Aer Lingus website mistake

JimmyO

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Ah C'mon Jimmy. This was a genuine mistake. You chanced your arm and they copped it. Your world didn't fall apart like you're trying to portray. Any employer will allow you to change your holidays under the circumstances. Get over it.

Lets say you were selling your car for €5,000 but when putting the ad in the paper, you mistakenly put in €5 and don't realise it. You then get a call from someone saying they'll take it asking price. You say great. They say great. Later that day they come and put the car on the back of a truck and the guy turns and gives you a fiver and starts heading off. You agreed to sell the car at asking price and he agreed to buy. Would you feel aggrieved? Would you feel you are being ripped off or even robbed by this person? Of course you would. Would you say "well I put the ad in for €5 and agreed to sell for asking price so I guess I have to sell it for €5, oh well". Damn right you wouldn't. You would probably be on here moaning about how you were ripped off and how your world has fallen apart.

Firstly, I never chanced my arm. I, along with the majority of people who got the deal were buying tickets in the Aer Lingus Sale.

Secondly, your example above is a different situation. That's invitation to treat. Not the same situation.

Third, my world hasn't fallen apart. I never mentioned such a thing. Granted if I approach my employer they will probably be kind enough to understand. However the person travelling with me has lost bookings. Let's not paint this as me being melodramatic.

And finally If a precedent is set here in Aer Lingus' favour there's nothing to stop them doing it again.

TheBigLebowski

Jg1982 wrote: »

Eh, but your missing the point here. If, before I gave your man the car, he says to me "I'm giving you a fiver for the car, is that ok?", I would say "NO! The price of the car is €5,000". Aer Lingus took our money and agreed to the deal.

Eh, no, your missing the point. The point is what if he didn't say anything beforehand other than I'm giving you the asking price and you agreed. He puts the car on the truck and throws you a fiver and drives off. Any person would feel they were being robbed. That's the point and you missed it.

Victor_M

JimmyO wrote: »

Firstly, I never chanced my arm. I, along with the majority of people who got the deal were buying tickets in the Aer Lingus Sale.

Secondly, your example above is a different situation. That's invitation to treat. Not the same situation.

Third, my world hasn't fallen apart. I never mentioned such a thing. Granted if I approach my employer they will probably be kind enough to understand. However the person travelling with me has lost bookings. Let's not paint this as me being melodramatic.

And finally If a precedent is set here in Aer Lingus' favour there's nothing to stop them doing it again.

Ah, maybe we should be calling you Robin Hood (or in this case Robin Aer Lingus!)

So given your self admitted meticulous cross checking before purchasing you never realised that you were getting E7436 worth of tickets for a tenner!

I'm not surprised you dropped everything right away, booked holidays and got the missus to cancel work etc, do it fast before someone cops on!

AER LINGUS EI105
non-stop Dublin
10:30 Sat 26 Apr 2008 New York
13:00 Sat 26 Apr 2008 Business View Map

AER LINGUS EI104
non-stop New York
17:40 Tue 29 Apr 2008 Dublin
05:15 Wed 30 Apr 2008 Business View Map



Price for this Journey Prices are shown in Euro

Passengers Fare p.p. Taxes & Charges Cost p.p. Total
2 Adults 3,550.00 62.31 3,612.31 7,224.62
Fuel Surcharge (excluding infants) 100.00 200.00
Handling Fee (excluding infants) 6.00 12.00
TOTAL EUR 7,436.62

noelwpb

We didn't ask for business class. We asked for lowest fare. We didn't pay €5 for flights. We paid approx. €200 per seat. Thats not so insane considering they just launched a sale and we were among the first customers of that sale. I've seen flights to the US for 300 odd, so this just seemed like a lucky 'early bird catches the worm' bargain. Simple as

Mountjoy Mugger

Is it not the case that the fact that the seats were premium seats didn't come to light until the email confirmation, ie after paying?

How would you know you were supposed to be paying 3/6/7k or whatever?

dal

Victor, I think you need to step back, take a deep breath, and realise that a lot of these people bought these flights in good faith.

TheBigLebowski

The details (i.e. business class) are clearly displayed long before you confirm your booking. It's not that clear when its cut and paste here but is quite clear on the actual website.

Price Your Journey
Click on the flight number for flight details including flight time, stopover, terminal information and aircraft type.

