Maleth Aero - The One Show

[Megabear2]

Following on from the fiasco, this makes interesting reading:

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2cQxlcT6ZKFW5TPvCDjfcLt/maleth-aero-p-o-carnival-ror-june-2024

 

[Thejuggler]

Not good for Maleth to wash laundry in public.

 

As I suspected it appears they don't have the money to pay the compensation, or deliberately delaying in the hope people get bored trying to claim,

 

Contract dusputes between them and Carnival are of no concern to passengers and could take years to resolve,

[molecrochip]

There is no reason for P&O not to have required food and drink service as they do it with Tui.

 

I said months ago there had been a breech of contract by Maleth not providing the required services. Essentially, P&O have refused to pay for what wasn’t delivered, and believe they are due monies back.

 

Remember that these planes, whilst old, were new to Maleth. To me it suggests P&O entered into a contract for a plane with IFE but then Maleth acquired/received planes without or did not have time/money to refurbish them. I also suspect that P&O were expecting the planes with the premium cabin but in August 2023, found out they weren’t getting those particular planes.

 

But other posters on here are correct, it appears that if Maleth aren’t paid in full by P&O then they don’t have the funds to compensate passengers. The escrow argument is daft. P&O put money in which is paid out as compensation. P&O win legal tussle and turn to escrow to get their money back and it’s empty.

 

At least Maleth now acknowledge that it’s their responsibility to do so.

[molecrochip]

I’ve come back to this tonight as I know a lot of people feel let down.

 

I hope the recent statement, which I personally believe is true based on my own interactions, shows that P&O were as caught out by Maleth as the passengers were.

 

The worldwide shortage of charter planes and crew led P&O to Maleth but it’s now clear that Maleth were not capable of fulfilling the contract that they entered into.

 

I’ve always said that the delay compensation is due direct from the airline and the CAA agree.

 

All said, P&O did a bad job of managing Maleth. When incidents occurred, P&Os contract staff fled the scene. Maleth ground crew never existed in the first place.
 

For most flights, the delay compensation is enough. £520 for a delay over 4 hrs more than compensates for a lost evening on board. Odd exceptions on those flights should be looked at. I would however like to see some FCC compensation for certain flights such as the ones where passengers spent 8 hours effectively locked in the Antigua departure lounge with no food/drink facilities.

[Megabear2]

12 hours ago, molecrochip said:

I’ve come back to this tonight as I know a lot of people feel let down.

 

I hope the recent statement, which I personally believe is true based on my own interactions, shows that P&O were as caught out by Maleth as the passengers were.

 

The worldwide shortage of charter planes and crew led P&O to Maleth but it’s now clear that Maleth were not capable of fulfilling the contract that they entered into.

 

I’ve always said that the delay compensation is due direct from the airline and the CAA agree.

 

All said, P&O did a bad job of managing Maleth. When incidents occurred, P&Os contract staff fled the scene. Maleth ground crew never existed in the first place.
 

For most flights, the delay compensation is enough. £520 for a delay over 4 hrs more than compensates for a lost evening on board. Odd exceptions on those flights should be looked at. I would however like to see some FCC compensation for certain flights such as the ones where passengers spent 8 hours effectively locked in the Antigua departure lounge with no food/drink facilities.

Unfortunately as I see it rather than waiting for distraught passengers to contact the BBC Watchdog P&O should not have been burying their heads in the sand and hoping it would go away.  There have been numerous passengers seeking clarity and advice yet the stance has apparently been to ignore them and say nothing to do with us.

 

I find it very difficult to believe P&O could not have given those people some sort of statement about the situation to at least explain they are involved in legal action with Maleth and as such their hands were tied.

 

I'm also rather surprised at the due diligence carried out that the airline was actually viable and able to honour any legal obligations it might incur in the event of problems for passengers.  Although £500,000 for those five badly affected flights sounds a large amount, at the end of the day an airline should be solvent enough to meet a legal obligation.  This contract with Maleth really does sound like "flying by the seat of the pants" stuff and the poor passengers appear to be the unaware victims of a panic by P&O based on oh God what are we going to fly the passengers out on?

 

No matter how it's dressed up it's a very poor show all round.

Edited June 14 by Megabear2

[9265359]

12 hours ago, molecrochip said:

I’ve always said that the delay compensation is due direct from the airline and the CAA agree.

 

Assuming the airline

1. actually has the money to pay; and

2. even if it does have the money is willing to pay.

 

Good luck to anyone trying to get money from an airline with no physical presence in the UK who can't / doesn't want to pay.

 

12 hours ago, molecrochip said:

The worldwide shortage of charter planes and crew led P&O to Maleth but it’s now clear that Maleth were not capable of fulfilling the contract that they entered into.

 

Perhaps P&O should have thought a little bit harder about that before they hired a tiny two-bit airline to fulfil this contract, and the implications for their customers getting flight compensation from a non-UK airline with damn all in assets.

 

Legally, P&O may be the clear, but morally and reputation-wise...

 

3 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Although £500,000 for those five badly affected flights sounds a large amount, at the end of the day an airline should be solvent enough to meet a legal obligation.

 

A 51% stake in Maleth Aero Limited was sold in December 2020 for £800k.

 

I doubt a company that is worth around £1.6m has £500k in cash sitting around with no other call on it other than to hand over as compensation.

[Megabear2]

1 minute ago, 9265359 said:

 

A 51% stake in Maleth Aero Limited was sold in December 2020 for £800k.

 

I doubt a company that is worth around £1.6m has £500k in cash sitting around with no other call on it other than to hand over as compensation.

Exactly the point I was making about poor due diligence.  If you can provide that information why on earth could P&O's legal team not see the risk?  We are only speaking about five flights but there could have been considerably more as a lot were only a little under the three hours with their delays.

[9265359]

1 minute ago, Megabear2 said:

why on earth could P&O's legal team not see the risk

 

Because it isn't P&O's legal risk!

 

If P&O legal were asked for an opinion then their answer would most likely have been that any flight delay compensation is down to the airline and it is not a legal matter for P&O.

 

It was a management decision not a legal decision.

 

It is obvious that P&O were between a rock and a hard place - ships due to sail a Caribbean season with thousands of passengers who have booked and paid, but no airline to fly them there.

 

P&O operations needed flights and Maleth Aero were the only ones available to do it.

 

P&O had two options - 

 

1. Cancel all the planned sailings and try to do something else with the ships; or

2. Hire Maleth Aero and cross their fingers and if it didn't go well say "not our problem".

 

They decided on option 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Megabear2]

11 minutes ago, 9265359 said:

Because it isn't P&O's legal risk!

 

If P&O legal were asked for an opinion then their answer would most likely have been that any flight delay compensation is down to the airline and it is not a legal matter for P&O.

Very technical but any lawyer worth their salt should have been aware of the need to ensure the P&O brand was protected from bad publicity by association.  The furore that erupted on announcement of one class no entertainment aircraft did a lot of damage to the brand including with the travel agents. Now it's looking very likely the passengers will not even get the compensation they are legally due and P&O are able to sit on their hands saying nothing to do with us guv and yet they made a corporate decision to knowingly take that risk on their passengers' behalf.  If you're correct it's just very shabby.

Edited June 14 by Megabear2

[AchileLauro]

31 minutes ago, 9265359 said:

 

Because it isn't P&O's legal risk!

 

If P&O legal were asked for an opinion then their answer would most likely have been that any flight delay compensation is down to the airline and it is not a legal matter for P&O.

 

It was a management decision not a legal decision.

 

It is obvious that P&O were between a rock and a hard place - ships due to sail a Caribbean season with thousands of passengers who have booked and paid, but no airline to fly them there.

 

P&O operations needed flights and Maleth Aero were the only ones available to do it.

 

P&O had two options - 

 

1. Cancel all the planned sailings and try to do something else with the ships; or

2. Hire Maleth Aero and cross their fingers and if it didn't go well say "not our problem".

 

They decided on option 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Either way P&O were between a rock and a hard place and the brand reputation was going to take a severe knock. 

 

P&O were going to be criticised whichever decision they took.

[Megabear2]

13 minutes ago, AchileLauro said:

Either way P&O were between a rock and a hard place and the brand reputation was going to take a severe knock. 

