Air Canada ordered to pay couple $2k. Instead, it's taking them to court
cbc.ca
cbc.ca
When a random cab driver finally came by possibly just to catch some shut-eye, a $400 ride sounded better than sleeping outside the airport with a toddler and no food or bathroom. After contacting Air Canada customer service and going through their complaint process, the responses were always that our flight was not delayed referencing the first leg but always omitting the second (the complaint was only made on the second leg, using that flight number, so not like it was left out). Well, I eventually got hold of an actual representative who, after a polite exchange or two, stopped responding to any further communication. I filed a case with CTA, citing the relevant Air Canada policies as well as the CTA delays and cancellations guidelines. Plenty of nuances around what is in or out of the airline's control, but supposedly a new rule went into effect last September which would provide compensation in either case. Disappointingly, the CTA reviewer closed the case in under 30 minutes from the airline's response without directly addressing any of this, leaving me with apparently no further option but I suppose to sue in Canadian court? Though I might have even signed away that right by entrusting the CTA with some form of arbitration. The money and time lost is one thing but the CTA's handling has made me unlikely to ever fly to/through Canada again if I can help it.
You're omitting a lot of information yourself. What was the reason given by the airline and CTA for why your claim was invalid? How was the flight booked? What was the nature of the delay? Why was the cab ride $400? How did you even get to a taxi stand? If you're waiting for a connecting flight wouldn't you be trapped in the airport airside?
- The delay was caused initially by a safety critical instrument being recognized as faulty, which required the airline to seek a replacement aircraft. This was deemed out of control of the airline, with subsequent staffing and catering issues cascading (in airline's control).
- CTA stated that because the primary issue was safety critical and outside of their control, passengers were not due compensation.
- CTA made no acknowledgement of the claims that 1) Air Canada did not inform passengers the nature or possible length of delay, 2) did not offer any rebooking, accommodation, or food/drink during extended layover, and 3) the Regulations Amending the Air Passenger Protections Regulations (https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/content/new-refund-regulations-now-force) which requires the airline to at least communicate but in many cases offer reimbursement regardless of whether an incident is in or out of their control.
- Flight was booked with Air Canada.
- Cab ride was at our final destination, from Tokyo NRT to Yokohama where family resides. Instead of landing in the afternoon, it was well past normal arrival hours and everyone staff included was clearing out. By the time we got outside, taxi stand was empty, nobody was around, airport was locked behind us. Waited approx. two hours before one randomly showed up. (Yes, we were trying to call any local services in the meantime but of the ones which I could actually connect to without a local # none were actually able to send a driver to where we were.)
Obviously I don't want to fly on an aircraft with knowingly compromised safety, but if they had simply alerted passengers what was happening and what to expect then I would've arranged a pick up in advance or requested that we catch a flight the next day. Throughout the delay, I received 4-5 texts simply saying there was a catering issue that would be resolved "soon".
Looking at the government's site[1] it looks like you're only owed compensation for "flight delays or cancellations that are in their control and not related to safety", so at least with respect to the first delay it's safe to say that the CTA was correct in ruling against you in this case. The second part (ie. "staffing and catering issues cascading (in airline's control)") is in a legal gray zone and I could see it argued either way. For instance, if a flight was 6 hours due to safety issues, and then as a result they're not able to get a flight crew, because they're not expecting a flight to occur at that time, that's arguably caused by the safety issue rather than "in airline's control".
>- CTA made no acknowledgement of the claims that 1) Air Canada did not inform passengers the nature or possible length of delay, 2) did not offer any rebooking, accommodation, or food/drink during extended layover, and 3) the Regulations Amending the Air Passenger Protections Regulations (https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/content/new-refund-regulations-now...) which requires the airline to at least communicate but in many cases offer reimbursement regardless of whether an incident is in or out of their control.
My interpretation here is that if the airline fails to do those things, they're in violation of the regulation and are liable to pay fines to the regulator, but it doesn't say that the passengers are entitled to compensation. At best you could argue that as a result of those delays you had to buy food/transportation/accommodation, submit receipts, and argue that the airline should compensate you for those expenses. I don't think it's something where if they failed to do something, you can straight up demand $$$ as compensation.
>they had simply alerted passengers what was happening and what to expect then I would've arranged a pick up in advance
I think you're overestimating how much the airline knew. If it's a random mechanical issue it's plausible that even they didn't know how long the repairs would take. Same with the staffing/catering issues afterwards.
>or requested that we catch a flight the next day
The regulations does mention "once a delay reaches 3 hours, an airline must also offer alternate travel arrangements in the same class of service and using a reasonable route", but it's unclear whether if the next flight leaves in 12 hours and the delay is 7 hours, whether you can arbitrarily rebook to any flight you want. Moreover, it's possible that the next flight is also full and you can't change to that.
