Ryanair Ltd Dublin Airport County Dublin Ireland Number of complaints: 1

Date: 17 October 2007 Media: National press Sector: Holidays and travel

Ad
A national press ad, for Ryanair, was headlined "ROBBED BY LAST MINUTE.COM?" The ad showed a cartoon picture of a burglar with "ONLINE AGENT" written on his top.  Further text stated "IF YOU BUY A RYANAIR TICKET THRU AN ONLINE AGENT YOU'RE BEING RIPPED OFF... *THEY OVERCHARGE BY 100% OR MORE *THEY DON'T PROVIDE CORRECT TERMS AND CONDITIONS *THEY DON'T NOTIFY SCHEDULE CHANGES *THEY DON'T PROVIDE WEB CHECK-IN OR PRIORITY BOARDING A table compared various agents' prices with Ryanair's fare and stated that there was a "+100%" difference with Lastminute's Dublin-London fare.  Small print at the bottom of the table stated "Quoted fares taken from Agent's [sic] websites.  Text at the bottom of the ad stated "STOP THE RIP OFF BOOK ONLY ON RYANAIR.COM".

Issue
Last Minute Network (Lastminute) objected that:

1.   The headline "ROBBED BY LAST MINUTE.COM?" was misleading and together with the cartoon robber, denigrated and discredited their business.

2.   The claim "THEY OVERCHARGE BY 100% OR MORE" was misleading because the price comparison table gave an artificial advantage to Ryanair by quoting a price from lastminute.ie (the website for Lastminute.coms Irish operation) and also because Lastminute never charged more than a £5 or 5% booking fee (€15 in Ireland) plus the credit card fee charged by Ryanair on top of the cost of the flight. Lastminute believed the quoted €22.59 fare for a Dublin-London flight was not representative of the average cost of Ryanair flights on Lastminute's website.
    
3.   The claim "DON'T PROVIDE CORRECT TERMS AND CONDITIONS" was misleading because Lastminute incorporated all their suppliers' terms and conditions into their own terms and conditions, which customers had to agree to before making a purchase.

4.   The claim "DON'T NOTIFY SCHEDULE CHANGES" was misleading because Lastminute had a procedure for notifying customers of changes to flight schedules.

The CAP Code:

3.1;7.1;15.5;18.1;19.1;20.1;20.2;18.4

Response
1.   Ryanair said the robber and the headline were intended to illustrate to the public that if they booked a Ryanair flight with a third party such as Lastminute,  then they would be "ripped off" and overcharged in comparison with bookings made through Ryanair.com.  They sent screenshots of four examples of simultaneous searches on the two websites to illustrate their point.  They said Lastminute was not authorised to sell their flights and were not an agent for Ryanair.  They argued that, in selling Ryanair flights, Lastminute was also in clear breach of the conditions for use of Ryanair.com which stated "use of the website is restricted to private non-commercial purposes."  They asserted that Lastminute inflated the prices without their consent and without informing passengers and that they therefore felt justified in exposing the "rip-off".  They pointed out that the ad appeared in publications with a combined circulation of over 5 million and the only complaint made was by Lastminute, which, in their opinion, showed that the public felt their comments were fair.
 
2.   Ryanair said the fact that Euro prices were used in the ad was completely irrelevant; they claimed that valid like-for-like comparisons were made that used the same flights, the same currency and the same times.  They sent screenshots of two simultaneous bookings for the Dublin-Stansted route.  

3. & 4.      Ryanair sent a copy of a letter to Trading Standards that described complaints from passengers that Lastminute had failed to provide them with important terms and conditions or to pass on important passenger information such as schedule changes.  They reiterated that Lastminute had breached the conditions of use of Ryanair.com, had inflated prices without consent and provided a poor service to passengers by failing to inform them of the conditions of use.     


