Hi,
We flew to Sharm in September with Thomsonfly, being 6 foot + we booked leg room seats as we do most times. This was never an issue with First choice as you sat in an exit, the seats are narrower because of the table in the arm rest but you had space in front of you to stretch your legs. This time it was Thomsonfly, £50 each for leg room seats, we boarded our flight and sat in our seats, we had the toilet bulkhead wall in front of us so no room to move your feet, let alone stretch out your legs. My wife is only small 5ft 4 but even she said it felt cramped, we questioned the stewardess and she said they were sold as leg room seats. Once the plane had boarded she moved us into normal seats, these had more room, she advised us to make a complaint in resort, which we did.
The resort rep advised us to make a complaint on our return to the UK, this we did by completing the on flight questionaire, the website complaint form and also by letter. You guessed it! we did not get a response. I have spent the past few days trying to get a response, today I finally got an offer of £50, this is not the point, first of all it cost us £100 but it is more the point of mis leading people. Apparentely the brochure says leg room seats do not have a seat in front of them, it does not say there is a wall there.
On the return journey we had row 1, another bulkhead wall + the galley, also we had a very old couple sat next to us who had to be brought in through the front doors using a special lift, they were not very mobile at all. This is not a dig at them but I have always been under the immpression that you had to be fully mobile and able to help in an emergency if you sat near the exits. Are rules being bent to suit and are they mis-advertising / mis selling, Iam not happy with the outcome, can someone please advise me who to contact next, sorry for the rant
I know how you feel as this happened to us with Jet2 in July on our holiday to the Algarve. There were 3 of us and we persevered on the way out but on the way back we complained to the steward who moved us to the row behind which didn't have the bulk head. I totally agree with you that those 'wall' seats are worse for leg room space than ordinary seats as you can't stretch your legs at all. At least with the standard seats you can put your feet under the seat in front.
Air Asia X have since sent a questionnaire email and I have 'let them have it' as there were other issues with them. I don't suppose I'll hear from them.
Cheers Geri
If they sell "extra legroom" seats that actually have less leg room I'm pretty sure there's a basic breach of contract there!
But your point about the elderly couple is much more important. I raised a thread on this topic a few weeks ago because I'd seen the same thing on a flight. If you are on the front row where the attendent sits facing you in tip up seats by the door for take off and landing it seems to be OK to let anyone use those seats but if these were mid way seats with no attendent then you are right, people on that row should be able bodied and capable of opening the exit in their own.
For the problem of them taking money off you and not providing what you paid for you should consult your local Trading Standards office (or Consumer Direct). If they did put unsuitable people on a "self service" emergency exit row then have a word with the CAA.
Strictly speaking they are right in saying that there are no seats in front. That'll be there get out clause I guess.
Mark
Thank you for all the replies, It's time the airlines listened to there customers, we have used First choice several times and in the main have been happy. Because of all the mergers it's like they have the monopoly, we could change companies but a lot of them are subsiduries of the big companies.
Internationally your seat pitch is measured from the back of your seat where your bum goes to the furthest point directly in front(where your knee's would be) If you get a tape measure this distance is further on row 1/17 than it is row 8 for example. These seats are not ideal for streching out in as your feet have no where to go.
It is not fair to blame Thomson as they are following international standards, Virgin Atlantic do exactly the same to name only one. The reason it never happened with First Choice is that the aircraft they use on Egyptian routes predominantly have all their extra space/legroom seats at doors(757) Thomson use high density 767 with a differing specification. Thomson also charge more for the three true extra "legroom" seats onboard the aircraft you use, which they offer first then reduce the price and offer those that you got.
To answer your question about the additional passengers bought on with assistance, only doors with no cabin crew present or designated cross over points in an emergency have restrictions on seating. The exits by row 1 has the galley as the emergency cross over point.
You obviously work for them! I booked this holiday in june 2008 at the time it was still First Choice, I believe we received a letter in Nov 08 saying the 2 had merged but there were no changes to the booking, wrong, you yourself say the different aircraft have different seat configurations. My booking invoice says extra legroom seats, not extra space seats which is a very clever ploy by Thomsonfly. Prior to my September holiday I have flown this route with FC 7 times, each time booking extra legroom seats & that is exactly what I got.
Thomsonfly should have contacted me, and told me about there little play on words and let me make the choice of flying in standard seats or the smaller extra space seats, they did not, so they misled me. I now know that It is not worth booking those seats as anyone with long legs will suffer, I hope people read this and at least they are forewarned and hopefully wont part with there money.
Finally, in this age of discrimination, why do airlines discriminate against tall people and get away with it, why should we have to pay more just because we have long legs/bodies, we should be given decent sized seats to start with!
My husband is 6'6" and has a 36" inside leg. He has problems with seating plus he's had a pulmonary embolism so he is supposed to be able to move about. He can just about squeeze into the standard pitch seats but can't stretch his legs under the sat in front, due to the fact his legs are touching the seat in front all the way down. He actually pefers bulkhead seats because he gets a bit of extra room.
This is made worse by me being a nervous flyer who has a doctors note stating that I require a window seat near the front of the plane. (Unless I'm well infront of the engines there is problems ). Exit seats are a no no for me. Poor guy has to sit in the middle seat just so I don't turn into a jibbering wreck.
I do sympathise with you but even if FC and Thomsons hadn't merged, your plane might have been changed and you still might not have got the seats you thought you would.
