'Smoke Screen'

[Airband]

'Smoke screen': Canadian airlines use NDAs to keep a lid on passenger settlements

Mon Dec 18, 2023 - The Canadian Press
by Christopher Reynolds

Quote

 “kind of scary — we didn’t know if we could navigate the system well enough against a full-time lawyer and not come out losers.”

MONTREAL — Colleen Dafoe was at the Halifax airport last December with her husband and daughter when WestJet told her their trip was cancelled.

The airline suggested rescheduling them on a flight more than 10 days later, she said — well after the end of their planned vacation to the Dominican Republic to celebrate Dafoe’s 50th birthday with extended family.

They never left Nova Scotia.

Dafoe said she asked for a refund from WestJet, which refused and instead offered a vacation voucher valid for one year. Eventually, she turned to small claims court for the $1,200 in compensation she believed her family was owed under Canada’s passenger rights charter.

Only after she launched the legal action did a WestJet lawyer offer to pay them the full amount — if they signed a non-disclosure agreement barring them from discussing the matter.

“My husband and I hemmed and hawed about this. Part of us wanted to stand our ground and not accept the confidentiality clause, because airlines should not silence people when they have not followed regulations,” Dafoe said.

In the end, Dafoe agree to a settlement that included a confidentiality clause, which bars her from disclosing the amount.

WestJet says it does “not comment on NDAs publicly regardless of topic or circumstance.”

Dafoe said she agreed to settle because going to court seemed “kind of scary — we didn’t know if we could navigate the system well enough against a full-time lawyer and not come out losers.”

Her case fits into an apparent pattern where Canada’s two biggest airlines initially proffer vouchers — often worth between $150 and $300 — if a passenger complains. Then, should the customer decline and proceed to file a court claim, Air Canada and WestJet eventually offer up to as much as the original request, or sometimes more, after a protracted back-and-forth — so long as an NDA is inked.

[Specs]

I never understand why airlines don't reimburse the full amount.   They took money for a service they did not in any reasonable assessment or review deliver.  Why do they get to keep the money?   How much fine print in the Terms and conditions allows this?

[UpperDeck]

But what's the issue with an NDA? No one is holding a gun to your head to sign; it's a settlement offer which you can accept or refuse. If you refuse and proceed to trial and recover, you can scream that result from the rooftop.....if it makes you feel better.

[Specs]

Why have an NDA at all.  Why not just give the customer their money back.    

[Malcolm]

Just now, Specs said:

Why have an NDA at all.  Why not just give the customer their money back.    

$$$$ saving and of course the claim might have being inflater

[J.O.]

I agree that I don't see the big deal with the NDA, they're a fairly standard element of settlement agreements. It seems some folks want more than just their money back. They also want the right to slag the airline on social media forever and a day.

[Kip Powick]

1 hour ago, J.O. said:

I agree that I don't see the big deal with the NDA, they're a fairly standard element of settlement agreements. It seems some folks want more than just their money back. They also want the right to slag the airline on social media forever and a day.

Let them "slag".....none of the arlines in Canada are begging for customers and realistic people will read the "slag", consider the source, and think "get over it and move on". I have never heard of a disgrunteled customer driving an airline into a cash flow problem.