ATOL! The Next Generation?
The news of the FlyGlobeSpan collapse provides a timely and important reminder of the recently announced Department for Transport Consultation, to update the Regulatory Framework for Aviation. Within the many aspects of this Consultation is the proposal to completely review the ATOL (Air Tour Operators Licence) scheme. This follows on from a number of high profile airline/travel company collapses which have left many holidaymakers either physically or financially stranded. We have dealt with a number of Consumers who have been ‘bounced’ between the CAA, ABTA and the Credit Card Companies – some of whom are still waiting for their money following the XL collpase!
The Travel Industry & Travel Press have in recent months obssessed on the issue of Consumer Protection, suggesting perhaps that the only issue that needs regulating is that of Financial Protection. The CAA launched an action against one company – Travel Republic – and failed in their quest to argue that they were selling ‘packages’, without having the necessary ATOL Licence; the CAA have now decided to appeal the decision made by the court. We have also noted the comments made by various parties, all trying to rationalise the way holidays are sold or are purchased – this debate is apparently making it difficult to find the correct solution to the thorny question of Consumer Financial Protection.
Far be it for this organisation to guide Government Departments and/or Politicians, but I keep coming back to the issue of ‘perception’. To illustrate this point we recently published an article entitled ‘Back to the Future For Package Travel Commissioner Kuneva?’ In that article we highlighted the terms and conditions of 3 pre-1992 popular holiday brochures. All three were effectively selling DIY holidays and provided for no liability where failure arose in the contract.
So, what is the difference between these three brochures and how the same holidays are being sold in 2009? It’s simple - the earlier holidays were sold in a paper brochure; today’s are sold via an internet brochure There is little or no difference in the terms and conditions offered to the Consumer in either the said paper brochures or that offered online! In reviewing these ‘historical’ Consumer documents, we say that the ‘new’ method of selling holidays – and a holiday is what the Consumer is purchasing – is an attempt to return to the ‘Golden Age’ of travel!
It is the Travel Industry wearing a new coat with the old rules of commerce stuffed into its pocket! There is no mystery, there is no confusion, we can all talk around ‘reverse packaging’, DIY holidays and so on, however, there is rarely anything new, it is simply re-packaged and re-branded and are often told that this is progress! If the bait is taken, then the Consumer will be cast adrift in a sea of contractual terms and no protection, financial or otherwise!
We think that this ‘obsession’ with Financial Protection is a smoke screen for the real event taking place, that being the EU’s current review of the Package Travel Directive.
We have consistently stated that Consumer Protection is not just about Financial Protection. It is also about Health & Safety, Hygiene Protection, Significant Changes, the so-called battle between what constitutes a Package or a DIY Holiday and the applicability of the extensive protections found under the Package Travel Regulations. We also think that the smoke screen exists to hide the real inequality in any debate about Financial Protection, that being, why are airlines excluded from providing Financial Protection for their product?
The response so far to the DfT Consultation is one of confusion and disappointment – there are many cook’s already in this particular kitchen!
The debate on Financial Protection tends to suggest that the poor long suffering Consumer should actually provide extra money through an insurance scheme, which would recompense them in the event of failure. I have always found this to be an interesting proposition; it is the sticking plaster approach to Financial Protection. The real issues to be explored centre on the questions of whether a company or its directors are fit to trade, both professionally or financially and if there are shortcomings, should there not be investigation and subsequent sanctions by a regulatory body? Spicy stuff, but I fear this Consultation will not grasp the nettle and bring true protection to the Consumer.
One final point about this Consultation, I note the list of those ‘consulted’ appears to be woefully short on Consumer or Pressure Group representation – how about the Aerotoxic Association, The Global Cabin Air Quality Executive, Co-Gas Safety, Consumer Safety International to name but a few?
No worries chaps – we shall certainly be making our own contribution to this Consultation!
HTW has noted that amongst the submissions to the Committee on Toxicity (COT) it has been suggested that the symptoms highlighted by crew and passengers were akin to the condition of hyperventilation.
HTW has for many years received reports from concerned holiday makers or independent travellers as to the safety of their aircraft, ship or boat, train or road transport.