Flight Info. Departing Arriving Fare Seat Map

AER LINGUS EI109
non-stop Dublin
17:00 Sat 19 Apr 2008 New York
19:30 Sat 19 Apr 2008 Business View Map

AER LINGUS EI108
non-stop New York
21:40 Fri 25 Apr 2008 Dublin
09:10 Sat 26 Apr 2008 Business View Map



Price for this Journey Prices are shown in Euro

Passengers Fare p.p. Taxes & Charges Cost p.p. Total
1 Adult 3,550.00 62.31 3,612.31 3,612.31
Fuel Surcharge (excluding infants) 100.00 100.00
Handling Fee (excluding infants) 6.00 6.00
TOTAL EUR 3,718.31

JimmyO

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Eh, no, your missing the point. The point is what if he didn't say anything beforehand other than I'm giving you the asking price and you agreed. He puts the car on the truck and throws you a fiver and drives off. Any person would feel they were being robbed. That's the point and you missed it.

As above, that's a different arguement and different situation.

This is Offer, Acceptance and Consideration and not invitation to treat (as you have posted twice).

axer

I flew to ny about 3 years ago for €333 return. It is not so hard to imagine that 3 years later that same flight could be €180 considering the way european prices have dropped in the same amount of time i.e. I can fly to berlin return for €50 - that would have been at least twice (if not more) than the current price 3 years ago. It is especially not that shocking when a flight to the USA is €180 at the start of a sale.

The argument of people rushing out to tell their family and friends to book because their was a mistake on aerlingus's website is rubbish too. Just look at threads that appear in the bargin alerts forum about free ryanair flights sales. If people see a bargin they are going to let others know - part of the reason that the airlines have sales. It doesn't necessarily mean that they see a mistake and are trying to capitalise on it.

What if it had been the case (which is very probable) that aerlingus wanted to give away €5 flights at the start of the sale. A marketing manager makes the decision. Then later a higher up manager hears about it and disagrees saying he does not want to have that sale. In the mean time 100 customers have utlised the sale to buy cheap flights. The manager having decided to cancel the sale cancels all the flights that were bought on the sale and says there was a mistake made. This is a possible situation and it would be illegal for the company to change its mind and cancel contracts with customers.

Victor_M

dal wrote: »

Victor, I think you need to step back, take a deep breath, and realise that a lot of these people bought these flights in good faith.

dal, I don't doubt that for a minute, I am getting a bit wound up, thanks for the reminder:)

It was a mistake, I just don't see why it should cost Aer Lingus between .5 - 1 million Euro because of a glitch (I have nothing to do with Aer Lingus by the way)

Mistakes happen, as I mentioned earlier if it happened in the opposite direction refunds would be issued and that would be that.

Some people have just got the smell of next to nothing business class flights now and are chancing their arms.

If you were planning on flying to the USA for a holiday you would have presumably set aside the cost of flying to the USA into your budget.

I'm just sick of hearing the victims on the radio complaining that they can't afford a nice holiday stateside now that they have to pay for the flights.

MOH

Victor_M wrote: »

So you checked and cross checked and still didn't notice they were business class?

or

you did see they were business class (which is perfectly visable on the confirmation page) and won't admit that you chanced your arm, it didn't work out but you are hoping that if enough chancers make enough moise that Aer Lingus will be bullied/embarrased into letting you away with it.

You knew it was a mistake, come on admit it.

So every time you book a flight the most important thing you check on the confirmation page is what class the flight is? I would have thought most people would just worry about date, time, airport and price.

If you've selected the 'lowest fare' option and it's offering you flights for a fiver, why would you even bother checking what class it's in? Anyone would assume it's economy.

Victor_M

Victor_M wrote: »

I'm just sick of hearing the victims on the radio complaining that they can't afford a nice holiday stateside now that they have to pay for the flights.

I agree 100% on that score.
However I think EI are in a spot of contract law bother over this one that won't be too easy to get out of and if even one of the customers sucessfully sues (which looks like a high probability) then I think it's curtains for EI's desire to weasel out of their mistake as they will have to apply the decision to the rest of those involved.

Heres a good summary I found posted on another airline forum

There are a number of things which have clouded the issue, but the legal advice now being widely given to those affected is that there is indeed a likely breach of contract.

