Is this enough compensation? A $150 voucher for denied boarding in Bremen

Ted Oehlerking’s flight from Bremen, German, to Seattle, via Amsterdam was canceled all the way down the line. Although his airline, KLM, put him on the next available flight and upgraded him, it didn’t offer him any financial compensation for the delays.

Thing is, under EU 261, the European airline consumer protection law, his airline owed him €250 for the denied boarding actions and delays — and perhaps more. Here’s the full text of the rule.

It’s worth taking a closer look at how a regulation like this can affect air travel, since the Transportation Department is on the verge of creating a similar set of rules for the domestic airline industry. And it’s worth asking if there’s ever a point when enough compensation is enough.

A subsequent email to Delta Air Lines, KLM’s codeshare partner, generated a form-letter apology, agreeing that Oehlerking and his wife were, indeed, subject to EU compensation rules. It offered him either a €250 in cash or a €350 voucher for the canceled flights. Is that, plus the courtesy upgrade, enough?

Well, it would be if their flight had originated in Amsterdam. But it didn’t. KLM also failed to offer the couple the required compensation in Bremen, which includes meals, hotel accommodations if a passenger is forced to remain overnight, transportation to and from the accommodations and two communications in the form of telephone calls, fax messages, or emails. The Oehlerkings had been delayed by about a day.

“I am truly sorry you were not provided with a goodwill gesture when you were denied boarding on Flight 1754 in Bremen,” the Delta said in it email. “Certainly one of our team members should have assisted you at that time. We want to ensure that the best possible service is provided at all times.”

Oehlerking wants more than an apology.

I don’t want a be a pain to Delta. They did put us up in a hotel in Amsterdam and I did push them to upgade me on a flight to Newark instead of a two-stop trip.

By law they are required to give us €250 for the denied boarding in Bremen and that’s all that is being offered unless I accept a voucher, and then its €350 each.

We also had the two canceled flights from Amsterdam to Seattle spent another day of vacation to hang out at the airport.

Do you think this is an adaquate compensation?

It’s hard to say what is or isn’t adequate. I know EU 261 is a pain in the airlines’ side. I’ve also been accused of misinterpreting the rule a time or two, which is fine. (Hey, I’m a consumer advocate, not a lawyer.)

The way I read the rule, the Oehlerking’s were owed vouchers in Bremen and €250 and another €250 in Amsterdam. KLM correctly paid for their hotel and graciously upgraded them to business class when it rerouted the couple to Seattle via Newark, but its initial response fell short of what the law required, in my opinion.

Oehlerking contacted Delta again and was offered another pair of $150 vouchers.

Did they get it right this time? A survey taken this morning says: yes.

And here’s a thought: Is it possible for well-meaning government regulation to place such a burden on an industry that there’s no hope of ever meeting the requirements, which effectively forces it to weasel its way out of the rules every time? It might be smart to look at what’s happening in Europe, specifically with EU 261, before the new DOT regulations become finalized.

We wouldn’t want to end up in the same place.

(Photo: Elliot mb/Flickr Creative Commons)

  • John

    First … €250 is $330 not $150 and that should be per person. From the story I couldn’t tell if they asked for accomodations in Bremen or not. If they didn’t, they can still turn in receipts and the airline should pay them. If they chose to stay in the airport and never enquired about it, in my opinion they are out of luck.
    Also, my understanding is that the airline is only responsible for the first cancelled flight (ie Bremen to Amsterdam) and not the flights after that unless they were rebooked on a flight that was then cancelled.

  • Harry

    I think they also need to factor in the free upgrade to First Class.
    That has a dollar value impact as well. An upgrade from Europe to Seattle is worth more than the 250 Euros.

    What do they think they deserve?

  • http://www.all-about-guatemala.com/bc Benjamin Barnett

    Seems like the OP is just being greedy now. I would have gladly waived the 250 euros in exchange for first class by itself.

  • Karen P

    No. They are owed the full amount due to them as laid out in the law. The upgrade was nice but more a goodwill gesture.

  • Chicky

    I voted yes, because I think, technically, they got enough compensation. To me, the upgrade to business class is worth that other 250 euros. My problem is the tap dancing the OP had to do in order to get it. As has been noted so many times on this site, the airlines certainly are quick to take a traveler’s money, but rarely are they in a hurry to refund it, and then only when a cattle prod is employed.
    If the airlines (and other travel providers) would just do the right thing the FIRST time, so much of this could be avoided. Go ahead, cut the check, upgrade to business class, there in the airport, and get the travelers on their way. Problem solved.

