What's the book corporate America doesn't want you to read? Find out now -- or you could get scammed.

Did lobbyists eviscerate Sen. Menendez’ Clear Airfare Amendment?

March 23, 2010

Here’s a copy of the revised Clear Airfare Amendment (PDF) that was passed by the Senate. Notice any changes?

This legislation was one of the best opportunities to compel airlines and travel agents to quote an all-inclusive price.

What do you think of amendments to the amendment?

Comments are open.

(Photo: -MRTN-/Flickr Creative Commons)

Christopher Elliott is the author of Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals. Critics have called it “eye-opening” and “inspiring” — it’ll “grab your attention and won’t let go.” Order your copy now on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or iTunes.

Tagged as: , , ,

7 comments

  • http://www.angrymarks.com/ Kevin Fields

    Perhaps I am missing something, but isn’t the “revised” bill basically what we already have now?

  • SirWired

    The changes don’t look too bad…

    “other costs applicable to” -> “charges paid when purchasing” air tickets. At first glance, this would appear to eliminate disclosure for baggage charges paid at check-in, but those charges are explicitly required to be disclosed because of language later in the amendment. It appears that this change means that other than checked baggage, they don’t have to disclose any other time-of-service fees paid after purchase is complete.

    “on the internet” added… I guess this means that telephone purchases will be exempt from the new disclosures. However, whenever I’ve bought a ticket over the phone, the agent has never bothered to separate out the “fare” and the total, although the baggage charges may still come as something of a surprise.

    “simultaneously with and” removed from “[disclosure must be made] simultaneously with and in close proximity to the price listed for the ticket.” This one is a bit puzzling; I think it was removed because it was redundant. It can’t be “in close proximity” if it’s on a separate page displayed at a different time.

    Under “taxes and fees described”, “[disclosures] including” is changed to “consisting of.” This seems to mean that if the airlines invent a fee that is not part of the list, there will need to be more legislation, as the FAA will not be able to add to the list on their own.

    Disclosure of fees for in-flight services was deleted. This one makes sense to me… I don’t see why they need to disclose fees for an in-flight sandwich, headset, internet, TV, etc. at ticket purchase.

    Interestingly, “operational services that are charged when the ticket is purchased” was ADDED. This is a great change, as it firms up requirements for up-front disclosure of “web reservation fees” so popular with bargain airlines.

    The glaring omission here is that print ads for airfares can still omit everything under the sun, while internet sales are covered. (However, print ads may still be covered under the “base” part of the USC amended by this law, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive practice or an unfair method of competition in air transportation or the sale of air transportation.”

  • SirWired

    Kevin,

    The answer to your question is no. If you go to pretty much any airline website today, you will see that the total price of the ticket (including fees, taxes, baggage charges, etc.) aren’t displayed until you get to the screen where you enter your credit card number. With the new law, they will have to be listed next to the initial quote. And they’ll have to disclose the current baggage charges on the same page, which they don’t do now.

    The 3rd party booking sites mostly comply with the taxes/fees portion, but not the baggage charge portion.

  • Glenn

    Something about the wording makes it sound like some of the fees aren’t disclosed *until* the ticket is purchased i.e. “charges paid when purchasing” leaves a little room for interpretation.

  • http://www.angrymarks.com/ Kevin Fields

    @Sir Wired: Perhaps I’m just a bit pessimistic by one part, because I can envision “in close proximity to” being interpreted as “placed at the very bottom of the web page in the smallest font size, the hardest to read font face, and in a color that is just barely a few shades lighter or darker than the background.” :-/

  • Katrina

    So much for “clarity”. A real shame.

  • Cahterine

    Makes me wonder why the airlines will not give a complete break-down for airline / auto rental monies on an airline ticket? We the people should be able to view what we are paying for before dishing out the cost. It’s as simple as that. Yet, we have lobbiests and the airlines fighting to hide these charges. As far as our Senate goes, what’s their problem? Seems pure and simple to me or does the Senate have they have their hands in the deal?

Previous post:

Next post: