Well, thats something closer to what I would expect from a premium airline. In the past, I was overbooked on CX flight from HKG to SYD - they upgraded me from premium economy to business on the same flight - no problem. I guess if it was SQ they would just rebook me on the next flight some 9 hours later instead of the upgrade.
I would of thought some compensation was due. Very surprised SQ didnt offer anything.
I got diverted on Emirates A380 due to bad weather to Adelaide and we refuelled stayed on board for probably 4 hours as we couldn't be offloaded no gate available no staff to do anyway.
They also were fantastic making sure everyone had drinks, snacks or whatever they wanted.
Well, thats something closer to what I would expect from a premium airline. In the past, I was overbooked on CX flight from HKG to SYD - they upgraded me from premium economy to business on the same flight - no problem. I guess if it was SQ they would just rebook me on the next flight some 9 hours later instead of the upgrade.
So don't fly SQ on this route next time. Yes, an email response is such a slap in the face - I get it. But harping on will not make the anger and pain dissipate. You need to let it go and take your business elsewhere. Unfortunately I don't think the consumer protection/welfare laws are very good in Russia (like duh!) and Singapore. People suck it up there, or in the case of Russia, get murdered if they complain too much.
Well, I am Australian so it wont work for me Its not considered normal here to keep pax 6 hours on the grounded airplane. Surely next time I book my flight I will recall this situation with SQ.
Somewhat disappointed with the responses to the OP ..
Had this happened in a European airport, EU laws would have seen the offending carrier refunding the total fare plus compensation for a delay of this nature and length - provided it wasn't a proven act of nature. Similarly, carriers in the US are subject to 'tarmac delay' compensation. But hey, we live in a country where legislation and passenger consideration often miss the mark - or don't exist. Somewhat like the Russian scenario being discussed.
It was due to both snow in DME and mechanical faults, SQ actually redeposited all my cash spent (But not PPS Value) on paid First Class, so I did requalified for 2012's PPS through this roundtrip (MEL-SIN-DME-IAH return, paid $31771).
You appear to think that anybody that doesn't side with you, is somehow affiliated with SQ. Which i find quite funny. You can't seem to accept others opinions, if they don't suit your whinge - in this case, the majority of replies. I suggest you take this elsewhere, where you may get more sympathy. But if you do, I would suggest not signing up and immediately post a big complaint.
If you read more in the community section in ABT, you will see that the majority of the time, the original poster leads the discussion in a constructive direction. Even if they had a less than positive experience, the discussion is geared towards how it could be made better. Not just play the blame game with too many assumptions and little fact.
For me personally, that's what I enjoy about this site. We generally avoid the sort of posts you have brought us and the conversation is on a more intelligent and knowledgeable level.
With all due respect MikeZ, might be time to move along..
The folks here are clearly not telling you what you want to hear, and simply rehashing the same points over and over again isn't going to help with matters.
At the end of the day, this is air travel and these things happen. Unfortunate? Yes. End of the world? Far from.
(And before you ask, no, I am not affiliated with SQ)
[MOD HAT] Okay, the time has come for us to step in.
First up, MikeZ: Know that just because another user disagrees with your own personal opinion, it doesn't necessarily mean that user is affiliated with the company you are discussing. As we always say at AusBT, discuss the topic at hand, not the users participating in the discussion. It's for that reason that your multiple posts which repeatedly made these claims have been deleted from this topic. Again, please continue to discuss the topic, not fellow users.
We'd also like to remind other AusBT users that this isn't purely a 'questions and answers' area, and hasn't been for several months: it's a community where topics can be discussed, with or without a direct question in mind. Posts which insisted the original user post a direct question have also been removed for this reason.
Don't attack others for their opinion: if you disagree, then make your case. But stay objective and stick to the topic.
Focus on the subject and add value to the conversation.
Comments which attacked and which made unnecessary remarks about other users and their choice of English spelling, have, you guessed it, also been deleted, which leaves comments discussing the actual topic, which is what the discussions area is all about.
