Emirates passenger opens up amid business class debacle

A traveller who was awarded $12,500 over a falsely advertised Emirates business class seat revealed what pushed him to take his complaint further.

A man who was awarded $12,500 over a falsely advertised Emirates business class seat has revealed what really pushed him to take the major airline to the Disputes Tribunal.

A man who was awarded $NZ13,555 ($A12,500) over a falsely advertised Emirates business class seat has revealed what pushed him to take the major airline to the Disputes Tribunal.

Mark Morgan, 57, a surgeon from New Zealand, won his compensation battle after the court found he and his and his wife’s business class experience from Auckland to London was nothing like what the airline had advertised.

He bought the ticket imagining he would be settling down to a mini bar, a flat bed and an updated entertainment system – however, he allegedly received nothing of the sort.

“I was driven by a sense of unfairness,” Mr Morgan told Daily Mail Australia.

“Whether or not I was going to win, I just wanted to use up some of the CEO’s time because I knew it had to be him representing Emirates at the tribunal, even if it was just over telephone conference.

“To have the satisfaction of saying to the person involved that this is bloody unacceptable, it p***ed me off and you are in the wrong.”

Mark Morgan, 57, a surgeon from New Zealand, was awarded $12,500, after he sued Emirates for false advertising.

He said being able to just say that, whether he had won or lost, was enough.

“It wasn’t about the amount of compensation – that money had gone, as far as I was concerned.”

Mr Morgan’s ordeal began when he and his wife headed to London in August last year.

She flew out a week before him from Auckland on an older plane than the updated Boeing 777-300 that had featured in adverts.

Concerned that he would also be put on an older aircraft, he got reassurance from the airline it would be running the updated version of the plane.

But that wasn’t the case, according to Mr Morgan, who ended up on an older version of the 777.

He bought a business class ticket on a plane from Auckland to London imagining he would be settling down to a mini bar, a flat bed and an updated entertainment system.

He said not only wasn’t there a lie-flat seat, but there was no minibar, internet connection or USB ports and the entertainment system “malfunctioned” due to its age.

Dr Morgan said it was false advertising, because it wasn’t a one-off swap to a jet with an older-style product, but rather the standard jet for Emirates’ Auckland route.

He complained to customer service with no success.

He then escalated it to the higher ups, writing to Chris Lethbridge, regional manager of Emirates’ New Zealand, and Tim Clark, the president of Emirates.

However, he claims he received the same “generic fob off” from both.

He said he was even willing to settle for a lower amount, but Emirates wouldn’t listen.

He eventually took the airline to the Disputes Tribunal where the carrier defended its ad saying it doesn’t guarantee aircraft types in its contract with customers.

But the tribunal ruled that Dr Morgan’s claim was a fair reflection of the difference in service advertised versus what he paid for.

But it was an older plane, with the tribunal ruling in his favour saying ‘Emirates advertised a business class service that consumers were very unlikely to receive’.

“Emirates advertised a business class service that consumers were very unlikely to receive,” Disputes Tribunal referee Laura Mueller said, reported Stuff.

“This was the result of advertising a service that they were rarely delivering, not due to an occasional or one-off change of aircraft due to operational requirements.”

The business class seats and amenities it advertised were not provided to Dr Morgan and his wife, she added.

“The promotional materials were based on an updated/new business class seat and service that is not in place in the older aircraft that Emirates flies to NZ,” Ms Mueller said in her decision.

In the end he was awarded $12,600 after claiming his business class experience did not reflect an ad of Emirates’ new style business seating.

Emirates claimed the service he had was only a 5 per cent reduction in quality compared to the service it advertised, and had offered a refund of $786.

It told the tribunal that the seats Dr Morgan and his wife received reclined to 166.1 degrees, rather than lying completely flat, but it said: “To the ordinary air-traveller the seat made available is equivalent to a lie-flat seat.”

Adam Glezer, founder of Consumer Champion.

In the end, Ms Muller ruled that Dr Morgan’s claim was reasonable and fairly reflected the difference in service advertised and paid for, versus the service received.

Emirates has until March 27 to pay Dr Morgan.

Live and Let’s Fly, a travel blogger who claims to have flown on the same route, called Emirates’ defence “laughable”.

“It is hard and certainly not fully lie-flat … There’s a huge difference,” they said.

Adam Glezer, founder of Consumer Champion, told news.com.au it is extremely important for passengers to fight for what’s right.

“Airlines need to be called out for this type of behaviour,” he said.

“The great thing about what Mark did, not only did he take it further but he showed them they can’t get away with it.”

Social media users have also backed Dr Morgan with many saying laws need to be tightened.

“Good to see Emirates being held responsible for what was very clearly a case of intentional misleading advertising. There should be more of this,” one person wrote.

“Yup … laws need to be tightened,” another said.

News.com.au has contacted Emirates for comment.