Is the taxpayer paying for AirAsia’s marketing costs?

I received an email from AirAsia recently, proclaiming “No Airport Tax”.

Quite ironic, considering that Prime Minister and Finance Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak on June 23 in a written reply to Wee Choo Keong (Wangsa Maju – PKR) said Malaysia Airports is negotiating with AirAsia on RM65m of airport taxes that Air Asia owes. “Drastic action cannot be applied … on AirAsia as it would affect the operations at the low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) and cause a negative result on MAHB as operator and manager of the airport.”

Subsequently, the Edge Daily on June 25th reported the government had appointed a consultant to find a middle path in the dispute between AirAsia and Malaysia Airports. Another consultant? Why? PM Najib has confirmed AirAsia is in arrears to the tune of RM65m.

What is there to discuss? Airlines collect airport tax from passengers just like your restaurant charges you the 5% government service tax. It is a tax collected by the private sector on behalf of the government. The Customs and Excise department quite rightly goes after restaurants and other businesses who charge that 5% but don’t remit the sum to the government. No negotiations. You remit what you collected. Why the special treatment for AirAsia? Its passengers had all paid the airport tax when booking their flights. It is money that they believed was going to the airport, not to AirAsia.

Now Air Asia is offering a “No Airport Tax” promotion. Is AirAsia really absorbing the airport tax? Or is it going to tell Malaysia Airports later on that it cannot afford to pay? In which case, this promotion is being sponsored by the taxpayer!

Air Asia already benefits from extremely one-sided contract terms which are unfair to consumers. Let’s not add taxpayer support .

Maxis is guilty of fraud

I was going to give you more on the PKFZ scandal, but had to waste countless hours since Saturday dealing with Max-sick and its clueless “technical support” personnel.

Yup, my Max-sick broadband is on the blink again. The problems started Friday, but I was still able to get a steady, albeit slow connection via EDGE technology. On Saturday, the line kept dropping. By Monday evening, Max-sick was dead. Cue countless calls to Max-sick's “customer service” and a home visit by an unskilled vendor who insisted it was a modem problem when I was 1000% sure it wasn't. True enough, he changed the modem and still there's no service.

Finally, yesterday (Tuesday) evening, someone called and said Max-sick had “escalated my problem up to the engineering team”. What? I had complained on Saturday!!! It takes them THREE days to “escalate” the problem? Whatever happened to service integrity? Internet connection is a necessity nowadays. I rely on it to work and earn income. No internet = pissed off customers and lost opportunities. Yet when I asked Max-sick if they are at least going to waive my monthly fee, they said “they have to close the file first”, whatever that means.

Maxis is guilty of fraud. It is charging for a service (broadband) which it is not delivering. It's like a travel agent selling you a 5-star holiday package including accommodation at the Shangri-la, but dumping you into Rumah Tumpangan Ah Fatt instead. Actually it's worse than that. Maxis is not delivering ANY service at all. So, Maxis charges us for 5-star hotels but leaves us sleeping in the streets. In the meantime, it has the gall to continue aggressively selling Broadband packages. I know because I was accosted yesterday evening by yet another Maxis vendor! Needless to say, I gave him a piece of my mind, telling him he was selling a non-existent service.

But we consumers are powerless. There is no choice. Streamyx is equally bad, and I doubt that Celcom Broadband can outperform its sister company. In a situation like this, it is the regulator that has to protect the consumer against rapacious large companies.

So, where is our regulator? Incompetent like much of the Barisan Nasional government. Sigh. Next elections are so far away. In the meantime, we are stuck with a government that the majority of peninsular Malaysians did not vote for. Please, fellow citizens in Sabah and Sarawak – next elections help us kick out this useless administration.

And in case you're wondering, I had to drive out, incurring petrol and parking expense and spending unnecessary time, to find a place with wi-fi so I could upload this.

Air Asia says: We'll take your money, even if we chuck you off the plane

I recently booked an Air Asia flight/holiday. The email confirmation sent by Air Asia did not carry sufficient details. You know Air Asia imposes a variety of charges. Air Asia's marketing speak calls it 'consumer choice' – you pay only for what you want. I think there's a fine-line between consumer choice and price gouging which Air Asia has crossed, but that's a different story.

Anyway, I went to Air Asia' Terms and Conditions of Carriage to see if check-in luggage was also a 'consumer choice' item or already included in the fare.

That's when I came across this very unfair clause:

“6.1.3 Unavailability of Seat: There is a chance a seat may not be available for you on your flight even if your booking is confirmed. This is due to the common practice in the airline industry of overbooking. In the event of such unavailability of seat, we shall at our option, either:
* carry you at the earliest opportunity on another of our scheduled services on which space is available without additional charge and, where necessary, extend the validity of your booking; or
* should you choose to travel at another time, retain the value of your fare in a credit account for your future travel provided that you must re-book within three (3) months therefrom.”

Yes, overbooking is a common airline practice. But common airline practice, in the event that they do have to off-load passengers is to 1) ask for volunteers; 2) compensate the volunteers via cash payments and seat upgrades on the next available flight or3) even cash payments on top of full refunds of their airfares.

Air Asia's terms are extremely unfair. You, the customer who has already paid, will not get the flight you want. On top of that, you can't even get a refund! It's Air Asia's choice to put you on a later flight (too bad if it means the meeting you were going for would have already ended) or give you credit for another flight, which is valid for only 3 months! (too bad if you can't get leave again). No cash refund for you, even though it is Air Asia that is not delivering on its contractual obligation.

OK, some will say, if you hate it that much, then don't fly Air Asia. You have a choice not to fly Air Asia. But there are also grounds for government to step in here and legislate in the event businesses take undue advantage of small consumers. I remember an Unfair Contract Terms Act in the UK governing this. Any lawyers here to add more colour on this subject?