Can't Force Usage Of Vouchers For Flights Cancelled During COVID-19, Chandigarh District Commission Holds British Airways Liable
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh bench comprising Vijaykumar M Pawale (President), B Devaraju (Member) and V Anuradha (Member) held British Airways liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for failure to refund the ticket price despite cancellation of the flight. The bench directed it to refund Rs. 78,131/- to the Complainant and...
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh bench comprising Vijaykumar M Pawale (President), B Devaraju (Member) and V Anuradha (Member) held British Airways liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for failure to refund the ticket price despite cancellation of the flight. The bench directed it to refund Rs. 78,131/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- along with Rs. 10,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by the Complainant.
Brief Facts:
Ms. Toshaani Goel (“Complainant”) booked a return airline ticket online, costing Rs. 78131/-, for travel from Delhi to Charlotte (North Carolina, USA) on 30.8.2020 and from Charlotte to Delhi on 21.10.2020 from British Airways. The itinerary included stops in London and Chicago during the Delhi to Charlotte leg. On 24.8.2020, the airline notified the Complainant of new UK government rules due to COVID-19. Despite multiple requests for guidance on boarding the 30.8.2020 flight, the airline claimed that the flight was cancelled due to operational issues. Subsequently, the airline issued an E-voucher and told the Complainant to utilize it for future travel. The Complainant, not a frequent traveller, expressed inability to use the voucher. The Complainant made several communications with the airline for a refund but didn't receive a satisfactory response. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against the airline.
In response, the airline countered the complaint, asserting maintainability, concealment of facts, and cause of action as preliminary objections. However, the airline admitted the purchase of the subject ticket by the Complainant for travel on the specified date. It is denied that due to the cancellation of the flight, the ticket was cancelled.
Observations by the District Commission:
The District Commission noted that the Complainant, citing COVID-19 guidelines and her reluctance to travel in the future, expressed the intention not to use the E-voucher with the airline. Despite this, the District Commission noted that the airline did not refund the amount and insisted on the E-voucher, thereby, compelling the Complainant to travel in the future. Therefore, the District Commission held the airline liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices.
Consequently, the District Commission directed the airline to refund Rs. 78,131/- to the Complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 13.1.2022, the date of the initial refund request. Additionally, the airline was ordered to pay Rs. 10,000/- to the Complainant as compensation for mental agony and harassment along with Rs. 10,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by her.
Case Title: Toshaani Goel vs British Airways
Case Number: CC/258/2023
Advocate for the Complainant: Devinder Kumar
Advocate for the Respondent: Nitesh Mittal