I believe customers need to inform airlines and public on their bad experience. It will make airlines better and both customers and airlines will only win from this.
Those who defend SQ in this situation are contributing into a culture of poor service. They are persuading themselves and others that what happend was normal. It is not the way to become better.
Your situation was unfortunate. The things to bear in mind are:
a) SQ would have had no real idea how long the delay was going to be. I'm certain that if they had known it was going to be 6 hours, they would have returned you all to the terminal.
b) If they had given you the hot meal that you wanted, then you would have had no meal on the flight itself - because the meal they would have given you during the delay would be the same meal you were to eat in flight. And no, at an outstation, there would be little chance of their caterers just being able to magic up 300-odd new meals in a couple of hours.
c) For SQ, Moscow is an outstation - they don't have many (if any?) of their own staff there to handle irregular things that happen. This is a common problem for all airlines when things happen to their aircraft outside of their home ports or major hubs.
d) What "compensation" would you like, in the circumstances? I think some form of compensation would be a good PR move on SQ's part, but nothing that they could give you - points, voucher, money - will actually give you back what you lost - time.
Fair comment. In terms compensation, SQ could not turn time back of course. However, they do have enough of other things at their disposal and its not even money: points, class upgrades. This is what I would expect from a premium airline.
Also, aren't good airlines supposed to have contingency plans (hotel, urgent meals, work with passengers in their native language) for such destinations? They should expect such things to happend on a regular basis. Especially when they are flying a brand new A350 where "childhood deceases" are not kniwn yet.
This may be a bit of a consolation for you - but , with all good intentions , Moscow-DME is still not Changi or Heathrow .
You may have been delayed by some mechanical fault , but also maybe by the whim of some crazy Russian bureaucrat . If the 2nd one , so 6 hours probably wasn't too bad . And in this case , understandably , SQ does not really want to compensate you .
My bottom line suggestion - don't fly thru Moscow again . In a normal airport , yes , you would have returned to terminal , received coupons etc. Realize also , that even so , Russia has improved a lot over the years , and are working on it . Hopefully , in the not too distant future , they'll get there .
Well, SQ explained the reasons for delay while onboard and in the letter. It was a technical fault. They had to deliver a spare part from Switzerland.
They never mentionec ground service/handling/formalities. So I dont think that some russian bureaucrat was delaying the airplane.
Again, its SQ fault. If SQ did not act as a budget airline they would have offered some compensation for keeping pax 6 hours in the grounded airplane without hot meal.
MikeZ
MikeZ
Member since 24 Jan 2017
Total posts 26
Well, thats something closer to what I would expect from a premium airline. In the past, I was overbooked on CX flight from HKG to SYD - they upgraded me from premium economy to business on the same flight - no problem. I guess if it was SQ they would just rebook me on the next flight some 9 hours later instead of the upgrade.
airADL
airADL
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 25 Mar 2014
Total posts 208
TheRealBabushka
TheRealBabushka
Member since 21 Apr 2012
Total posts 2,058
So don't fly SQ on this route next time. Yes, an email response is such a slap in the face - I get it. But harping on will not make the anger and pain dissipate. You need to let it go and take your business elsewhere. Unfortunately I don't think the consumer protection/welfare laws are very good in Russia (like duh!) and Singapore. People suck it up there, or in the case of Russia, get murdered if they complain too much.
MikeZ
MikeZ
Member since 24 Jan 2017
Total posts 26
Well, I am Australian so it wont work for me
Its not considered normal here to keep pax 6 hours on the grounded airplane. Surely next time I book my flight I will recall this situation with SQ.
kimshep
kimshep
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 11 Oct 2014
Total posts 412
Somewhat disappointed with the responses to the OP ..
