Virgin’s multiple entry visa bungle costs its customers a fair go to Fiji

VIRGIN on the ridiculous – this pair were left thousands out of pocket when a check-in staffer misread their visas. The airline then tried to cover up the mistake.

Lam-In and her daughter Betty with their Indonesian passports / Picture: Bob Barker

INDONESIAN tourists Betty and her mother Lam-In are used to discrimination. It’s why they don’t have surnames. Former president Suharto made those of Chinese heritage give them up.

They’ve been struggling to get a fair go here, too.

Betty and Lam-In have been in Australia on 12-month multiple-entry visas that allow stays of up to three months at a time. Last month they planned to fly Virgin to Fiji with friends for a long weekend then ­return to Sydney. It would be fun and keep their visas intact.

FOLLOW PUBLIC DEFENDER ON TWITTER

BRYDENS LAWYERS ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS FROM 1PM TODAY

But at Sydney Airport, a Virgin employee refused to check them in. She ruled the visas were no good ­because the date of return was more than three months after they last ­entered Australia. Betty tried to ­explain this interpretation was wrong but was ignored. She tried to have the matter escalated. She was told the ­supervisors would say the same thing and were too busy anyway.

After I became involved, Virgin’s initial explanation was that a computer system “owned by the Immigration Department” had warned against boarding the pair because their visas would be invalid. To fly them risked fines, Virgin said. A screenshot apparently showed this.

I asked for the screenshot but Virgin never provided it. It did, however, provide repeated assurances it had done the right thing.

I also made inquiries of Customs. After three weeks of pushing it told me: “According to departmental systems a visa check was conducted by Virgin Airlines on that day, which showed that the clients held valid multiple entry visas.”

Presented with this, the airline’s story changed: “Virgin Australia has conducted a thorough investigation and we recognise a mistake was made on this occasion. We sincerely apologise to the guests involved … and we have since arranged a full refund as a gesture of goodwill.”

Goodwill? Even after realising it was in the wrong Virgin tried to substitute in-flight credits for the cost of the lost Fiji accommodation.

Betty feels Virgin embarrassed them and that they were mistreated. She plans to take the matter further.

CONSUMER CREDIT LEGAL SERVICE TO SUFFER FROM FUND REFORMS

WHILE financial counsellors’ fears of losing funding in the Budget were not realised, they won’t be bankrolled to advocate for better policies.

Katherine Lane, principal solicitor, Consumer Credit Legal Centre

Consumer Credit Legal Centre principal solicitor Katherine Lane said: “Law reform is a small part of what we do in resource allocation but an enormously important part of how we assist as many Australians as possible.

“Without the law reform and policy work consumer advocates such as CCLC have done over the years, there would be no free external dispute resolution … in many matters, there would be no redress against dodgy and dishonest finance brokers, and predatory lending would still be rife.”

Attorney-General George Brandis’ office said the government wanted taxpayers’ dollars spent on “frontline services” instead.

But Ms Lane said: “Where is the cost efficiency in advising thousands of people every year on the same issue and not being able to lift a finger to change the law to prevent those problems?”