Since the European Parliament plans to make changes to passenger rights regulations in the autumn (read here about how to receive compensation under the current regulation), I was invited to Andris Auzāns’ show “Spried ar Delfi” (in Latvian) together with European Parliament member Vilis Krištopans and Andrejs Vanags, a board member of the Latvian Consumer Rights Protection Association, to discuss what changes are planned and whether they are in the passengers’ best interest.

In short — I believe the changes are, unfortunately, absolutely not in passengers’ favor. Why?

• They propose to reduce the amount of compensation to €300 and €500 (only two thresholds) and increase the distance threshold from 1,500 km to 3,500 km, as well as increase the allowable delay duration to 4 and 6 hours.
• They also plan to increase the number of exceptions under which compensation is not paid.
• At first glance, setting a 14-day response time for the airline to reply to a passenger’s delay complaint looks good, but in practice, I believe it will only increase the number of cases where the reply is a quick “no.”

If you are also against these changes, sign the petition here.

What should be done to improve the regulation?

• Set stricter mechanisms for cases where the regulation is not followed — when the passenger has contacted the airline but receives a misleading response (unfortunately, I have often encountered cases where airlines blatantly lie in their reply letters about the reasons for delays and claim that compensation is not due.) Already today, Croatia has a mechanism that if the airline has unjustifiably refused compensation to the consumer, it must pay double!
• Stricter rules for flight cancellations 14 days or more before departure. The current regulation states that if the cancellation happens 14 days before the flight, compensation is due; earlier than that, there is no moral compensation, and it is not clearly described whether, for example, 15 days before the flight, an alternative route to the destination must be offered. Fourteen days before departure, most people have already booked non-refundable car rentals and hotels, so the airline’s offer to refund the money, fly to another destination, or — in the best case — travel on their own flight several days later, is inadequate. It should be stipulated that in the event of a route change, the airline must provide the fastest possible alternative for the passenger to reach their destination, regardless of which airline operates it. Currently, there are airlines that use consumers as a kind of interest-free credit source — selling tickets and then, half a year later, deciding not to fly to the destination at all.
• And of course, under no circumstances should compensation amounts be reduced — on the contrary, given inflation over the last decade, the discussion should be about increasing them!

The recording of the show is available here.

Photo: Kārlis Dambrāns/DELFI