Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines? • Hacker News Board

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#21

Post by joneholland » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 4:55 PM UTC

Rather than booking the replacement flight directly the author should have had easyjet rebook him.

The author did no-show on the replacement flight provided by easyJet, and all of the griping will get them nowhere. You can’t take things into your own hands and then expect the company to refund you, the company would have provided the free alternative flight (earlier than the one the next day) and the EU fine had they just talked to a gate agent.

I’ve flown hundreds of thousands of miles and had my share of issues like this and you can always sort it out if you do it prior to taking the replacement flight.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#22

Post by sp332 » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 4:57 PM UTC

otterley wrote: post #12

"Automated claims systems, why don’t airlines have these? They would save money on support staff/legal fees/etc. The could charge a couple of pounds/dollars/euros more per ticket and probably cover all compensation costs. We know that “no win no fee” claims services exist. They know they exist. They know that we know that they exist, so what the fuck are we all doing wasting our time here?" The answer is simple: You…

I thought exactly the same. Avoiding automaton let them bring a whole court system to its knees which meant they could get away with breaking the law.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#23

Post by jpcooper » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 4:57 PM UTC

telesilla wrote: post #19

jpcooper wrote: post #5

Travel cancellation insurance is a thing that exists. It would be nice to see a travel cancellation insurance product which pays out based on the following automatically and easily verifiable outcomes: 1. Customer turns up. 2. Plane leaves within a certain range around scheduled time. 3. Plane arrives at destination. 4. Plane arrives at destination within a certain range around the scheduled time. 5. The price of the…

The EU has strict rules around exactly this. If the flight is outside the rules, you submit the paperwork and wait for a response. I've done this 5 times the last year and won more than the flight cost, even those times I received a hotel and replacement flight. It makes EU flight planners very careful, I imagine, due to the expense of losing an entire flight income and more.

The author seems not to have been able to claim what he should under these rules.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#24

Post by Veen » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 5:02 PM UTC

telesilla wrote: post #4

Probably just whoever was reading the paperwork on the day. That's an unfortunate turnout for the poster. I've had exactly the same experience but different departure airport and won (flight didn't go, I bought am immediate replacement seat myself, didn't use the one that was reassigned to me so I could get there faster). I use https://refund.me , excellent success rate and very little effort. It would be amazing to…

The UK Government announced their intention to adopt EU Regulation 261/2004 into UK law (although we've yet to see whether that will actually happen).

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#25

Post by marcosdumay » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 5:03 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #22

otterley wrote: post #12

"Automated claims systems, why don’t airlines have these? They would save money on support staff/legal fees/etc. The could charge a couple of pounds/dollars/euros more per ticket and probably cover all compensation costs. We know that “no win no fee” claims services exist. They know they exist. They know that we know that they exist, so what the fuck are we all doing wasting our time here?" The answer is simple: You…

I thought exactly the same. Avoiding automaton let them bring a whole court system to its knees which meant they could get away with breaking the law.

No that you said it, court systems should have overuse tariffs, so the people that overwhelm them subside the extra capacity they need.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#26

Post by renewiltord » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

You have to book through them rather than by yourself. In fact, I'm very surprised he retained the flight back. Usually they cancel your return leg if you no-show the outbound leg.

It's shitty stuff from the airlines for sure. But AFAIK, they all do this at this level.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#27

Post by Nextgrid » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 5:09 PM UTC

otterley wrote: post #12

"Automated claims systems, why don’t airlines have these? They would save money on support staff/legal fees/etc. The could charge a couple of pounds/dollars/euros more per ticket and probably cover all compensation costs. We know that “no win no fee” claims services exist. They know they exist. They know that we know that they exist, so what the fuck are we all doing wasting our time here?" The answer is simple: You…

> The author is thinking like an engineer, not like a businessperson.

I'd rewrite this and say that the author is thinking ethically, not like scum.

If the law or regulations say that you must compensate a customer for your failings, you should implement the most efficient system for you to do so (thus both you and the customer win) and focus the remaining resources on making sure you don't have to compensate customers in the first place by avoiding failures (and failures that aren't avoidable should just be accounted for in the price you sell your services).

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#28

Post by otterley » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 5:10 PM UTC

marcosdumay wrote: post #25

sp332 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought exactly the same. Avoiding automaton let them bring a whole court system to its knees which meant they could get away with breaking the law.

No that you said it, court systems should have overuse tariffs, so the people that overwhelm them subside the extra capacity they need.

At least in the U.S., courts already charge filing and other fees, which in these small cases might be more than the potential damages. (Unless you can seek punitive or multiple damages depending on what the law allows.) That's why class actions are often used here, since it would be impractical to file a case on behalf of every injured claimant.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#29

Post by tacostakohashi » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 5:11 PM UTC

kirykl wrote: post #17

uberman wrote: post #7

Long story short: Guy had flight canceled and wants airlines to have automated refund system. The issue is though that no company I know of really wants an automated easy path to disperse money back to the public. Ever try to collect on an insurance policy?

Amazon does a pretty good job automating returns. It’s also good enough to be a differentiator when choosing where to buy.

I had an Amazon item that didn't show up / got lost by UPS. The process presented by Amazon for this was pretty silly / tedious:

1) Initially, the tracking page said the item is late, maybe lost, if it doesn't arrive by X date (2-3 days after it was due), check back here to initiate a replacement / refund.

2) I went back on X date to arrange a refund. You click the button, initially it takes you to an automated chat thing that asks is this the item you are asking about (yes), do you want a refund or replacement (refund)... then it hands you over to a human and you have the same conversation again.

3) Finally, the human issued the refund... but as a gift card / credit without asking me.

In any case, it was a 5-10 minute process hidden behind both automated and non-automated chats, which is stupid and unnecessary, especially considering that these are the people that invented (patented) 1-click. They knew from their own tracking that it was missing, so it could and should have just been a single button for replace vs refund.

I suspect the steps depend on the item / amount involved, some customer risk score, etc, etc, I am sure it's all very elaborate, but in my case it was tedious.

Issuing a gift card is consumer-hostile BS too, should be outlawed if you ask me. I paid for something with money, it didn't show up, so I get the money back, simple. If I wanted to buy a gift card, I would.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#30

Post by otterley » Sat, Dec 26, 2020, 5:12 PM UTC

Nextgrid wrote: post #27

otterley wrote: post #12

"Automated claims systems, why don’t airlines have these? They would save money on support staff/legal fees/etc. The could charge a couple of pounds/dollars/euros more per ticket and probably cover all compensation costs. We know that “no win no fee” claims services exist. They know they exist. They know that we know that they exist, so what the fuck are we all doing wasting our time here?" The answer is simple: You…

> The author is thinking like an engineer, not like a businessperson. I'd rewrite this and say that the author is thinking ethically, not like scum. If the law or regulations say that you must compensate a customer for your failings, you should implement the most efficient system for you to do so (thus both you and the customer win) and focus the remaining resources on making sure you don't have to compensate custome…

As someone who works for a company focused on relentless customer service, I agree that that would be ideal. So far there hasn't been a profitable entrant into the airline business that's focused on customer service (EDIT: with the noteworthy exception of Southwest Airlines in the U.S.). Customers are notoriously price sensitive when it comes to non-business travel and unfortunately it's a race to the bottom. And you can't offer the lowest prices if you make the refund process easy.