Decision No. 108-C-A-2021

SUMMARY

[1] In Decision No. 34-C-A-2021 (Initial Decision), issued April 30, 2021, the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) found that KLM failed to refund Ms. Kaur for the unused portion of her ticket in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in Delta’s International Passenger Rules and Fares Tariff No. DL-1 Containing Local and Joint Rules, Fares and Charges on Behalf of Delta Airlines, Inc. Applicable to the Transportation of Passengers and Baggage Between Points in the United States/Canada and Points Throughout the World, NTA(A) No. 304 (Tariff). The Agency ordered KLM to provide calculations indicating the value of the unused portion of Ms. Kaur’s ticket, in order to refund her accordingly.

[2] In this decision, the Agency will address the following issue:

Is the refund amount proposed by KLM in accordance with the Tariff? If not, what is the appropriate amount of compensation to be paid?

[3] For the reasons set out below, the Agency finds that the refund proposed by KLM has not been calculated according to Rule 23(A) of the Tariff. Therefore, the Agency orders KLM to compensate Ms. Kaur in the amount of CAD 45.99.

BACKGROUND

[4] On June 22, 2019, Ms. Kaur was scheduled to travel from Delhi, India, to Toronto, Ontario, via Amsterdam, Netherlands, on codeshare tickets marketed by Delta and operated by KLM. Her flight from Delhi to Amsterdam was delayed and KLM reprotected her from Amsterdam to Toronto through Montréal, Quebec.

[5] After Ms. Kaur arrived in Montréal, she did not clear customs quickly enough to take her connecting flight to Toronto. She rejected the reprotection option that KLM offered to her and made her own way home to Toronto.

[6] In the Initial Decision, the Agency found that KLM failed to properly apply the terms and conditions set out in the Tariff because it did not provide Ms. Kaur with a refund for the unused portion of her ticket after she terminated her travel in Montréal.

[7] In Decision No. LET-C-A-53-2021 (Procedural Decision), issued July 29, 2021, the Agency opened pleadings on whether the residual ticket value submitted by KLM in response to the Initial Decision is calculated in accordance with the Tariff.

PRELIMINARY MATTER

[8] The Initial and Procedural Decisions refer to Rule 90(B) of the Tariff as setting out the applicable terms and conditions regarding involuntary refunds. At the time the incident occurred, however, a temporary renumbering of the Tariff was in effect and the terms and conditions regarding involuntary refunds were set out in Rule 23(A). Therefore, the Agency refers to Rule 23(A) of the Tariff throughout this decision.

THE LAW AND RELEVANT TARIFF PROVISIONS

[9] Subsection 110(4) of the ATR requires that a carrier operating an international service apply the terms and conditions of carriage specified in its tariff.

[10] If the Agency finds that an air carrier has failed to properly apply its tariff, section 113.1 of the ATR empowers the Agency to direct the carrier to:

(a) take the corrective measures that the Agency considers appropriate; and

(b) pay compensation for any expense incurred by a person adversely affected by its failure to apply the fares, rates, charges or terms and conditions set out in the tariff.

[11] The relevant provision of the Tariff is set out in the Appendix.

POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES

[12] On May 5, 2021, in response to the Initial Decision, KLM provided calculations demonstrating a residual ticket value of CAD 42.95. Specifically, KLM provided breakdowns indicating that the prorated fare for the mileage from Montréal to Toronto was CAD 38 and that the difference between the taxes and surcharges collected for Ms. Kaur’s ticket and those applicable to the portion travelled was CAD 4.95.

[13] On June 10, 2021, Ms. Kaur informed the Agency that she disagreed with both the Initial Decision and the refund amount proposed by KLM.

[14] On August 5, 2021, in response to the Procedural Decision, Ms. Kaur repeated her dissatisfaction with the Initial Decision. Ms. Kaur did not submit evidence or argumentation regarding KLM’s calculations of the residual ticket value.

[15] Also on August 5, 2021, KLM submitted that it duly explained how the amount of CAD 42.95 was calculated on May 5, 2021, and requested Ms. Kaur’s bank details in order to pay her that amount.

ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATIONS

[16] The Agency has reviewed KLM’s submissions filed in response to the Initial Decision. Given that Ms. Kaur was rerouted through Montréal from her scheduled flight to Toronto, her decision to terminate her travel in Montréal occurred within a fare component and Rule 23(A)(2)(b) of the Tariff applies. KLM’s calculation methodology for the unused fare amount, involving proration based on mileage, is consistent with Rule 23(A)(2)(b) of the Tariff. However, the base fare amount used in KLM’s calculations, CAD 870, differs from the CAD 933 indicated in Ms. Kaur’s ticket. As KLM does not explain the discrepancy, the Agency finds that KLM did not demonstrate that its proposed refund amount is in accordance with Rule 23(A)(2)(b) of the Tariff.

[17] In light of the above, the Agency finds that the appropriate unused fare amount is that determined by substituting the CAD 933 base fare amount from Ms. Kaur’s ticket into KLM’s calculations – namely, CAD 41.04.

[18] With respect to the taxes and surcharges, the Agency notes that KLM indicated a reduction in the tax related to goods and services, while those related to security and country-specific passage were unchanged. The Agency therefore accepts the CAD 4.95 difference as reasonable.

[19] Consequently, the Agency finds that the appropriate compensation in this case is CAD 45.99 and orders KLM to compensate Ms. Kaur on that basis.

ORDER

[20] Ms. Kaur is to provide the following information to KLM and notify the Agency that the information has been sent to KLM as soon as possible and no later than October 20, 2021:

• The name of her bank in Canada;
• The complete address of the bank (including postal code);
• The 3-digit bank code;
• The 5-digit transit number of the bank;
• The account number;
• The exact first and last name shown on the bank account; and
• Her complete address.

[21] Upon receipt of this information, KLM is to compensate Ms. Kaur in the amount of CAD 45.99. This amount is to be paid as soon as possible and no later than the tenth business day following receipt of the information from Ms. Kaur. If Ms. Kaur does not provide the above information to KLM within the specified timeframe, KLM has no further obligation towards her.

---

APPENDIX TO DECISION NO. 108-C-A-2021

International Passenger Rules and Fares Tariff No. DL-1 Containing Local and Joint Rules, Fares and Charges on Behalf of Delta Airlines, Inc. Applicable to the Transportation of Passengers and Baggage Between Points in the United States/Canada and Points Throughout the World, NTA(A) No. 304

Rule 23(A) INVOLUNTARY REFUNDS

If a refund is required because of Delta’s failure to operate on schedule or refusal to transport (except as a result of passenger’s failure to comply with the contract of carriage), the following refund will be made directly to you:

         ….

        (2)  If a portion of the ticket has been used and termination (interruption) occurs:

(a) At A Fare Breakpoint – The refund will be an amount equal to the fare paid for the unused transportation from the point of termination (interruption) to the destination or next Stopover point named on the ticket, or to a point at which transportation is to be resumed. No refund will apply when alternate transportation is provided by Delta and accepted by the passenger.

(b) Within A Fare Component – The refund will be an amount equal to the percentage of unflown mileage to the fare component total mileage by prorating the fare paid for the fare component, from the point of termination/interruption to the destination or next stopover point named on the ticket, or to the point at which transportation is to be resumed. No refund will apply when alternate transportation is provided by Delta and accepted by the passenger.