Home US How a savvy couple exposed airline lies about their flight cancellation in a stunning David vs. Goliath court victory

How a savvy couple exposed airline lies about their flight cancellation in a stunning David vs. Goliath court victory

0 comment
Olivia Donner became an internet sleuth after the airline first blamed a bird strike and then bad weather in an attempt to avoid compensating her for a cancelled flight.

A Canadian airline has been humiliated in court by two passengers who exposed its lies about the reason for a cancelled flight.

Flair Airlines, in an attempt to avoid paying compensation when its 3.10pm flight from Calgary to Vancouver was cancelled on August 29 last year, first blamed a bird strike and then the weather.

Suspicious passengers turned internet sleuths Olivia Donner and James Broadhurst did their own research and found no record of a bird strike in the Canadian Civil Aviation Daily Incident Reporting System (CADORES).

The budget airline later emailed Donner to blame the weather for the cancellation, insisting it did not have to pay compensation for factors beyond its control.

“I have no evidence before me, other than Flair’s bare assertion, to show that a bird strike canceled the flight,” a court judge ruled Wednesday. “Flair had the opportunity to provide evidence and arguments, but he failed to do so.”

Olivia Donner became an internet sleuth after the airline first blamed a bird strike and then bad weather in an attempt to avoid compensating her for a cancelled flight.

The Alberta-based airline generated the most complaints in Canada in 2022, averaging 15.3 complaints per 100 flights.

The Alberta-based airline generated the most complaints in Canada in 2022, averaging 15.3 complaints per 100 flights.

The couple was informed by email that their flight was cancelled less than six hours before takeoff.

The airline blamed a bird strike and later told the court that the plane’s crew reported several bird strikes on Vancouver’s airport tower when the plane landed on its previous flight.

But the airline was unable to explain why it failed to report it as required and failed to provide the message it says one of its maintenance experts had sent to his bosses.

The couple were booked for a flight at 5am the next day and eventually landed 14 hours later than originally scheduled.

Donner began investigating when the company rejected her request for compensation through the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, turning to the Facebook group for help Air passenger rights in Canada.

“I waited a couple of weeks and checked the CADORS report, which had no matching record of a bird incident,” he wrote on his page.

‘I emailed Flair to request compensation with all the details of the situation, asking for $500 since I was hours late and they had not proven that it was due to a situation beyond their control.

‘They told me that the flight had been cancelled due to ‘weather conditions’. Now it seems clear that they are lying.’

Members of the Facebook group were not surprised to hear about their experience with an airline that generated the most complaints in Canada in 2022, averaging 15.3 complaints per 100 flights.

The Alberta-based airline promotes itself as the country’s leading independent ultra-low-cost carrier under the motto “airplane and simple.”

The airline is looking for a new chief executive after Stephen Jones retired in June.

The airline is looking for a new chief executive after Stephen Jones retired in June.

Tribunal member Jeffrey Drozdiak said his decision was simple: He ordered the airline to pay Donner and Broadhurst $500 each in compensation within 15 days.

“When a party fails to provide relevant evidence without any explanation, the court may draw an adverse inference,” he wrote in his ruling.

‘An adverse inference is where the Commercial Arbitration Tribunal assumes that the party failed to provide relevant evidence because that would have prejudiced its case. I consider that an adverse inference is appropriate in this case.

‘Based on this adverse inference, I find that the cancellation of the flight was likely within Flair’s control.’

The decision was hailed as a victory by some of the 200,000 members of the Facebook group, but many suspected it would have little significance for other passengers.

“There’s a good chance airlines will take a risk and deny compensation for default,” one person wrote.

“A slap on the wrist,” wrote another. “Is this how our courts make sure Flair follows the rules next time?”

Some warned that carriers face an era of increased scrutiny.

‘Bravo. At some point the airlines will realise that passengers are getting smarter and better at representing themselves and maybe they will wake up and treat us right.

‘Until then the fight continues, they keep losing and the passengers win!’

You may also like