  • MeanMeosh

    I don’t proclaim to be a EU 261 guru, but I’m not completely sure that the travelers really WERE entitled to two sets of EUR 250 compensation for the canceled flights. I’m assuming that their ticket was a single, through ticket from Bremen to Seattle, and the only reason for missing their original flight in Amsterdam was the cancellation of their flight in Bremen. If so, it seems kind of harsh that an airline would have to pay twice for what is, essentially, a single cancellation. Certainly they should have been given a hotel and the other goodies EU 261 calls for in Bremen, and they should have been entitled to meals and a phone call in Amsterdam, and a hotel again if they were stranded overnight there (I can’t tell from the facts if they were or not). But having to pay the cash twice doesn’t seem right.

    Personally, I think what they were offered is fair enough – that business class upgrade alone is probably worth more than what the meals and hotel in Bremen would have cost. If they insist on pursuing the claim, though, I think the most they should be entitled to is reimbursement for the hotel and meal costs, assuming they can produce the receipts.

  • Arizona Road Warrior

    The upgrade was to business class not first class. It is my guess that the OP was on Delta flight # 57 from Amsterdam to Newark; therefore, the plane was a 767-300ER Vers. 1.

    Delta is upgrading the seats on six of these 767s with flat-bed sleepers to be used on flights that are 11 hours long (Source: Seatguru). It is my guess that the OP had a 767 with the old recliner seats. In other words, it wasn’t a lap of luxury nor could match the real business class seats that you can find on one of the top ten airlines for international flights.

    It is my understanding from reading the article, that the direct flights from Amsterdam to Seattle (which the OP had tickets for) were cancelled. The OP asked to be upgrade to ‘business class’ since he had to endure a stop in Newark instead of having the direct flight to Seattle which he purchased.

  • Ree

    What I want to know is why didn’t he ask in Amsterdam for the other 250 euros? He’s asking now, after the fact for everything + the kitchen sink….just being greedy…in my opinion. Oh, yeah, AND he received an upgrade on his flight to Newark…that’s definitely more than 250 Euros…so, he should be satisfied…sounds like he’s someone that is never satisfied.

  • Holger

    There arent enough informations for a proper decision:
    Why was the plane canceled?
    How long did he wait for the next availavle flight?
    How much delay did he have when he arrived at his final destination.
    Did he buy his ticket form KLM or from Delta? (Both are mentioned, but he has only one contract(or did he have 2 tickets?)

    So there are alot of possibilities; lets mention a few:
    a)
    he has a ticket from Delta but the fligth was operated by KLM; the flight was canceled due to technical problems; he arrived in Seattle 6 hours late:
    => Cash compensation of 600€ form Delta

    b)
    he has a ticket from KLM, the first flight was operated by KLM the second by Delta; both flights were canceled / delayed more than 6 hours and both flight cancellations were NOT caused by extraordinary circumstances (e.g. canceled due to weather)
    => Cash compensation of 600€ from KLM

    c)
    he has a ticket from KLM, the first flight was operated by KLM the second by Delta; both flights were canceled / delayed more than 6 hours and the FIRST flight cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances (e.g. canceled due to weather)
    => no cash compensation !

    d)
    he has two seperate tickets:
    the first flight was operated by KLM the second by Delta; both flights were canceled / delayed more than 6 hours and both flight cancellations were NOT caused by extraordinary circumstances (e.g. canceled due to weather)
    => thats tricky: he gets at least 250€ from KLM for the first flight; if he is rebooked to the second flight cause he has a (second) ticket which allows the rebooking, than he gets an additional 600€ cash from Delta. If Delta only allows him to take the second flight because of goodwill, he gets nothing in addition to the 250€

  • Lisa S

    I find this a bit confusing also because I feel I don’t have all the information. However, I do not believe the compensation was enough, especially if what Arizona Road Warrior wrote is correct. The OP lost 2 days of vacation, which in my book is a lot of time. Incidentals were not paid for until after the fact, and it appears that quite a lot of wrangling had to be done to get them covered. Why was boarding denied to begin with?! The denial of boarding, which triggered a missed flight to Seattle should have resulted in an upgrade to first class (especially as it sounds like a less than direct route was offered), all hotels and meals should have been paid for, the 250 euros per person should have been provided, and the OP should have been offered all this from the beginning. I bet if this had been done, the OP would never have written to Chris.

