In 2023, the Austrian Agency for Passenger and Passenger Rights filed around 150 reports to the district administrative authority because airlines violated the Passenger Rights Ordinance. The low-cost airline Wizz Air Hungary particularly stands out: around two thirds of the complaints were filed against this company.

Since Wizz Air entered the Austrian market, the company has repeatedly attracted negative attention when it comes to the implementation of the Air Passenger Rights Ordinance. Customer service takes the position of passengers that in the event of cancellations and/or delays, they are only entitled to a refund of the ticket price or rebooking to another Wizz Air flight. Both the European Court of Justice and the Supreme Court have determined in various proceedings that passengers do have the right to alternative transport with another airline. The decisions are also applicable to Wizz Air.

In an existing correspondence, a customer service employee of the pink low-cost airline claims to an Austrian lawyer that the Air Passenger Rights Ordinance stipulates that if the flight is “cancelled” more than 14 days before the scheduled departure, no replacement transport has to be provided and therefore the passenger only has to I am entitled to a refund or rebooking to another Wizz Air flight. In addition, reference is made to a few clauses in the General Conditions of Carriage.

The affected passenger received information that his booked Wizz Air flight had been canceled and, according to the email, only a refund (initially as “Wizz Credits”) or rebooking to another Wizz Air flight was supposedly possible. There was no mention at all of the legal entitlement to alternative transport – contrary to the Air Passenger Rights Ordinance. The traveler first contacted customer service, who rejected any claim for replacement transport. In the meantime, the passenger organized a replacement flight at his own expense and wanted Wizz Air to reimburse the costs. The low-cost airline refused again and claimed that they were not entitled to it because they had canceled more than 14 days before departure. The traveler now turned to the arbitration board of the Agency for Passenger and Passenger Rights. Result: Wizz Air has to pay, but the carrier ignored the arbitration result. An available email shows that the APF representative informed the traveler that a report had been submitted to the responsible district authority in Bruck an der Leitha.

Passenger has to sue - According to consumer advocates, this is not an isolated case

Since the affected passenger wanted the money he was entitled to back, he contacted a lawyer with the help of his legal protection insurance, who asked the company to pay, citing the outcome of the arbitration and the legal situation. Wizz Air's customer service - and not the legal department - again responded negatively by email. Reference is made to an alleged paragraph in passenger rights that states that you have no claims in the event of a “cancellation” more than 14 days before departure. Furthermore, Wizz Air's conditions of carriage would stipulate that the only option would be a refund or rebooking to another Wizz flight. The passenger has now filed a lawsuit against the low-cost airline, although the proceedings are still pending -

The case described as an example is by no means an isolated case, as consumer protection organizations such as the Chamber of Labor have reported that there are an exceptionally large number of complaints about Wizz Air. With a few exceptions, the aim is always that in the event of delays, changes to flight times and/or cancellations, little to no support services should be provided and rebooking to the next possible travel option (substitute transport) with other airlines should generally be refused. According to consumer advocates, when passengers are forced to organize themselves and purchase a ticket that is sometimes significantly more expensive from another provider, the legally entitled reimbursement of this expense is often refused. Sometimes the customer service argues with the ominous 14-day deadline, sometimes with clauses in the conditions of carriage, sometimes with passages in the Air Passenger Rights Ordinance that are not at all applicable. Letters of request from consumer protection organizations and lawyers are not ignored, but rather answered, but supposedly nothing ever changes in the rejection. Remarkably, this attitude changes after a lawsuit is filed, because, according to consumer advocates, a lawsuit is almost never accepted and the money, including legal fees and court costs, should be transferred without comment a few days after delivery of the legal document.

Low-cost airline rejects allegations

By the way, Wizz Air sees the situation completely differently. The company was sent a catalog containing numerous questions relating to compliance with passenger rights in Austria and the implementation of APF's arbitration recommendations. A spokeswoman then issued the following statement to Aviation.Direct: “Wizz Air remains committed to regularly revising its policies and aligning them with current regulations and court decisions in order to continue to improve the overall flying experience. We maintain open communication with the responsible arbitration board in order to address any concerns and continually optimize our processes. Wizz Air offers passengers affected by a flight cancellation the opportunity to rebook the flight or receive a refund. In cases where passengers choose another airline, the refund will be made based on the invoice submitted to customer service.”