 

P&O were going to be criticised whichever decision they took.

Just playing devil's advocate here!  So do you think it was the right decision?  If you were one of the thousand or so passengers on those five flights or indeed the more successful ones would you think the gamble paid off or would you expect P&O to back you up, help you and at least apologise they put you in this situation?

[9265359]

36 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Very technical but any lawyer worth their salt should have been aware of the need to ensure the P&O brand was protected from bad publicity by association. 

 

Brand protection is a management issue not a legal issue.

 

37 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

The furore that erupted on announcement of one class no entertainment aircraft did a lot of damage to the brand

 

Did it? I doubt it had any significant impact even over the short term, let alone the medium to long term.

 

Even with the flight compensation (or the lack of), I doubt that it will make the slightest dent in the numbers booking with P&O.

 

1 minute ago, Megabear2 said:

do you think it was the right decision?

 

It was the least bad decision for the company - if it had worked then everything was fine, and if it didn't then not their problem legally.

 

And had they proactively cancelled the Caribbean season on a 'well the aircraft might break down' then the bad publicity from the 'you have ruined my Christmas / life / etc.' stories would have been even worse than this minor hiccup, and that's before you get to all the lost revenue.

[tring]

 

The main cause if the issue regarding appointment of Maleth in my opinion is that P&O advertise and sell fly cruises, inclusive of flights, two or more years in advance.  At that stage they appear to have no idea what airline(s) will be available and at what cost.

 

I do agree that cancelling large numbers of Caribbean fly cruises after they had been on sale for a fair while would have also been a disaster for the company and would have affected many more passengers, who would have been, understandably, livid.  Why were these cruises ever put on sale though?  Perhaps it is time for the release dates for those cruises to be revised.

 

 

Edited June 14 by tring

[Presto2]

Reading all of the above it seemed like Catch 22 for PO and hindsight is always a wonderful thing when it comes to which decisions to make. 

[AchileLauro]

1 hour ago, Megabear2 said:

Just playing devil's advocate here!  So do you think it was the right decision?  If you were one of the thousand or so passengers on those five flights or indeed the more successful ones would you think the gamble paid off or would you expect P&O to back you up, help you and at least apologise they put you in this situation?

I didn't suggest that it was the right decision and I also didn't say that it was the wrong decision either.

Whichever way P&O decided was going to upset an awful lot of their customers. They were simply in a no win situation.

[GINGERWILDCAT]

 A  view from us the paying customers in this case. We paid P&O directly for all our package requirements, flights,  transfers, food etc. At no time during the process did we pay Maleth. P&O made the decision to use Maleth, not us, our contract was with P&O…..

As an aside I would have thought airlines would have insurance to cover such eventualities but obviously not.

[9265359]

1 hour ago, tring said:

Why were these cruises ever put on sale though?  Perhaps it is time for the release dates for those cruises to be revised.

 

If that had been done you would have had people complaining that the cruises were not on sale until summer 2023 when the flights were arranged - and if your suggestion is to contract with the airlines a couple of years in advance, well good luck with that.

 

23 minutes ago, GINGERWILDCAT said:

I would have thought airlines would have insurance to cover such eventualities but obviously not.

 

Most likely they don't because of the cost and because it would be too complex to evidence that the insurable loss was not the company's fault.

 

Decisions on delays are quite often a subjective decision of the aircrew, so would an insurance company pay out if the pilot thought it was too foggy to fly but the insurance company didn't?

 

Then there are the issues of what happens if the delay is due to knock on delays throughout the day, as again there would be questions on whether if things had been done differently with those earlier flights then the insurable delay could have been avoided.

 

And that's before you get to deliberate delays where an aircraft with a lot of passengers on a long flight has gone wrong, but you have another aircraft that is working and is due to take a few passengers on a short run - lots of airlines will choose to 'swap' the aircraft and use the working one to result in the lowest compensation pay out.

[snaefell]

It will of course be quite some years ago that P&O decided to go down the route with 2 such large ships,presumably always planning to use them for fly cruises to the Caribbean.

