SAS Messed up. What to do? Sue them?

[Felipe]

SAS employee was surely wrong. But you are insisting that your "ignorance" of T&C is acceptable. It is not. T&C are like laws, and law does not admit ignorance. You can't escape a speed ticket simply saying "sorry officer, I didn't know about the limit", right?

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

What if said officer was sitting right next to you in the car and told you that the speed limit was 60kmh/h while in reality it was 40. Would it be fair for him/her to give you a ticket for the false information given to you? That would be a more correct analogy.

 

[Felipe]

Just chiming in here, I may be completely off here, but my view is slightly different from the other:

It seems crucial to first establish if an agreement was reached with SAS regarding the new ticket. Given that you've made the payment and the ticket has been issued (as per SAS' conditions of carriage, which state that the ticket confirms the contract of carriage), it's reasonable to assume an agreement was formed.

The next consideration involves the authority of the person on the phone to enter into an agreement that would contradict the Eurobonus' terms. I would say that a SAS agent would be deemed to have implied authority (ställningsfullmakt) to represent SAS. Hence, if this holds true, the agreement would likely be valid.

If we accept these premises, it appears SAS has indeed canceled your flight. Consequently, you could be entitled to compensation under EC261/2004 (600 EUR per passenger) and reimbursement for any additional costs incurred.

Taking into account Sweden's emphasis on consumer rights, I think that you should not need to know that the booking potentially was against the initial terms and conditions.

Thanks for the detailed and reasonable response. Will definitely try this!

 

[palmen]

What if said officer was sitting right next to you in the car and told you that the speed limit was 60kmh/h while in reality it was 40. Would it be fair for him/her to give you a ticket for the false information given to you? That would be a more correct analogy.

In Sweden, you as the driver are responsible to drive the car according to the laws and regulations no matter what anyone in the car says, no matter who that person is. So yes, you are 100% at fault and responsible for diving to fast in that case.

If we accept these premises, it appears SAS has indeed canceled your flight. Consequently, you could be entitled to compensation under EC261/2004 (600 EUR per passenger) and reimbursement for any additional costs incurred.

You're missing one thing here. SAS can't cancel the flight, they can cancel a ticket but that's not the same thing.
EU261/2004 refer to operating carrier and cancelling a flight, in this case that's not SAS.

 

[Tomas E]

What if said officer was sitting right next to you in the car and told you that the speed limit was 60kmh/h while in reality it was 40. Would it be fair for him/her to give you a ticket for the false information given to you? That would be a more correct analogy.

I expect you to be able to read the speed limit signs and follow what's written on them, instead of threatening to sue the Police.

 

[palmen]

It seems crucial to first establish if an agreement was reached with SAS regarding the new ticket. Given that you've made the payment and the ticket has been issued (as per SAS' conditions of carriage, which state that the ticket confirms the contract of carriage), it's reasonable to assume an agreement was formed.

There are many ifs and buts here and hearsay. Most likely a new ticket was never issued, since it was send to backoffice and they stopped the reissue.

I've never heard an agent at SAS issuing a new ticket and then send it to backoffice for validation. The agent reserves the seats and then backoffice has to issue the ticket.

Noone know exactly what was said during the phonecall, but SAS record the calls so there are most likely proofs if it is exactly as has been described here, or if something else was said. I wouldn't be surprised if there are 2 sides of the story contradicting each other here.

 

[igelkotten]

SAS employee was surely wrong. But you are insisting that your "ignorance" of T&C is acceptable. It is not. T&C are like laws, and law does not admit ignorance. You can't escape a speed ticket simply saying "sorry officer, I didn't know about the limit", right?

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

This analogy is not right. Most of us agree that OP should have been aware of the ticket conditions to avoid the issues he suffered, but your statement is just plain wrong; none of us can for certain say what the legal effect of the entirety of SAS's terms and conditions are. It's a recognized legal principle that someone cannot say they were unaware of the law, but the same does not go for terms and conditions. I'm allergic to people making this type of definitive statements when it's clearly incorrect.

 

[Robert flysas]

Tråden är låst /Moderator