Subscription 790/year or 190/quarter

From the corner





(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)

A reason to fly with SAS? Norwegian requires payment in arrears. SAS chooses to cover it for itself.

An aggressive squeeze on "unpaid airline fare" is Norwegian's strategy to save hundreds of thousands of dollars: They send the bill for the new state airline fare in arrears to customers who had already purchased tickets before 1. June, but made the journey after that date. For security, Norwegian's data department has subsequently added a message about "unpaid fee" if customers today were to search their previously purchased tickets to see what was agreed when the tickets were purchased. However, some reservations about possible additional payment were never taken by Norwegian when the purchase was made.

Thomas Iversen at the Consumer Ombudsman's office can say that the Flyklagenemda has the dispute today, as one – of all things – a "pilot case" between unwilling customers and the company. It's a little too early for him to flag what he himself thinks, since the office is involved in the complaint. But there is reason to believe that consumers have a spokesman in Iversen.

So the thing is not whether the fee is right, but whether it is possible for a seller after the sale to increase the price of a sold and consumed item. Norwegian threatens a "cleaning fee" of 1 euros extra on top of those 10 euros if the customer chooses to wait for the Complaint's decision.

The fact that SAS has chosen to cover the costs themselves, without handing it over to unsuspecting customers, says something about the expected result of the treatment in nemda – but also something about the difference in strategy and customer treatment in the two companies?

Norwegian has turned around
this case later. [Eds.]


Jones is the head of the Hmmarsjiöld program. jones@networkers.org

John Y. Jones
John Y. Jones
Cand. Philol, freelance journalist affiliated with MODERN TIMES

You may also like