Since then we have seen the loss of Thomas Cook which must have made a huge hole in the numbers of aircraft available for this,something that I guess is always likely to happen but is difficult if not impossible to plan for.

[Snow Hill]

As US based AELF Flight Services own a majority stake in Maleth Aero, what, if any, responsibility do they have to ensure passengers with legitimate claims are fully compensated under the law? 

[jeanlyon]

7 hours ago, Megabear2 said:

Just playing devil's advocate here!  So do you think it was the right decision?  If you were one of the thousand or so passengers on those five flights or indeed the more successful ones would you think the gamble paid off or would you expect P&O to back you up, help you and at least apologise they put you in this situation?

So they just cancel all their cruises because they have no aircraft seats?  I don't think so do you?

[9265359]

1 hour ago, Snow Hill said:

As US based AELF Flight Services own a majority stake in Maleth Aero, what, if any, responsibility do they have to ensure passengers with legitimate claims are fully compensated under the law? 

 

They have no legal liability for the debts of the company they are shareholders in.

[AndyMichelle]

Just catching up with this thread with interest. 

Some great points being made from both sides of the fence, just how a thread should be. 

I am going to lower the tone though😂

I get sick of this 'not my fault Guvnor' attitude. 

We are seeing it more and more in society and I just can't accept it as an excuse. 

An offer was made and accepted in good faith by the paying customer. 

P&O cannot just pass on liability because the contract was not fulfilled on their behalf. 

What happened to due diligence?

What happened to customer service? 

What happened to common courtesy? 

This 'rock and a hard place' situation should never have been allowed to happen, but when it did, it needed dealing with quickly and effectively by P&O, they took the money... 

Just basic business practice was needed. 

Andy 

 

Edited June 14 by AndyMichelle

[jeanlyon]

But it's not their fault?   they contracted Maleth who didn't provide the full service.  Very difficult to get compensation as they are not a British company.

[molecrochip]

To be brutally clear here: In law, P&O’s responsibility and liability extended to transporting the passengers from one U.K. airport to the Caribbean and back.

 

That happened. The contract was substantively fulfilled.

 

There are reams of legal case law on this point. Even BA has been to court on this point. Everything else is a nice to have.

 

The delay is down to Maleth. Tui pay out when it happens, why should P&O have expected Maleth to not do so. It’s because Maleth don’t have the cash.

1 hour ago, jeanlyon said:

So they just cancel all their cruises because they have no aircraft seats?  I don't think so do you?

 

Yes, I do. The alternative was run to two big ships at significantly reduced capacity.

 

Charter contracts are agreed years in advance. The current short termisum has been because of two things - Thomas Cook stopped operating in September 2019 and Covid.

 

When Thomas Cook stopped operating, Virgin, BA and others stepped in to help using spare capacity in their fleets for the 2019/20 season.

 

Covid hit and wiped out the 2020/21 season at which time, Virgin, BA and others retired a lot of aircraft.

 

For the 2021/22 season there was limited fly-cruise operations with just Tui being needed due to Covid capacity reductions. BA and Virgin assisted as necessary as their networks were not back to capacity.

 

For the 2022/23 season, back to capacity with Arvia joining in January 2023. Tui, Virgin and to a degree BA were contracted.

 

By the 2023/24 season, Virgin and BA were needing all their planes for their own flights. Tui was maxed out. No major operator was in a position to planes. Bear in mind that masses of pilots and cabin crew had been laid off and even some Charter companies had gone bust.

 

Maleth was the only option to cancelling thousands of people’s holidays. Due diligence will have been done. Safety and financial tick. But this was a new operator waiting for planes to arrive when the contract was signed. Most of Maleth’s passenger planes were delivered in the six months leading up to the start of the contract.

[molecrochip]

I personally am sorry that so many are affected.

 

P&O are in the same boat as passengers - they want money back for what wasn’t delivered in the same way passengers want their delay compensation.

 

If the numbers of people wanting to take their first cruise with P&O is true, then this won’t dent their profile. Compared to the ferry fussco, it won’t be a scrape. Any passenger list will be replaced with a new one.

 

Its harsh but it’s the business reality.

 

That said, P&O should have played the heart and minds game better.