The company did not respond at all to the allegations that they had been in a lot of trouble in the United Kingdom due to what the CAA alleged was a “systematic disregard for air passenger rights” and that they had then settled passenger claims under considerable pressure. In the United Kingdom, Wizz Air committed itself - under the threat of sanctions from the Civil Aviation Authority - to respect passenger rights, in particular alternative boarding, compensation and support services. Despite the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the EU, the island state continues to apply the Air Passenger Rights Regulation, which has been incorporated into national law.

APF sees a clear need for improvement

“In its arbitration work, the APF is often confronted with applications based on flight irregularities on Wizz Air flights. In 2023, the second most APF procedures (behind Austrian Airlines) were conducted with Wizz Air. The main reason for this is the flight frequency that the carrier now has in Austria. Judging from the APF's perception, we cannot confirm that Wizz Air only participates "poorly or not at all" in the APF's procedures and that the case you describe is more the exception than the rule. We still see clear potential for improvement in the collaboration. In 2023, personal meetings also took place between the APF and representatives of Wizz Air (at group management level). Among other things, the topics of processing speed, delays in processing, non-fulfillment of payment promises, etc. were addressed. Despite these meetings, the APF has only seen marginal improvements in case management. The results of the arbitration proceedings are usually accepted by both parties to the procedure (applicant and airline). Three quarters of the proceedings that APF conducts with Wizz Air are concluded positively (applicant and airline agree to the arbitration result). If you include procedures in which the airline was able to prove that there were exceptional circumstances, the agreement rate is as high as 85 percent,” a spokesman for the Agency for Passenger and Passenger Rights told Aviation.Direct.

When asked what concerns Wizz Air customers particularly often turn to the state arbitration board with, the media representative replied as follows: “Applicants who flew with Wizz Air mainly turn to the APF due to flight cancellations and delays. This is in line with the reasons for the application of most other airlines. Wizz Air is no exception in this context. Many of the arbitration proceedings with Wizz Air are brought to attention due to the categorical rejection of APF's claims. Claimants submit a claim and often receive a standardized email denying the claim. Applicants can then contact the APF. Unfortunately, we do not have precise statistics on the proportion of applicants who do not receive any answers or who are dissatisfied with the airline's offer.

Two thirds of the administrative reports were made by Wizz Air

Many passengers are not even aware that it is possible to file administrative charges against airlines or their managers if they believe that passenger rights have not been respected. This can either be done by the traveler himself or it can happen that the APF officially sends statements of the facts to the responsible district administrative authority. The managers are personally liable, i.e. with their private assets, for administrative penalties imposed. More information on this topic is discussed in detail in this Aviation.Direct article.

When asked how many complaints the APF has recently filed against Wizz Air or its managers, the spokesman for the arbitration board replied as follows: “The APF is the national enforcement body designated in Austria for the enforcement of the Air Passenger Rights Ordinance and the PRM Air Passenger Rights Ordinance. In 2023, she submitted more than 150 reports to the relevant Austrian district administrative authorities. A good two thirds of them were against Wizz Air Hungary. There were no complaints against the other Wizz Air subsidiaries in 2023. The main reasons for the complaint were, on the one hand, violations of the obligation to participate in an APF arbitration procedure, inadequate information to assess the factual situation or the failure to provide the necessary documents, and, on the other hand, violations of the Air Passenger Rights Ordinance or the PRM Passenger Rights Ordinance. These included, for example, the non-payment of compensation payments after a previously given promise, the failure to offer alternative transport, the non-reimbursement of ticket costs, etc. The APF also increased its staff in this area last year, which also allowed advertisements to be processed more efficiently.

When asked about the fact that various airlines, Wizz Air Hungary, Wizz Air Malta, Wizz Air UK and Wizz Air Abu Dhabi, operate under the Wizz Air brand, but during the booking process it is not entirely clear who the contractual partner is or who is “just an agent”. The APF spokesman replied: “We have no insight into Wizz Air’s internal accounting and therefore cannot assess how flight tickets are charged. For the processing of arbitration proceedings, it is irrelevant for the APF which Wizz Air subsidiary ultimately operated the flights, as the complaints management system is no different.”