1. People have to have believed the fare was genuine
1a. There was a sale in progress (and let's face it, most pax have never prices a fare in J) so in Ireland, the home of nasty low fares shenanigans, this would sound reasonable to a good many people.
1b. The default on the booking engine is Y inventory, normally, but not at that time, so people had, unwittingly chosen Premier class and beeen shown that inventory, indicating Premier Class of travel and showing a price for it.
2. There was a second promotion involving free companion seats in J - and this is the inventory that leaked across.
3. Aer Lingus actually issued booking confirmations, receipts, tickets numbers and debited peoples credit cards. Consideration was made and confirmed in writing, so a contract was in operation.
3a. On the aerlingus site: Price Guarantee: Availability or price is not guaranteed until you receive a booking confirmation. So there was reasonable expectation of the existence of a contract also, so dependencies (car hire, hotels etc.) were reasonably made. And thus the howl for compo, given EI stupidly cancelled all bookings rather than quietly changing the class of travel.
4. The EI T&Cs are leaky - they don't have an "Argos Clause" (remember the TV thing a few years ago?)

The NCA has weighed in on this saying essentially they will champion the cause if EI doesn't start acting reasonably. This is code for everybody must be allowed to fly, you should probably make a good will gesture on top of that - failing that we will use our statutory powers, to take you to court and enforce Premier class travel for everyone involved.
__________________

TheBigLebowski

JimmyO wrote: »

As above, that's a different arguement and different situation.

This is Offer, Acceptance and Consideration and not invitation to treat (as you have posted twice).

Wrong. It went past invitation to treat when the offer was accecpted (i.e. the asking price) and goods were exchanged. i.e. one guy took the car and the other took the fiver. So it is a similar situation and you would feel aggrieved. Just because it is a large corporation doesn't make you trying to rip them off any more just.



Offer
An ‘invitation to treat’ can be considered to be part of the initial stages of negotiation between two or more parties to a contract. An invitation to treat is part of the ‘offer’ and in many circumstances, an offer may be non-binding until the successful conclusion of a contract for sale.

Acceptance
Acceptance must be an unqualified or unconditional agreement by both parties with the offer, otherwise it is a counter offer. It must be clear and certain, although acceptance can be implied.

Consideration
This means that both parties are exchanging something of value, for another thing of value. In a retailing context, the retailer exchanges goods in return for cash or some other thing of value, and the purchaser exchanges cash or some other thing of value, for the goods. In a valid contract there is both the loss and gain of something of value for both parties.

MOH

Victor_M wrote: »

Mistakes happen, as I mentioned earlier if it happened in the opposite direction refunds would be issued and that would be that.

You mean if Aer Lingus charged people 1000 quid for a flight and people agreed to it AL would later refund them? I doubt it!

If you were planning on flying to the USA for a holiday you would have presumably set aside the cost of flying to the USA into your budget.

I'm just sick of hearing the victims on the radio complaining that they can't afford a nice holiday stateside now that they have to pay for the flights.

And if you weren't planning on going, but saw a great deal on flights, decided on impulse to pop over for a quick shopping trip and take advantage of the exchange rate, booked the flight and ancillary expenses, hotels etc., and were then told it's going to cost you a couple of hundred quid more?

avantarklu

If Aer Lingus are allowed to walk away from this, where does that leave consumer confidence in their main source of revenue i.e. their website?

From now on, at what point can ever passenger who books online be satisfied that they have a valid booking before proceeding with any other arrangements?

Do passengers now have to wait a day, a week to be sure that another mistake has not been made and that Aer Lingus will not cancel another booking because of it?

Should every passenger who makes a booking now have to go through another step in booking a flight and perhaps have to contact Aer Lingus by phone or in writing to ensure that the confirmation they have received by email is valid and will be honoured?

If a passenger books a flight for €50, can Aer Lingus cancel the booking saying the passenger should have known better because the price of that flight is normally €100?

axer

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Wrong. It went past invitation to treat when the offer was accecpted (i.e. the asking price) and goods were exchanged. i.e. one guy took the car and the other took the fiver. So it is a similar situation and you would feel aggrieved. Just because it is a large corporation doesn't make you trying to rip them off any more just.



Offer
An ‘invitation to treat’ can be considered to be part of the initial stages of negotiation between two or more parties to a contract. An invitation to treat is part of the ‘offer’ and in many circumstances, an offer may be non-binding until the successful conclusion of a contract for sale.

Acceptance
Acceptance must be an unqualified or unconditional agreement by both parties with the offer, otherwise it is a counter offer. It must be clear and certain, although acceptance can be implied.

