Ryanair loses disability ruling

In message <1e1m10558sa9u6fh5oqekf81vf8vn6plu1@>, Malcolm Weir
<malc@gelt.org> writes
>>I thought he meant "is it a benefit-in-kind". After all, the chap who
>>just won his case was awarded damages to repay the costs he incurred
>>from a lack of wheelchair supply. So the wheelchair supply has clearly
>>some financial benefit.
>
>HMCE disagree.
>
>But what do they know!

Nothing, as the taxation in "benefit in kind" is done by the Inland
Revenue (not HMC&E).
--
Roland Perry

"Usenet" <Usenet@paladio.> wrote in message
news:cTkQ45cTCUHAFwBL@paladio....
>
> Four possibilities:
>
> Perhaps Ryanair have had greater experience of immobile passengers due
> to flights to Lourdes and Knock, and so try to avoid the cost?
>

I've done the Ryanair flight to Knock four times, and don't remember any
wheelchar pax - not that 4 flights (or 8 if you include the returns) is a
good sample.

>
> Perhaps they've taken the concept of 'we're a commercial company and NOT
> a charity!' to heart, but forgotten they're still human?
>

Their argument seems to be that the airport should pay not the airline, as
happens at most of their airports. I guess either way the other air
passengers pay.

"Malcolm Weir" <malc@gelt.org> wrote in message
news:d6d520donggnbkjtaa9vm4bdmhef00hs7o@...
> On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 23:28:24 -0500, "Miss L. Toe"
> <missltoemissltoe@m> wrote:
>
> [ Snip ]
>
> >> >Hmm - currently all other airlines collect fees from all passengers to
> >> >fund wheelchair access and some even make a profit, they just don't
itemise
> >> >it.
>
> >> Where are you finding this "wheelchair fee" from all passengers?
> >>
> >> Here's a hint: nowhere. Just as you don't find "landing fees"
> >> itemized by anyone, or "rent of check-in space".
>
> >Hmm - where did I say itemised ?
>
> In the paragraph of yours I quoted, the penultimate word is "itemise".
>
> You may find that re-reading what you wrote helps you remember what
> you wrote!
>

and you may find it helps to read the word before my penultimate word !!!!!!

"Malcolm Weir" <malc@gelt.org> wrote in message
news:5c78205bf3133n7bigddi5vobe8qvmcku3@...
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 18:29:06 -0500, "Miss L. Toe"
> <missltoemissltoe@m> wrote:
>
> >"Malcolm Weir" <malc@gelt.org> wrote in message
> >news:d6d520donggnbkjtaa9vm4bdmhef00hs7o@.. .
> >> On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 23:28:24 -0500, "Miss L. Toe"
> >> <missltoemissltoe@m> wrote:
> >>
> >> [ Snip ]
> >>
> >> >> >Hmm - currently all other airlines collect fees from all passengers
to
> >> >> >fund wheelchair access and some even make a profit, they just don't
> >itemise
> >> >> >it.
> >>
> >> >> Where are you finding this "wheelchair fee" from all passengers?
> >> >>
> >> >> Here's a hint: nowhere. Just as you don't find "landing fees"
> >> >> itemized by anyone, or "rent of check-in space".
> >>
> >> >Hmm - where did I say itemised ?
> >>
> >> In the paragraph of yours I quoted, the penultimate word is "itemise".
> >>
> >> You may find that re-reading what you wrote helps you remember what
> >> you wrote!
>
> >and you may find it helps to read the word before my penultimate word
!!!!!!
>
> Yes. Now, explain the wheelchair fee thing.
>
> In particular, note that there is *no* itemization by serious airlines
> of *any* of the various costs of doing business.
>
> So why do you think the _lack_ of itemization of one of those costs
> implies that there is a specific fee to fund wheelchair access?
>
> YOU introduced the issue of itemization, or lack thereof, as something
> that you (presumably) considered significant...
>
> Since no operating costs are itemized, it's not.
>
> Malc.

Which part of

"currently all other airlines collect fees from all passengers to fund
wheelchair access and some even make a profit, they just don't itemise it."

Did you not understand ?

On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 18:30:11 -0500, "Miss L. Toe"
<missltoemissltoe@m> wrote:

>Which part of
>
>"currently all other airlines collect fees from all passengers to fund
>wheelchair access and some even make a profit, they just don't itemise it."
>
>Did you not understand ?

I *understand* it.

It's just NOT TRUE! Never was!

See?

You claimed that they collect fees to fund wheelchair access. They
don't.

They fund wheelchair access out of the general revenue stream, whether
it comes from passenger ticket sales, cargo sales, consulting fees,
professional services, etc.

Malc.

"Roland Perry" <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote in message news:gRbX9OCST6HAFA3R@perry.co.uk...
> In message <NrGcnVW866d6YYPdSa8jmw@karoo.co.uk>, resenär
> <manager@REMOVETHIStravelextrasuk.com> writes
> >Ryanair are merely itemizing a cost that all other airlines absorb.
> >Wheelchair hire is not the only cost of this kind, there is the money spent
> >on the wages of those employees assisting passengers in all kinds of ways:
> >Unaccompanied children, elderly passengers, deaf passengers, blind
> >passengers and passengers who do not speak the local language to name but a
> >few.
> >
> >Aren't there other practises of Ryanair to be more worried about and
> >criticised such as the "fee" to refund taxes on cancelled flights?
>
> The difference being that it's against the law to charge disabled people
> in the way that Ryanair did, and not against the law to charge for (say)
> dealing with unaccompanied minors. [Although it wouldn't surprise me to
> discover that Ryanair simply ban them, to avoid the hassle;

Which is exactly what they do do. In order to compete, many full
service airlines are now charging for this service and not before time
IMHO, I see no reason why the costs of such a service should be
bundled onto the cost of all tickets. FWIW, when I return back to
work after Xmas, it's not uncommon for 25-30% of the plane to be
UMs (I rarely see any the rest of the year).

tim


> something
> that would again be illegal if they banned disabled passengers.]
>
> I don't agree with all the aspects of disability legislation (for
> example forcing *all* new taxis [in the provinces] to be wheelchair
> accessible and therefore pricing many small operators off the road), but
> the law's the law. Talk to your M(E)P if you want it changed!
> --
> Roland Perry

> >
> But as they need it to and from the gate (out and return) its really 1/72.
> Still I don't see 2 wheelchair greeters of every flight!
>

the 'song' flight I took from Boston to Tampa earlier this week had 4
wheelchairs coming off, and 6 going on !

and the return had 3 going on.

Malcolm Weir <malc@gelt.org> wrote in
news:kee820to9d95ki9sd25cv1at5sl88updqc@:

> On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 18:30:11 -0500, "Miss L. Toe"
> <missltoemissltoe@m> wrote:
>
>>Which part of
>>
>>"currently all other airlines collect fees from all passengers to fund
>>wheelchair access and some even make a profit, they just don't itemise
>>it."
>>
>>Did you not understand ?
>
> I *understand* it.
>
> It's just NOT TRUE! Never was!
>
> See?
>
> You claimed that they collect fees to fund wheelchair access. They
> don't.
>
> They fund wheelchair access out of the general revenue stream, whether
> it comes from passenger ticket sales, cargo sales, consulting fees,
> professional services, etc.
>
> Malc.
>

I don't know the correct answer to this. But I would have thought that
each business within (say) BA has its own internal accounting. The
cost of wheelchairs will be set against the passenger receipts. If the
cost of wheelchairs goes up, so will ticket prices, or there will be
savings elsewhere in that business, such as stopping meals.

--
Adrian