Passengers do not have to accept “Wizz Credits”.

For some time now, Wizz Air has generally reimbursed customers in the form of so-called “Wizz Credits” and lures customers with a 20 percent bonus in their emails. You can still have the money paid out, but without the bonus. The form is well hidden on the Wizz Air homepage, but the processing time can sometimes be very long. Reimbursement in the form of “compulsory vouchers” is actually not permitted, but Wizz Air has been practicing this way for a long time.

The APF spokesman said: “According to Air Passenger Rights Regulation 261/2004, compensation must be paid in cash, by bank transfer, by check or, with the written consent of the passenger, in the form of travel vouchers. These reimbursement modalities also apply to the cost of the flight ticket. If passengers accept the vouchers, then from APF's perspective an agreement has been reached with the airline. In our experience, vouchers (or Wizz Credits) are initially offered in the arbitration proceedings. If requested by the APF, the cost of the ticket will also be transferred directly to the passengers - although there may be delays. In any case, the Air Passenger Rights Regulation outweighs clauses in the company’s conditions of carriage.”

Some time ago, most flights that were previously offered as Wizz Air Hungary were canceled in Vienna. handed over to Wizz Air Malta. As a result, supervision regarding the operating license for these flights lies not with the Hungarian Civil Aviation Authority, but with the Maltese Civil Aviation Authority. When asked whether there had been an exchange with TM-CAD due to passenger complaints, the APF media officer said: “The APF exchanges ideas with the national enforcement bodies of other member states as part of the regular meetings of the National Enforcement Bodies (NEB). . In Malta this is the MCAA (Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority) and not the Aviation Authority. Furthermore, it is not APF’s common practice to contact representatives of foreign aviation authorities in the procedures.”

A 14-day period does not exempt you from the obligation to provide alternative transport

Is it really the case that if Wizz Air announces a significant change in flight times and/or a cancellation more than 14 days before departure, then you are not entitled to replacement transport? The APF representative explains the legal situation: “Substitute transport: With regard to the right to alternative transport, there is no difference whether you are informed of a cancellation more than 14 days before departure. Compensation payment: There is a difference in the compensation payment, i.e. there is NO entitlement to compensation payment if 1) a passenger was demonstrably informed about the flight cancellation at least two weeks before the departure date, 2) a passenger was demonstrably informed about the cancellation between 14 and 7 days before departure was informed and the alternative flight offered has a departure time of max. 2 hours earlier and an arrival time of max. 4 hours later, or 3) a passenger was demonstrably informed of the cancellation less than 7 days before departure and the alternative flight offered has a departure time of max . 1 hour earlier and an arrival time of max. 2 hours later. With regard to replacement transport, however, a fundamental distinction must be made between a flight delay and a flight cancellation. In cases of flight cancellations, regardless of the 14-day period, passengers are entitled to a refund of the cost of the ticket, a return flight to the first point of departure, alternative transport to the final destination under comparable travel conditions at the earliest possible date or alternative transport to the final destination at a later date. According to current case law, this includes rebooking to other airlines. In the event of flight delays of at least five hours, passengers have the right to a refund of the cost of the ticket and a return flight to the first departure point at the earliest possible time.

For passengers faced with flight irregularities, for example with Wizz Air, the APF media officer recommends the following steps:

“In the event of flight irregularities, regardless of the airline, the APF generally recommends contacting the airline first. Via service counters, hotlines, e-mail, by post, etc. However, it is best to provide proof in writing (make a copy of the e-mail; keep the shipping confirmation). We have linked the Wizz Air complaint form on the APF website: https://wizzair.com/de-de/informationen-und-serviceleistungen/anregungen-und-beschwerden/. If the airline does not respond within a six-week period or provides an inadequate response, passengers can contact the Agency for Passenger and Passenger Rights. An arbitration application must be filled out at: https://www.APF.gv.at/de/beschwerde-flug.html and after checking whether the claim is justified based on the EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation, arbitration proceedings will then be initiated. Depending on the complexity of the procedure, this can take a few days to weeks. As already mentioned above, the chances of successfully dealing with the matter are generally good.”