Consideration
This means that both parties are exchanging something of value, for another thing of value. In a retailing context, the retailer exchanges goods in return for cash or some other thing of value, and the purchaser exchanges cash or some other thing of value, for the goods. In a valid contract there is both the loss and gain of something of value for both parties.

Why would the guy take the fiver?

If it were me as the seller, the guy would give me the money first then load or take away the car. If the guy gives me the €5 I would say that was not what I am looking for the car and I would have refused his offer. If I had accepted the €5 and gave him a receipt then I could not go back on it.

TheBigLebowski

MOH wrote: »

You mean if Aer Lingus charged people 1000 quid for a flight and people agreed to it AL would later refund them? I doubt it!

I'm sure they would refund if they mistakenly overcharged you.

MOH wrote: »

And if you weren't planning on going, but saw a great deal on flights, decided on impulse to pop over for a quick shopping trip and take advantage of the exchange rate, booked the flight and ancillary expenses, hotels etc., and were then told it's going to cost you a couple of hundred quid more?

You would need to be searching for a flight to the US on the aerlingus website. People didn't come across these flights while looking for information on the nearest Butlins holiday camp.

axer

if

avantarklu wrote: »

If Aer Lingus are allowed to walk away from this, where does that leave consumer confidence in their main source of revenue i.e. their website?

From now on, at what point can ever passenger who books online be satisfied that they have a valid booking before proceeding with any other arrangements?

Do passengers now have to wait a day, a week to be sure that another mistake has not been made and that Aer Lingus will not cancel another booking because of it?

Should every passenger who makes a booking now have to go through another step in booking a flight and perhaps have to contact Aer Lingus by phone or in writing to ensure that the confirmation they have received by email is valid and will be honoured?

If a passenger books a flight for €50, can Aer Lingus cancel the booking saying the passenger should have known better because the price of that flight is normally €100?

Also could Aerlingus start a sale for a low price - then realise there is high demand for the flights (for example, if a match is scheduled for around that time. They then proceed to cancel the tickets bought on the sale and start charging a higher price for the tickets. This is not something I think they should be allowed to do. They are *not* above the law.

JimmyO

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Wrong. It went past invitation to treat when the offer was accecpted (i.e. the asking price) and goods were exchanged. i.e. one guy took the car and the other took the fiver. So it is a similar situation and you would feel aggrieved. Just because it is a large corporation doesn't make you trying to rip them off any more just.



Offer
An ‘invitation to treat’ can be considered to be part of the initial stages of negotiation between two or more parties to a contract. An invitation to treat is part of the ‘offer’ and in many circumstances, an offer may be non-binding until the successful conclusion of a contract for sale.

Acceptance
Acceptance must be an unqualified or unconditional agreement by both parties with the offer, otherwise it is a counter offer. It must be clear and certain, although acceptance can be implied.

Consideration
This means that both parties are exchanging something of value, for another thing of value. In a retailing context, the retailer exchanges goods in return for cash or some other thing of value, and the purchaser exchanges cash or some other thing of value, for the goods. In a valid contract there is both the loss and gain of something of value for both parties.

Thing is, if I was selling a car I wouldn't let the guy put it onto his trailer until he had paid me first so it wouldn't go past invitation to treat. {See, Fisher vs Bell [1961]}

The fact that Aer Lingus allowed 'the car' be put on 'the trailer' is what's at issue here.

TheBigLebowski

axer wrote: »

Why would the guy take the fiver?

If it were me as the seller, the guy would give me the money first then load or take away the car. If the guy gives me the €5 I would say that was not what I am looking for the car and I would have refused his offer. If I had accepted the €5 and gave him a receipt then I could not go back on it.

Ok well lets just say you didn't realise that it was only a fiver and you accepted it (Which is similar to the aerlingus situatution in that they didn't realise what was going on.). Okay you might say I'm a fool for not realising a fiver was not €5000 but that doesn't excuse what the guy buying the car is doing. And then as soon as you accept it, you say " Ah bollox, I meant to put €5000 in the ad", wouldn't you feel you were after being done as your man heads off?

axer

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Ok well lets just say you didn't realise that it was only a fiver and you accepted it (Which is similar to the aerlingus situatution in that they didn't realise what was going on.). Okay you might say I'm a fool for not realising a fiver was not €5000 but that doesn't excuse what the guy buying the car is doing. And then as soon as you accept it, you say " Ah bollox, I meant to put €5000 in the ad", wouldn't you feel you were after being done as your man heads off?