Had this happened in a European airport, EU laws would have seen the offending carrier refunding the total fare plus compensation for a delay of this nature and length - provided it wasn't a proven act of nature. Similarly, carriers in the US are subject to 'tarmac delay' compensation. But hey, we live in a country where legislation and passenger consideration often miss the mark - or don't exist. Somewhat like the Russian scenario being discussed.
btaus
btaus
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 15 Dec 2016
Total posts 171
It was due to both snow in DME and mechanical faults, SQ actually redeposited all my cash spent (But not PPS Value) on paid First Class, so I did requalified for 2012's PPS through this roundtrip (MEL-SIN-DME-IAH return, paid $31771).
Grannular
Grannular
Member since 31 Mar 2014
Total posts 272
You appear to think that anybody that doesn't side with you, is somehow affiliated with SQ. Which i find quite funny. You can't seem to accept others opinions, if they don't suit your whinge - in this case, the majority of replies. I suggest you take this elsewhere, where you may get more sympathy. But if you do, I would suggest not signing up and immediately post a big complaint.
If you read more in the community section in ABT, you will see that the majority of the time, the original poster leads the discussion in a constructive direction. Even if they had a less than positive experience, the discussion is geared towards how it could be made better. Not just play the blame game with too many assumptions and little fact.
For me personally, that's what I enjoy about this site. We generally avoid the sort of posts you have brought us and the conversation is on a more intelligent and knowledgeable level.
MikeZ
MikeZ
Member since 24 Jan 2017
Total posts 26
Grannular, the facts are:
rj
rj
Member since 11 Nov 2013
Total posts 26
With all due respect MikeZ, might be time to move along..
Chris C.
Chris C.
Member since 24 Apr 2012
Total posts 1,116
Okay, the time has come for us to step in.
First up, MikeZ: Know that just because another user disagrees with your own personal opinion, it doesn't necessarily mean that user is affiliated with the company you are discussing. As we always say at AusBT, discuss the topic at hand, not the users participating in the discussion. It's for that reason that your multiple posts which repeatedly made these claims have been deleted from this topic. Again, please continue to discuss the topic, not fellow users.
We'd also like to remind other AusBT users that this isn't purely a 'questions and answers' area, and hasn't been for several months: it's a community where topics can be discussed, with or without a direct question in mind. Posts which insisted the original user post a direct question have also been removed for this reason.
Finally, to all users, please be reminded of AusBT's long-standing comment policy, specifically:
Comments which attacked and which made unnecessary remarks about other users and their choice of English spelling, have, you guessed it, also been deleted, which leaves comments discussing the actual topic, which is what the discussions area is all about.
[/MOD HAT]
MikeZ
MikeZ
Member since 24 Jan 2017
Total posts 26
I believe customers need to inform airlines and public on their bad experience. It will make airlines better and both customers and airlines will only win from this.
Those who defend SQ in this situation are contributing into a culture of poor service. They are persuading themselves and others that what happend was normal. It is not the way to become better.
John Phelan
John Phelan
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 28 Oct 2011
Total posts 261
MikeZ
MikeZ
Member since 24 Jan 2017
Total posts 26
Fair comment. In terms compensation, SQ could not turn time back of course. However, they do have enough of other things at their disposal and its not even money: points, class upgrades. This is what I would expect from a premium airline.
Also, aren't good airlines supposed to have contingency plans (hotel, urgent meals, work with passengers in their native language) for such destinations? They should expect such things to happend on a regular basis. Especially when they are flying a brand new A350 where "childhood deceases" are not kniwn yet.
aviwil
aviwil
Member since 08 Nov 2011
Total posts 8
MikeZ - I understand you , mate .
MikeZ
MikeZ
Member since 24 Jan 2017
Total posts 26
Well, SQ explained the reasons for delay while onboard and in the letter. It was a technical fault. They had to deliver a spare part from Switzerland.
They never mentionec ground service/handling/formalities. So I dont think that some russian bureaucrat was delaying the airplane.
Again, its SQ fault. If SQ did not act as a budget airline they would have offered some compensation for keeping pax 6 hours in the grounded airplane without hot meal.