Airlines Flout Responsibility With Faulty Terms While Penalizing Consumers

[Anchor]

When a flight is suddenly canceled or delayed due to an airline's fault, travel plans—including accommodations and vehicle reservations—are completely thrown off. Even so, receiving proper compensation is not easy. It turns out that while airlines impose cancellation fees for consumer responsibilities, they have maintained faulty terms that lack even basic compensation regulations for their own faults.

Reporter Jeong Seong-jin has the details.

[Reporter]

Park, who booked a plane ticket to Phu Quoc, Vietnam, for a summer vacation, received a shocking text message one month before departure.

[Park / Airline Cancellation Victim: I was notified that it was difficult to operate the route due to the Middle East war. Since I had already booked hotels, resorts, and everything else....]

All the airline offered was a refund for the existing ticket or an alternative ticket to a different city in Vietnam.

[Park / Airline Cancellation Victim: I asked them to secure an alternative flight even if it meant using another airline, but they said that was absolutely impossible.]

Park had to purchase an alternative flight that was three to four times more expensive, but the airline pointed to its terms and refused additional compensation.

According to an investigation by the Korea Consumer Agency into the passenger transport terms of 22 domestic and foreign airlines, 21 of them either had no compensation regulations other than fare refunds in the event of cancellation due to airline fault, or left compensation entirely to the airline's discretion.

This stands in contrast to how they impose penalties when cancellations are made due to consumer circumstances.

Some airlines refused refunds even when boarding was impossible due to overbooking—selling more tickets than available seats—or refused compensation by claiming "force majeure" when flights were canceled due to the pilot's health issues, all while citing their terms.

Grievances related to aviation services have increased every year, reaching 3,200 cases last year and ranking first among consumer damage reports.

While the European Union and Canada have legal regulations for compensation when flights are canceled due to airline fault, South Korea only has consumer dispute resolution standards with no legal binding force.

[Jeon Woo-sung / Manager, AI Advertising Monitoring Team, Market Investigation Bureau, Korea Consumer Agency: Consumers must apply for relief or individually file lawsuits to directly prove damages, making it difficult to receive proper compensation. Institutional improvements, such as stipulating liability for compensation regarding cancellations, are (necessary).]

The Consumer Agency plans to recommend that airlines improve unfair terms and discuss institutional improvements, such as legislation, with relevant ministries.

(Photo: Seol Chi-hwan, Video Editing: Jeon Min-gyu, Design: Kim Ye-ji)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.