Assessment
1.  Upheld
The ASA noted Ryanair's argument that Lastminute overcharged in comparison with bookings made through their own website.  We also noted Lastminute's policy was to add Ryanair's credit card fee and a booking fee of either £5 or 5% of the ticket price to the cost of the Ryanair fare.  We noted the screenshots showed one instance of the same flight where the Lastminute fare cost £9 more than the Ryanair fare.  We noted two instances where the Lastminute screenshot did not specify the airline, departure airport in London, the flight time or the flight number.  We considered that it was not clear from those two examples whether the same flight was being compared.  We noted a fourth screenshot compared Ryanair.com prices (in euros) with Lastminute.ie prices in Euros.  We considered that because the ad appeared in the UK, the comparison with a website used only by customers in Ireland was not relevant.  We also considered that Ryanair had not provided evidence to show that Lastminute overcharged customers and had therefore not substantiated the claim "Robbed by Lastminute.com?"  We concluded that the claim in conjunction with the image of a robber misleadingly and unfairly discredited Lastminute's business.  

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 15.5 (Prices), 18.1, 18.4 (Comparisons with identified competitors and/or their products), 19.1 (Other comparisons), 20.1 and 20.2 (Denigration and unfair advantage).

2. Upheld
We noted the table stated that the fare on the Dublin-London route was €22.59 from Ryanair and €45.18 from 'Lastminute'.  We also noted the screenshots for bookings for that route showed very similar prices of €22.68 and €45.18, where the Lastminute price was taken from the lastminute.ie website.  We considered, however, Ryanair had not provided evidence to show that the price was typical of those charged by Lastminute. We also considered that the use of lastminute.ie did not constitute a relevant comparison for customers in the UK.  We considered that the table's reference to 'Lastminute' did not make clear that Lastminute.ie and not Lastminute.com was used.  We concluded that the ad misleadingly implied that Lastminute routinely overcharged by 100% or more in the UK.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 15.5 (Prices) 18.1 (Comparisons with identified competitors and/or their products), 19.1 (Other comparisons).

3. Upheld
We noted Ryanair had informed Lastminute that they advised customers of incorrect terms and conditions, baggage allowance, hand baggage dimensions, photo ID regulations, and baggage fees, and unclear formatting for e-mailed confirmations.  We also noted Lastminute had responded by amending the baggage allowance, hand baggage dimensions and baggage fees to bring them in line with the information on the Ryanair website, and they had requested clarification about the problem with photo ID regulations (which they believed tallied with Ryanair's own information) and with the e-mailed confirmations.  We noted they advised Ryanair that they used their own terms and conditions but within those they informed customers that they were also bound by the carrier's terms and conditions.  We noted Lastminute had not received any response from Ryanair.

We understood that, because they were a third-party agent who sold products on behalf of hundreds of operators, Lastminute did not provide full terms and conditions for each of their suppliers.  We noted Lastminute's terms and conditions stated "... the contract for the product is between you and the supplier.  In most cases this will mean that there are additional terms and conditions governing the contract as each supplier will have terms and conditions relating to that product.  Please make sure that you have read these terms and conditions before completing your transaction with us."  We considered that the reference to additional terms and conditions made it clear to customers that they should make further checks with the airline.  We also considered that Lastminute had taken reasonable steps to ensure that they were providing correct additional information to customers who booked Ryanair flights, but had not received a response from Ryanair.  We concluded that the claim was misleading.        

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 18.1, 18.4 (Comparisons with identified competitors and/or their products) and 19.1 (Other comparisons).

4. Upheld
We noted Ryanair's argument that Lastminute failed to pass on schedule changes.  We also noted Ryanair had informed Lastminute of the problem and that Lastminute had replied with an explanation of their procedure and had not received a response.  We noted Lastminute had a procedure in place for notifying customers of schedule changes; we understood that Ryanair sent flight change notifications by e-mail to customers, and that because Lastminute booked flights directly with Ryanair on behalf of their customers, the notification would be sent to Lastminute.  We understood that Lastminute, in turn, e-mailed customers to advise them of the change and asked them to confirm that they were happy with it, and that if they did not receive a response they would attempt to notify the customer by telephone.  We considered that there would be times when customers changed their e-mail address or did not pick up their e-mails or messages in time to be advised of the schedule change.  We considered, however, that Lastminute's procedure did not appear to differ significantly from Ryanair's own notification procedure.  We noted the action Lastminute had taken in response to Ryanair's complaint which included a confirmation to Ryanair of the e-mail address to which notifications should be sent.   We concluded that the ad misleadingly implied that Lastminute did not have a notification system in place.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 18.1, 18.4 (Comparisons with identified competitors and/or their products) and 19.1 (Other comparisons).

Action
The ad should not reappear in its current form.


Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)