  • Brooklyn

    Isn’t he entitled to compensation in cash, not in vouchers that he may not be able to use? And don’t worry about the airlines: this legislation is SUPPOSED to hurt! It’s about passengers’ rights, yes, but it’s also about providing an incentive for the airlines to institute procedures that will minimize the occurrence of cancelled and delayed flights. Look at what’s happening in Heathrow this week – apparently the airlines are refusing to speak to customers in person and requiring them to use a phone number that’s been cut off. The stranded passengers aren’t being provided with much of anything, including information, and the airport is even keeping hopeful flyers out of the terminals! I wonder what the public reaction will be if someone who can’t find or afford a hotel freezes to death because they couldn’t get inside? Don’t feel sorry for the airlines – they manage to screw it up every single time.

  • MVFlyer

    I’m no aviation lawyer, but I wonder if he’s entitled to 600 euro under the law–his ticket was from Bremen to Seattle, not to Amsterdam, and they couldn’t get him from point A to point B in the specified time. Changing from KL to DL is irrelevant since he booked a single ticket (I’m assuming on DL)–all airlines leaving the EU are covered under the law regardless of nationality (the applies to EU-based airlines only on inbound flights to the EU). And getting an upgrade in my mind is not part of the compensation…it doesn’t get you home any faster. He’s also entitled to the compensation in CASH, not a voucher that’s likely useless.

    This all said, the EU legislation was designed to prevent airlines from playing games with schedules, denied boarding (think pax paying low fares getting bumped for last minute, high paying pax) and the like. They EU ministers didn’t give any exclusions for weather and other acts of god (how about the Iceland volcano???), which I think is unfair to the carriers. Like it or not, however, they’re stuck with it, and the airlines I suspect will bend the rules at any cost.

  • Bill

    First of all, I think the law goes too far in requiring the airlines to compensate. That’s an issue with the EU regulators.

    However, the airlines should comply with the law. If that forces airfares to rise, so be it, that’s how business is supposed to operate. It is a cost of doing business in the EU. It might get rid of these discount fares that mask the true cost of flying.

  • Susan

    I think the rule is complex and overly so – that said, it is cash compensation and frankly a voucher is not cash and with its exclusions and all the strings attached, it is highly likely that many, many go unused and therefore the airline is out nothing.

    If the OP was not offered the correct amount of cash and the airport employees could not help him (which is common) then the voucher is an artful dodge and should be deemed unacceptable.

    I agree with @Bill and the seat analysis provided by @Arizona. The upgrade was a goodwill gesture, which in reality was nice, not luxurious and I think the stop in Newark negates a bit of its bling factor. The reality is – the OP paid for a direct flight and didn’t get it and got stranded for two days to boot.

    In my book – he should get all he is entitled to and a voucher is not it.

  • SA

    If he was ticketed Bremen-Amsterdam-Seattle on one ticket, he should only be entitled to one compensation (per person).

    Why are so many people eager to play the “let’s see how much I can get” game? Is it because sites like this encourage it? Hmmm.

  • BucksterSF

    “Although his airline, KLM, put him on the next available flight and upgraded him, it didn’t offer him any financial compensation for the delays.”

    Come on, really? Are we just that greedy we cannot roll with the punches anymore?

    The OP wrote: “I don’t want a be a pain to Delta. They did put us up in a hotel in Amsterdam and I did push them to upgade me on a flight to Newark instead of a two-stop trip.”

    I hate customers like this. Nothing is ever enough. I’ll bet he has no real problems in life and is totally thankless for that situation. I’m especially sensitive to these whiners at the holidays, when so many have so little.

  • http://noaddedsalt.blogspot.com Elisa

    Sorry, but this attitude is typical of KLM. They are *STILL* refusing to compensate people for the Icelandic eruption problems, as you can see from a cursory look at their public Facebook page. Their continual form-letter replies about it state that despite the courts ordering that compensation is payable, they “do not agree” with the ruling. It’s a bit like being caught for speeding and telling the police that sorry, you don’t agree with the law and won’t be paying a fine. KLM are continuing to ignore the EU rules when it comes to compensation, usually using “it wasn’t our fault” as the excuse. Regardless of whether it was KLM’s fault, the rules say they must compensate either way, so for many passengers it’s like bashing their heads on a brick wall.

    And yet again, Delta are (correctly) advising passengers they are due that compensation, while their Dutch partner across the sea denies it.

    It’s true that the spirit of the regulation was not meant to penalise airlines who were not at fault. But that doesn’t change the ruling’s current scope, and right now, airlines have to provide phone calls, accommodation and food, regardless of whether it was preventable. AND cash refunds, not vouchers. If they don’t like it, they need to campaign for the ruling to be amended, not take it out on passengers.