi journey - think about it! The whole point, the whole Ethos of Ryanair is that you pay for the bare minimum, if you want anything else, and unfortunately in this case this seems a bit heartless, you pay extra for it. BA merely amortize all these costs across everyones ticket so your paying for it anyway, its just not itemised.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[oldharry]

The worst case of 'Extras' I have come across was Ryanair: advertising a return ticket to Alicante for 99p. Yes 99p! Great - with 'extras' it came to £74.10 for 2 people. Still very cheap, but why not be honest and SAY it was £37.05 each? It was still by far the cheapest fare available. Or if the various supplement s are variable - 'from.... such and such a price'

Trouble is, they all do it, even the long established ones. And it is creeping in to the whole travel business. Many 'Hot' or 'Late deals' now carry significant 'booking supplements' or 'handling charges' in the last year or two. And a favourite one is the 'fuel supplement' reflecting oil price hikes - generally £20 a head - on a 300 seater an extra £6,000! Nice one!

Railways would get short shrift if they tried this game.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[zefender]

Let's assume a 5 mile trip in a black cab costs £10. Can you point me to a 4 hour Ryanair flight where 'all in' it costs less than this?

I think the 'low, cost, no frills' line has been taken much too far. We're talking about an organisation that operates with a contempt for its customers and seeks to fleece them at every opportunity. Why was 15kgs chosen as the heavy baggage limit I wonder? How can it possibly cost more to carry a typical 20 kgs case, weighing a third as much as a person, than the passenger him/herself? It's also worth comparing the so called low cost carriers on a point to point basis since it's not uncommon to have to pay more than the airfare reaching your actual destination from some faraway tertiary airport.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mikewilkes]

<:Why was 15kgs chosen as the heavy baggage limit I wonder? How can it possibly cost more to carry a typical 20 kgs case,:>

Squeezy jet work on a size basis. As regards weight, if you can carry it and put it in an overhead locker they dont give a toss what it weighs!!!!

Need to have your porridge the day you take the new anodes out to the boat.



<hr width=100% size=1>

Ceum ur

 

[Gordonmc]

In defence: Ryanair have a low baggage limit because it is their stated intention to move toward "no check-in", in other words only cabin baggage.
In prosecution: Ryanair shot themselves in the foot on the wheelchair issue. They were taken to the European Court by a wheelchair-bound passneger who claimed he was discriminated against by being charged extra. Ryanair took the huff and imposed the blanket additional charge. They could have avoided the situation by biting the bullet and accommodating the disabled passenger at no extra cost.
They decided not to and are suffering the consequences.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: If someone

claims to offer low fares and does it, it's a little churlish to moan about the method unless it affects safety. What they're doing is trying to train customers into helping keep fairs low. It's working to. Fewer people are turning up for their cheapo flight expecting to be treated like royals, though some still do.

I don't use Ryanair because they fly you to places I don't want to go to. ie Airports I've never heard of that are a very long taxi ride from anywhere.

I do use Easyjet and BA & Virgin. EasyJet seem to do what it says on the tin. The staff seem switched on and friendly enough and the delays are reasonable. I've never had one of their ultra low prices but say £40 on average to Nice is OK.
BA I use if I need to be somewhere ontime and with a lot of stuff. They have improved their customer care lately, I got a smile out of one of their hosties the other day, and you can get a cheap seat if you plan ahead. Virgin are a very good longhaul company, particularly if you use them a lot.

How much of the improvements in the big carriers is down to the low fare bunch.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AlexL]

Yeah ok maybe it costs a little more, but blimey you're taking a few hours flight on a 50 million quid machine (ryanair are in the process of buying new 737-NG's), with god knows how many TONS of fuel, and multi BILLION dollar air traffic control services, for 'a few quid' and yeah ok the government slap 30 quid taxes on top of the ticket, but its still bloody good value.

Ryanair actually have a very good point aswell about the wheelchair issue, one of the taxes on your ticket goes to the BAA and airlines also pay a serious amount of dosh to use the airport, and then BAA say that stuff in the airport is the responsibility of the airline.

Baggage allowance
Weight is everything in flying, Weight is fuel, fuel is cost, low or no baggage makes it considerably cheaper to operate the aircraft. Again this not 'new news' once you check in, it is printed on the ticket and advertised when you buy the ticket. It doesn't really matter weather you have 16kilos on a 15 kilo allowance or 33 kilos on a 32 kilo allowance, the airline can and often will charge you for being over the limit, and on all airlines the charge is alot usualy 10's of pounds per kilo if not more.

I still maintain that you cannot really complain about minimal service from a supplier which advertises - well, eerr minimal service. Ryanair etc generally do exactly what is says on the tin. If you don't like whats written on the tin, then don't use it. Simple really.

I usually fly BA or other 'flag' airlines as I quite agree with your last paragraph, that all in it is little difference in cost, once you factor the 100 mile journey to the city from the ex Nato central european Airfield which they use!
However to be fair, Ryanair etc also fly to some nice provincial airports generally not served by the majors. However if you want to fly to a big city then BA are usually a better bet.

It seems to be a very english desease where we moan about the cost, so suppliers bring down the cost, by the only way possible - cutting out content, then we bitch about the content! having a cake and eating it springs to mind!. I think the airline industry is currently in a pretty good state as far as the customers are concerned, its cheaper than it has ever been (many airlines are going banktrupt so theres no massive profits being made, margins are very tight), there is more choice than ever, you can chose, cheap cheap or a good level of service and pay for it.


<hr width=100% size=1><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by AlexL on 26/11/2004 10:53 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[BustinAround]

Absolutely, if you don't like budget service fly BA and pay £150 instead of £30.

I also fail to see how the EU's idea is a bad one....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[abraxus]

Actually I think the EU proposal IS a bad one. Whilst it's only a few quid, why should I, or anyone else have to cough up to subsidise someone with reduced mobility taking a flight. The assumption here is that the person with reduced mobility is poor, which isn't neccessarily the case. If someone has has a special need that incurs a cost, then surely they should pay it.

What if I wanted to take 30kg of luggage instead of 15kg. Would I expect all the other passengers to chip in an equal amount to pay for it? Course I wouldn't.

This may sound callous, but as I said before, there is always the assumption that the wheeelchair bound are poor, which isn't always true, so why in that case should we all have to pay, even when there is no-one in a wheelchair wishing to use this service.

What about someone that wishes to fly, but can't afford even the cheap ticket? Should we all pay extra so that they can fly for free?

I believe that in general those with disabilties should receive concessions paid for by us out of our taxes, however when it comes to the conmmercial world and the payment of luxury items then it shouldn't be down to everyone else to subsisdise this without choice.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: In line

Your point is out of line with the rest of society. You pay for assistance to people who need it absolutely everywhere. In Tesco's, at Twickenham, at Paddington Station or at McDonalds. It's just that to make a point Ryanair show you the charge.

<hr width=100% size=1>