Finally, in this age of discrimination, why do airlines discriminate against tall people and get away with it, why should we have to pay more just because we have long legs/bodies, we should be given decent sized seats to start with!
There is no discrimination at all, it is just that aircraft (and also cars) are designed for the average sized person, whatever dimensions they are. An aircraft designed for 6' 6"-ers would have fewer seats and the price of air tickets would be far higher. An aisle seat is a great help I would think and there are plenty of those.
If people buy extra legroom seats they should either get them or have the money immediately refunded. However I can quite understand that with aircraft changes and different configurations they cannot always be guaranteed.
What I complain about is allowing 25 stone plus porkers occupy a single seat and encroach on those sitting on both sides, causing discomfort and on occasion actual injury. If people can't fit in a standard single seat bulk-wise they should be made to buy two, and if they don't declare this requirement when purchasing tickets they should not be allowed to board.
If I was a pilot and someone brought to my attention a doctor's note insisting that they have a window seat near the front of the aircraft, I would consider them unfit to fly on the grounds of safety, something on which the pilot has the last say.
Peter
You're going to get into trouble for that! And I agree with you completely! So before the abuse starts I'll widen the target. I'd say that if YOU know that YOU have a health issue or disablity and YOU suspect the plane/train/donkey cart/etc.. won't be suitable then YOU shouldn't buy a ticket in the first place. It's all very well complaining about discrimination (when it is true) but to put yourself in a possibly dangerous situation is just being pig headed. I don't understand the people on this board who, if they are to be believed, are deliberately risking their own health/life in order to get a cheap package holiday.
If you believe that there has been discrimination in contravention of the various legal protection there is action you can take -bearing in mind that these laws define discrimination and don't just cover everything that doesn't suit you. But if you knowingly buy something "unsuitable" and use it then you have shot down your own case.
And this thread is going way off topic because it was started by someone who had bought extra leg room for comfort and wasn't supplied with it - a simple matter of either dodgy trading practices or breach of contract.
There is no discrimination at all, it is just that aircraft (and also cars) are designed for the average sized person
A problem within the motor industry for many years. When seat belts became compulsory we had a case where someone could not fasten his due to his size. He was very much overweight and we actually quoted the company for a seat belt to be custom made. Not cheap either as they have to comply with very strict regulations. His company sorted it out by telling him that he must lose weight - or his job.
There are "legal" extensions that can be obtained for seat belt assemblies but these are normally only supplied for people with disabilities.The ones I supplied extended the buckle upwards.
fwh
And this thread is going way off topic because it was started by someone who had bought extra leg room for comfort and wasn't supplied with it - a simple matter of either dodgy trading practices or breach of contract.
I think that on this forum some of the tangents we go off on can have real value, and agree with you that if you buy something you should get it, whilst understanding that there can be genuine reasons why it is not always possible. In which case a prompt refund should be in order.
You're going to get into trouble for that!
More then likely, but some things need to be said. Let us face it, the masses can afford flights to the other side of the world because of the economy of scale and compromise on comfort. But for most that means cattle class, be it scheduled or charter.
If you want the bells and whistles you have to pay for it in first class seats/business/club, whatever they call them, which usually means scheduled flights and costs a bomb. Even then you might not get what you want, unless you charter a whole aircraft.
People who for whatever reason, psychological or physical, have medical conditions likely to cause injury or death or other problems from or during flying, shouldn't do it.
They'll get one hell of a shock when things go wrong and they find their insurance doesn't cover them.
It's a decision my wife and I have had to make, and we don't fly any more.
At least I'm preaching what I practice.
Peter
There are "legal" extensions that can be obtained for seat belt assemblies
There are also extensions to aircraft seat belts, but if grossly obese persons overflow into other passengers seat spaces they should only be allowed to fly if they pre-purchase additional seats.
And while I'm at it all children should have a seat of their own, single seats are not big enough for a parent and child, especially if you have to sit next to them!
Peter
I admit I am a fattie....but have noticed really big people in the check in queue....and thought please dont let them be next to me.
The airline have no way of knowing till people turn up how big they are.
A sensible solution would be to charge for excess body weight...similar to excess lugage weight...a reasonable limit should be set after which you pay extra....say 18 st....there could be an oportunity when booking to purchase an extra seat at reduced cost...
I know were ok in the seats at 15st....and class myself as a fattie....but think its wrong to ruin a fellow passengers flight by robbing him of his rightful seat area he has paid for....and with the consent of the airline and flight crew
I think I'll be in deep water over this
ps......height is a different thing ...you are born to be tall and cant shorten your legs....us fatties can diet though and change things for the better If we wish
This topic is really going off but there are some very interesting viewpoints.
And while I'm at it all children should have a seat of their own, single seats are not big enough for a parent and child, especially if you have to sit next to them!
Of all the comments this is probably the most important. If the current practice was so safe then you might have them on your knee whilst driving.
fwh
Ok folks lets get back to the original topic.
Post a Reply
Please sign in or register an account to reply to this post.
Similar Topics
-
Thomsonfly/First Choice Checkin Larnaca
Posted by qatarman in Flight Only / Airline and Airports
-
Just a rant!!
Posted by Helen T in General Holiday Enquiries, Hints and Tips
-
No Smoking and a bit of a rant - sorry
Posted by kazd in Algarve/Portugal/Madeira/Azores Discussion Forum
-
misc rant from me
Posted by khizman in General Holiday Enquiries, Hints and Tips
-
Child age and room occupancy rant
Posted by adisgirl99 in Spain - Costa Dorada Discussion Forums