How would you not know it was only a fiver he was giving you? Would you not check what he is giving you first? It doesnt matter what was in the ad as that was only an invitation to treat. The moment of handing over the cash is where it matters.

JimmyO

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

wouldn't you feel you were after being done as your man heads off?

No. I'd feel like a gob****e.

What you're really asking is would I think the guy should stop his truck, reverse back up the road and say 'You know what, here's some more money for the hell of it.' Of course not. Fair play to him for getting a bargain due to my own stupidity.

TheBigLebowski

axer wrote: »

How would you not know it was only a fiver he was giving you? Would you not check what he is giving you first? It doesnt matter what was in the ad as that was only an invitation to treat. The moment of handing over the cash is where it matters.

Maybe I can't count. Maybe I'm blind. Maybe I'm just dumb.

Or maybe it was an e-transaction and a staff member who works for me and is not very diligent accepted the transaction without fully clarifying the details. Sound familiar? Would you not feel you were being robbed and also feel like giving your staff member a kick in the hole? Either way, I would want my car back.

Hylus83

avantarklu wrote: »

If Aer Lingus are allowed to walk away from this, where does that leave consumer confidence in their main source of revenue i.e. their website?

Their website was broken again this morning - you couldn't book any flights whatsoever to the USA for a period of time.

I think this & Wednesday's bug was due in part to Aer Lingus changing their method/policy in testing their website software- http://www.siliconrepublic.com/news/news.nv?storyid=single10761

It reads: "National airline Aer Lingus’ e-commerce division has deployed open source technology that will enable it to automate testing instead of running costly manual website testing."

I'm thinking they should have stuck to the "costly" manual website testing, coz lets face it - this new technology is after resulting in a really bad PR situation and i think A.L. will have to honour the flights in the end (if people stick it out)

I'm waiting for the announcement from the NCA on what to do - they're supposed to announce what consumers options are later today, in relation to all this

JimmyO

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Maybe I can't count. Maybe I'm blind. Maybe I'm just dumb.

Or maybe it was an e-transaction and a staff member who works for me and is not very diligent accepted the transaction without fully clarifying the details. Sound familiar? Would you not feel you were being robbed and also feel like giving your staff member a kick in the hole? Either way, I would want my car back.

Well if you employed the less than dilligent employee and gave them the authority to make such decisions that's all on you.

You may want you car back, but you're not entitled to it.

puss

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

I'm sure they would refund if they mistakenly overcharged you.




You would need to be searching for a flight to the US on the aerlingus website. People didn't come across these flights while looking for information on the nearest Butlins holiday camp.

Most people got an email from Aer Lingus about their sale and acted on it. It was a case of the early bird gets the worm as all the flights were booked between 7.30am and 9am but in this case the worm was taken back.

dal

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Ok well lets just say you didn't realise that it was only a fiver and you accepted it (Which is similar to the aerlingus situatution in that they didn't realise what was going on.). Okay you might say I'm a fool for not realising a fiver was not €5000 but that doesn't excuse what the guy buying the car is doing. And then as soon as you accept it, you say " Ah bollox, I meant to put €5000 in the ad", wouldn't you feel you were after being done as your man heads off?

You should pick a better analogy as this one really isn't working.

TheBigLebowski

JimmyO wrote: »

Well if you employed the less than dilligent employee and gave them the authority to make such decisions that's all on you.

You may want you car back, but you're not entitled to it.

If it happened to you, would you want your car back?

axer

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Maybe I can't count. Maybe I'm blind. Maybe I'm just dumb.

That is your fault then. Thats like saying if I have a painting that is worth millions but didnt realise it. I sell it to some guy for €10 and find out later that it is worth €1000 - do you think I should be allowed to take back the painting?

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

Or maybe it was an e-transaction and a staff member who works for me and is not very diligent accepted the transaction without fully clarifying the details. Sound familiar? Would you not feel you were being robbed and also feel like giving your staff member a kick in the hole? Either way, I would want my car back.

Then you should get new staff as they are authorised by you to agree contracts on your behalf. If the contract sale has gone through then there is nothing you can do unless they were acting Ultra Vires. If they have acted Ultra Vires then the contract is negated as one of the parts to creating a contract is both sides' capacity to contract.

JimmyO

TheBigLebowski wrote: »

If it happened to you, would you want your car back?

See post #173