The British Competition Authority (CMA) today (Thursday) opened an investigation against the Irish low-cost company Rainier, following a payment collected from parents who wish to sit next to their children on flights.
1 Viewing the gallery
Rainier – the low-cost giant in the eye of the storm
(Photo: daily_creativity / shutterstock)
The authority is examining whether the payment that Rainier defines as a “mandatory family seat”, which is usually about 8 pounds (about 40 shekels) each way, forces parents to pay for seating arrangements required to meet obligations concerning the safety of children and the accessibility of services for passengers with disabilities, as stipulated in the aviation regulations.
In addition, the authority will check whether it is an “unfair” contractual condition according to consumer protection laws, and whether the payment is shown to passengers only in advanced stages of the booking process (“drip pricing”), instead of being included in advance in the total price shown to the consumer.
The competition authority stated that other airlines allow children to sit next to a parent or guardian without the need to purchase a reserved seat for the adult, or they automatically place the family members together during the booking and at no additional cost.
“Rainair’s family seating policy fully complies with all relevant laws and regulations,” the company said in response. She also claimed that she does not charge any fee for children to sit next to a parent or an accompanying adult, and that she expects to “refute” the competition authority’s claims.
“Like any adult passenger who chooses a reserved seat, adults flying with children also pay for one reserved seat. However, they can choose adjacent seats free of charge for up to four children in the same reservation,” said Ryanair.
The Competition Authority stressed that the investigation is only in its early stages, and that it is part of a broader effort to ease the cost of living and protect vulnerable consumers. At this point, the authority has not yet reached a conclusion as to whether Rainier did in fact violate the law.