>Well, yes, I'm making a comment on the internet about my negative experience with Air Canada and CTA in about 15 minutes. The claim itself had all the information and took hours to compile, I'm not sure how long it would take for me to simplify that point by point without still missing something.
I mean, as mentioned in the above paragraphs, whether you're entitled to a claim hinges on the cause of the delay, so it's fair to expect that this at least gets a passing mention.
[1] https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/air-passenger-protection-regulatio...
> If the situation is within the airline's control, but required for safety purposes
> Airlines' obligations to you include:
> standards of treatment; and
> completion of your itinerary or a refund.
I itemized all receipts and even had to provide USD/CAD/JPY conversion on every single one but funny enough the only thing which did get reimbursed, the stroller, was based on the current Amazon CA price for the similar model. In the section where you provide documentation you can provide a narrative, which I did along the lines of "I would request the maximum compensation based on my interpretation of X-Y-Z but be satisfied with the minimum reimbursement for itemized additional expense". Sure, the CAD$700 per passenger that the APPR mentions would be nice but the taxi ride seemed obvious? I figured it's one or the other because the point of reimbursement is to cover those extra things without putting the burden of receipts and claims on the customer.
I also noted that in the APPR it states "If the situation is within the airline's control (whether or not it's related to safety)" which led me to question what makes a safety issue in or not in the airline's control? I imagine this is common knowledge to those involved but again, would've found the judgement more credible if my question/claim had been addressed directly.
> I think you're overestimating how much the airline knew.
They submitted documentation showing that they were aware of the issue ~2hrs before our scheduled departure. From there, I think there are many reasonable steps they could have taken all of which are not pretend it's a catering issue while holding people in the airport for 6+ hours after scheduled departure and offering no assistance whatsoever.
I tend to approach these sorts of issues with very little expectation that my interpretation is right (even if it is reasonable), that I'm owed anything, or that other parties will do any more than uphold the minimum required of them. Still, it did not increase my confidence in CTA helping consumers when airlines somehow do not fulfill their own obligations.
I think the AND is very important. Issues as the one described certainly seem to be in the control of the airline (not detecting them during maintenance etc.)
Also rebooking and/or providing alternative transportation are certainly not related to being entitled to compensation.
I found Air Canada had previously apologised for a similar incident, but apparently they learned nothing from that.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38179443
The cynical part of me suspects they use it to bump people off full flights since it always works out cheaper for them than the compensation.
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/air-canada-vomit-apology-... with extra customer care:
> Benson goes on to relate how a pilot then came down the plane to speak to the passengers, telling them that “they could leave the plane… and organize flights on their own dime, or they would be escorted off the plane by security and placed on a no fly list!”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/30/air-canada-whe...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/16/air-canada-cha...
Weird that you would be opposed to participation of the very people you're seeking clarity on.
Canada has a foul domestic airline industry. More times than not from what I've looked at and read - it's cheaper to fly domestic in Canada by picking an international flight that has a layover in the USA than it is to fly solely domestic in Canada - with all the extra fees, charges, etc. etc. etc.
Just a side effect of the government and oligopolies in Canada turning the screws trying to extract more and more money out of their citizens.
Just to check, I looked up prices for flights from LAX-JFK and compared them to a flight from Vancouver to Toronto, both in the middle of July.
The Canadian flight was $18 cheaper, if you exclude low cost carriers. If you include LCCs, the Canadian option was about 10% more expensive.
Canadian oligopolies are very real and exist in telecom, grocery, banking, energy and mass media, the airline industry has gotten slightly better over the past decade
Sounds alright, doesn't it?
> The Dyczkowskis' lawyer, Peter Choe, who is working pro bono,
So they need a lawyer working pro bono for them to not have legal fees. Got it.
"They won't be on the hook for OUR legal fees". Props to Peter Choe, because otherwise... federal court cases are not cheap[1].
[1] My brother's ex's new partner sold a house to fight a decision to euthanize her dog for biting incidents in federal court. Leaving aside the wisdom of this choice, it's ... "not cheap".
> "The original case was between the passenger and Air Canada, therefore the review of the decision is between the same parties," he said.
Any Canadian lawyers care to comment if this is actually a special requirement of Canadian law? In the US, you sue the agency to challenge an administrative order. Suing the aggrieved individual sure sounds like a tactic to dissuade others from making complaints.
Also the airports are chaotic with luggage being misplaced and delayed almost every single time.
Let's say I live in the US and I hate the US, if you're being handwavy about it. There's nothing weird about finding enough bad in a country to badmouth it in aggregate.