Two travellers whose Emirates flight to New York was cancelled mid-journey because of superstorm Sandy are in a serious dispute with the airline over their experience of its customer care standards, which appear to be much lower than those of Qantas, which will be its partner airline from 1 April.

When Qantas passengers who have started their journeys are disrupted by major natural disasters like route closures caused by volcanic ash or the snowstorms that affected London bound flights in 2010 the airline provides accommodation, meals and some other assistance until they can either continue their travels or return to Australia and have their fares and incidental costs refunded.

It is a standard of care that differentiates Qantas from many airlines, and whenever it is applied to stranded passengers the costs to Qantas are substantial.

Invest in the journalism that makes a difference.

EOFY Sale. A year for just $99.

SAVE 50%

In their joint letter of complaint the two travellers say that they departed Sydney on 28 October and on arrival in Dubai were informed that because of Hurricane Sandy their onward flight had been cancelled and they would be accommodated in Dubai until a resumption of services to NYC on 1 November.

But several hours later both travellers were awoken, in the middle of the night, and told the following:

  • All flights to NYC in the foreseeable future had been cancelled as the anticipated hurricane impact was worsening.
  • All NYC airports were likely to be closed for an extended period, possibly weeks.
  • Emirates was no longer willing to pay for our stay in Dubai whilst awaiting the first available flight to NYC.  If we continued to stay in the hotel where they placed us we would have to pay the bill for all expenses incurred after 48 hours of our initial check-in time.  Emirates wanted us to depart for an alternative US destination ASAP. Options they gave us were:

1)   Fly to San Francisco at 8am that morning (less than 8 hours away)

2)   Fly to Washington DC at 8am that morning (less than 8 hours away)

3)   Fly to Dallas at 2am that morning (less than 2 hours away)

The Emirates staff member also advised us that should we choose to fly to Washington DC (the closest location to NYC), the flight would likely be cancelled and he could not guarantee the outcome of that decisions – i.e. we would likely find ourselves significantly out of pocket in terms of accommodation expenses if we had to remain in Dubai.

We were given no time to consider our options and were advised that if we wanted to make it on to one of these flights (the only three options provided to us), we had to tell him there and then – in the middle of the night, half asleep. We advised him that we needed time to research other options and the financial implications of this. For example, we needed to research the actual weather forecasts in order to verify the Emirates staff member’s claims that airports would be closed for a matter of weeks. We also needed to investigate the cost of accommodation at the hotel in which we were staying. He advised that he did not know the cost of accommodation and that was an issue between ourselves and the hotel, however he would not allow us the time to query this with hotel staff.

Under the circumstances, worried that we may end up with a significant bill in Dubai, we opted for the flight to Dallas.

The travellers drove from Dallas to NYC in five days, choosing the least costly rented car available, and modest accommodation, and meals, in the expectation that Emirates would meet those costs totaling $US 1649, for which receipts were kept and forwarded with a request for reimbursement.

We are bewildered that Emirates has acted the way they did, when they scared us into flying to an alternative US destination and shortening our stay in Dubai.

We feel that Emirates made use of our vulnerable position in not having access to any information we needed to assess the situation and properly consider our options.

This was the substance of the letter from Emirates in response to their complaint and request for reimbursement for costs incurred in completing their flight to New York.

Emirates wishes to apologise for the inconvenience you experienced due to the cancellation of flight EK203 from Dubai to New York, on 30 October 2012.

Flight delays and other service interruptions (caused by poor weather, air traffic delays, etc.), though regrettable, are unavoidable occurrences in travel of which Emirates has no control.

Although every effort is made to achieve on-time departures, which is an integral part of our product, there are occasions when flights are delayed due to unforeseen circumstances. The safety and security of our customers and staff is of paramount importance to Emirates, and we are sure you will concur with this position.

I can appreciate the disappointment and discomfort you experienced. Although we cannot change what has happened, I would like to take this opportunity to assure you that the events you have detailed are isolated ones, and not indicative of the level of service that we strive to offer our customers.

May I assure you that your feedback with regard to the service attitude of our staff and the overall handling of this incident has been forwarded to the relevant Senior Manager concerned for his review and necessary action.

Regrettably, as the circumstances of this cancellation were beyond Emirates control, we are unable to offer any service recovery.  We, at Emirates, understand that this does not fully resolve your claim; therefore we recommend that you contact your Travel Insurers who may be able to assist you with regard to the additional expenses incurred.

Thank you for writing to us and allowing me to respond. We look forward to welcoming you and onboard our flights again.

All of the above correspondence has been edited for length and the removal of names.

Emirates was approached by Crikey on 10 December and given copies of the correspondence. Today Crikey was told that the Customer Service response dismissing the request for reimbursement was the official resolution  of the matter and that there was no comment or further action that could be taken.

The two travellers who remain in New York say that they have not been contacted by the airline since their request for reimbursement of expenses was refused.

While the matters between the two travellers and Emirates have nothing to do with Qantas, it has been asked to clarify the question of standard of customer care in the event of service disruptions to passengers who are part way to their destinations as Qantas customers booked on Emirates flights under the business partnership expected to start on 1 April.

It is understood that Qantas may not be able to respond immediately, but whatever its response, it will be published here or in a new post referencing this article.

Save this EOFY while you make a difference

Australia has spoken. We want more from the people in power and deserve a media that keeps them on their toes. And thank you, because it’s been made abundantly clear that at Crikey we’re on the right track.

We’ve pushed our journalism as far as we could go. And that’s only been possible with reader support. Thank you. And if you haven’t yet subscribed, this is your time to join tens of thousands of Crikey members to take the plunge.

Peter Fray
Peter Fray
SAVE 50%