Credit Card section 75 query RE: Airline Failure

12
Posted 5th Mar
Hi,
I have international flights booked with FlyBe for the summer.
Now that FlyBe have folded, I am looking at my options.
I can see flights with other airlines, but they are far more expensive.
Further afield I can see flights that are cheaper, but would require a long drive; 2 weeks car parking fees and a possible overnight airport hotel stay, thus ending up costing more than the original FlyBe flights.
Every option is more expensive than the original FlyBe flights.

Before I contact my credit card company, would it be prudent to go ahead and book new flights (and hotel & car parking) on the basis that s75 should cover the additional (consequential) losses?Or am I taking a risk here and the card company may only choose to refund the original flights, leaving me to pay more for the new travel arrangements?

Thanks.
Community Updates
Ask

Groups

Top comments
psychobitchfromhell05/03/2020 11:22

Section 75 covers the cost of the original transaction. That's all.


Uranus05/03/2020 11:52

I believe consequential losses are included.


Section 75 also covers consequential losses so if you purchased event tickets and the event was cancelled you can also claim back the travel costs and hotel costs as well as they are no longer needed.

However op, i don’t believe it covers the extra costs now needed to still get to your destination as that is a whole new transaction and not really the fault of the card company.
12 Comments
Can't you claim on travel insurance?
Section 75 covers the cost of the original transaction. That's all.
psychobitchfromhell05/03/2020 11:22

Section 75 covers the cost of the original transaction. That's all.


I believe consequential losses are included.
DemonOverlord05/03/2020 11:18

Can't you claim on travel insurance?


Mine does not have scheduled airline failure cover.
Apparently almost half of all travel insurance sold in the UK does not have this.
psychobitchfromhell05/03/2020 11:22

Section 75 covers the cost of the original transaction. That's all.


Uranus05/03/2020 11:52

I believe consequential losses are included.


Section 75 also covers consequential losses so if you purchased event tickets and the event was cancelled you can also claim back the travel costs and hotel costs as well as they are no longer needed.

However op, i don’t believe it covers the extra costs now needed to still get to your destination as that is a whole new transaction and not really the fault of the card company.
ArcadeAssassin05/03/2020 12:12

Section 75 also covers consequential losses so if you purchased event …Section 75 also covers consequential losses so if you purchased event tickets and the event was cancelled you can also claim back the travel costs and hotel costs as well as they are no longer needed. However op, i don’t believe it covers the extra costs now needed to still get to your destination as that is a whole new transaction and not really the fault of the card company.


Thanks, so if I went out and purchased new flights today, and then phoned the card company, they would reject the consequential claim for the replacement flights?
But, they should approve a claim for a hotel that was booked with the same card (but separate transaction) at the destination?
Is that right, or are there caveats here too?

Thanks.
I think this is the grey area, the term 'consequntial losses' is subjective. Are the differences in cost drastic? I would be tempted to ring the credit card company now and ask them if they will cover new flights - they probably won't be able to tell you of course (as they would need to investigate), but given the collapse today they may have already made a decision on how they will proceed.

Of course, you could also reach out to the hotel directly and ask them if they will consider cancelling/moving the dates. Even with non refundable bookings there is a degree of discretion they can apply.

Either way depending on your credit card provider you may need to put up a fight, and my personal view would be the 'consequential losses' are the new flights - as a consequence of FlyBe failing to deliver on their end of the contractual agreement, you have had to seek alternative transport... of course there is no guarantee the credit card company will pay, and they may ask for proof (so if you decide to upgrade to first class, for example, in hope they will pay they might tell you to bog off)... so if it were me I'd probably try and find the cheapest 'next best' (even if that means i need to pay £50 for parking somewhere if the distance was reasonable) just in case I were left with the cost.

P.S. the likes of BA and easyJet are doing cheap tickets for those caught up in this mess mainly for getting people home - always worth asking them what they can do to help you.
Edited by: "CrashOverride" 5th Mar
Uranus05/03/2020 12:20

Thanks, so if I went out and purchased new flights today, and then phoned …Thanks, so if I went out and purchased new flights today, and then phoned the card company, they would reject the consequential claim for the replacement flights? But, they should approve a claim for a hotel that was booked with the same card (but separate transaction) at the destination?Is that right, or are there caveats here too?Thanks.


Yes I think they would reject the new flight claim.

I also don’t think the hotel would be covered as the hotel stay isn’t reliant on the flight (other flights/travel methods are available albeit difficult say) but in the example given, if you were going to a concert and that event was cancelled, the hotel stay would only be needed due to the concert, and thus is a consequential loss.

Nothing stops you trying though I suppose.
ArcadeAssassin05/03/2020 13:10

Yes I think they would reject the new flight claim.I also don’t think the h …Yes I think they would reject the new flight claim.I also don’t think the hotel would be covered as the hotel stay isn’t reliant on the flight (other flights/travel methods are available albeit difficult say) but in the example given, if you were going to a concert and that event was cancelled, the hotel stay would only be needed due to the concert, and thus is a consequential loss. Nothing stops you trying though I suppose.


That pretty much covers the scenarios.
Thanks for the help.
A holiday is not mandatory nor can losses from not taking a vacation be proved. The booking of new tickets is entirely discretionary and won't be covered.
Uranus05/03/2020 14:35

That pretty much covers the scenarios.Thanks for the help.


Note the exact wording of the legislation, which you can choose to apply to the merchant as you wish:
"...any claim against the supplier in respect of a misrepresentation or breach of contract, he shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor..."
which means if you have a legitimate claim against the supplier for xyz you can also present the same legitimate claim to the creditor (assuming the original transaction(s) does actually satisfy the S75 qualifiers).
Hence the real question to be addressed might be: what would you have been able to claim from FB (that could then also be presented to the CC co)?
Original legislation lifted from first para at legislation.gov.uk/ukp…ain
Consequential loss is a legal term and applies to such intangibles as loss of profit. It is not the same as directly incurred losses. Consider the loss carefully
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Discussions

    Discussions

    Top Merchants