BA sale

British Airways in court in the US over fuel surcharges on Avios tickets

Links on Head for Points may pay us an affiliate commission. A list of partners is here.

An interesting court case is currently working its way through the US legal system. Four frequent flyers in the States are suing British Airways over the fairness (or not) of the fuel surcharges imposed on Avios reward tickets and corporate net fares.

The latest attempt by British Airways to have the case thrown out has just failed, and it will proceed to the next stage.

See this Reuters story here for more details.

To quote:

In a decision made public on Friday, U.S. District Judge Raymond Dearie in Brooklyn, New York, said the plaintiffs offered sufficient support for their claims that the surcharges were not “reasonably related to or based upon” fuel costs. He did not rule on the merits of the case …..

The plaintiffs said British Airways saw the fuel surcharges as a means to boost revenue, and charge frequent flyers hundreds of dollars on each “free” reward ticket.

In letting the case proceed, Dearie cited a statistical analysis from the flyers that suggested that British Airways’ fuel surcharges from 2007 to 2012 “bore little relationship to – and were not based upon – changes in the price of fuel.”

There are a couple of points worth mentioning here. The first is that, for reasons unknown, British Airways charges higher fuel surcharges – substantially higher, in fact – for round-trip tickets which start in the US compared with the UK.

Heathrow to New York return in Club World has total taxes of £533. New York to Heathrow return has total taxes of £732. That won’t look good in court.

Secondly, I will leave you with this bit of data courtesy of my friend Andy.

Cost of fuelling a BA A380 to Los Angeles, return: $170,000 (figure comes directly from a BA pilot)

First Class fuel charge revenue: 14 x £359 = £5,026

Club World fuel charge revenue: 97 x £359 = £34,823

World Traveller Plus fuel charge revenue: 55 x £239 = £13,145

World Traveller fuel charge revenue: 303 x £239 = £72,417

Total fuel surcharge collected on a full A380 flight to Los Angeles: £125,411 = c $200,000

‘Profit’ generated by fuel surcharge vs the cost of fuel: c $30,000

The full court filings in the case can be downloaded from Loyalty Lobby here.

It is not clear where this case will end up – the worst case scenario, for BA, is that it is made to refund fuel surcharges to anyone who has flown to or from the US in recent years on an Avios ticket or corporate net fare (to which fuel surcharges are additional).

This would not be unparalleled – similar refunds were made a few years (I got one myself) when BA settled another court case.

(Want to earn more Avios? Click here to see our latest articles on earning and spending your points and click here to see our list of current Avios promotions.)

Another IHG Rewards Club 'flash sale' on Monday and Tuesday
3,000 bonus United MileagePlus miles for a RocketMiles hotel booking

Head for Points is sponsored by:

Magazine montage

Up to 30% off in Hilton's Winter Sale

Click here to find out more and book

Click here to join the 14,500 people on our email list and receive the latest Avios, miles and points news by 6am.

Amazon ad
About Head for Points

We help business and leisure travellers maximise their Avios, frequent flyer miles and hotel loyalty points. Visit every day for three new articles or sign up for our FREE emails via this page or the box to your right.

Comments

  1. Lady London says:

    I’m betting the rest of the industry would be grateful if BA would settle this out of court.

    The precedent a loss for BA would set, might potentially open up many more claims on other airlines.

    Incidentally, I noticed a few months back that YQ seems to have been renamed something else, and is no longer called “fuel surcharge” on some BA fare quotes I obtained. Shortly after the first time I noticed this change I heard about this court case 🙂

  2. wobbly wings says:

    We’ve debated this for years on FT. Fuel surcharges are a scam, nothing else. Fuel is an essential cost of flying airplanes and cannot be removed from the base cost and added on top. Fuel prices are relatively stable; so there is no temporary blip to compensate against. Even if there were, airlines could incorporate into the fares every time they file the fares. Surcharges mostly go up irrespective of their hedging and the underline price of fuel. All it is is a mechanism to force co-pay on awards and all sorts of discounted tickets and pay reduced commission on ticket sales. It’s time some regulator calls the bluff of the industry on this (it’s not only BA of course). Inevitably in the UK no one would take action, irrespective of how absurd it is and how many times this has been raised. It needs to be our friends over the Atlantic to take things forward.

Please click here to read our data protection policy before submitting your comment.