Is it suspected of price gouging if the air tickets sold on the online travel platform are 45 yuan more expensive than those sold by the airlines? A third-year student at East China University of Political Science and Law recently announced the verdict in the case of Ctrip.com's fraudulent sale of air tickets, and he lost the case as a consumer. The court of first instance held that when the defendant provided the booking service to the plaintiff, it had shown the plaintiff the price of the ticket involved in the case on the ticket booking page, and the price was consistent with the amount of the ticket itinerary, and there was no act of deliberately concealing the true situation, and the plaintiff's claim was not supported.
Although he lost the lawsuit in the first battle, he felt that he had realized the public welfare value of the lawsuit. "During the trial, the other party directly stated that 'the difference between the price of the ticket involved in the case sold on the platform and the reserve price of the airline is the defendant's profit', and it was written into the judgment. This subverts the general perception of travel platforms by the public, and everyone generally thinks that travel platforms are just a collection of air tickets and will not increase prices, but in fact, they are not. In the future, when consumers choose air tickets, it will be more affordable and beneficial to consumers to choose airline tickets sold directly. The conversation said. This is Tanzhong's participation in the 10th "Small Town Cup" Public Welfare Star Creative Litigation Competition as a project of the "Have You Fly Today" team, and it is also the first time he has participated in litigation practice.
01 Originated from a journey
On December 14, 2023, Tanzhong booked two Juneyao Airlines one-way tickets from Hong Kong to Shanghai through Ctrip and paid 1,724 yuan, so he asked Juneyao Airlines for an electronic itinerary, showing that the ticket price was 817 yuan/person, while Ctrip.com showed 862 yuan/person, with a price difference of 45 yuan.
According to the further comparison of the price composition of the two itinerary receipts, it was found that the types and amounts of taxes and fees stated in the two itinerary receipts were the same, and the difference was in the base price of the air ticket, that is, the same ticket Ctrip Travel Network was 45 yuan more expensive. Through online searches, it was found that the problem of air fare difference is widespread, and although many passengers are deeply disturbed, it is very difficult to protect their rights. During the conversation, it was believed that there was fraud on the travel network, so he sued the court, requesting a refund of the price difference and corresponding compensation. The case was filed in the Changning District People's Court on May 10, 2024.
02 "Compete" with big factories
During the trial, Ctrip argued that the fare displayed was consistent with the actual price paid by the plaintiff, and the amount shown in the "Air Transport E-ticket Itinerary" issued by TravelSky was also consistent with the amount actually paid by the plaintiff, so the defendant did not commit fraud.
Ctrip stated that the price of international flights was not exclusive to the defendant, and that other platforms could sell them at different prices, and that the plaintiff could choose by himself after comparing prices, and that the defendant did not conceal the price, promised that the price was the same as that of the airline, and did not inform the plaintiff that its price was the lowest price, so there was no misleading behavior towards the plaintiff.
At the same time, Ctrip pointed out that consumers have the right to know, but the platform is not obliged to disclose the airline's reserve price to them. The difference between the price of the ticket involved in the case sold on the platform and the reserve price of the airline is the defendant's profit, and the defendant's act for the purpose of profit does not violate any laws and regulations. Therefore, Ctrip believes that there was no fault or fraud in the process of booking the air ticket in question.
The court held that the focus of the dispute in the case was whether the defendant had committed fraud in the process of performing the reservation service contract involved in the case, whether the defendant had concealed the true situation from the plaintiff, whether there was subjective intention, and whether the act caused the plaintiff to fall into a misunderstanding and then make a wrong expression of intent. However, when the defendant provided the booking service to the plaintiff, it had shown the plaintiff the ticket price on the ticket booking page, which was consistent with the amount stated in the "Air Transport Electronic Ticket Itinerary" issued by TravelSky, and there was no deliberate concealment of the true situation, so the plaintiff's claim was dismissed.
03Unexpected realization of public welfare value
During the review, it was found that in response to the price of air tickets, in April 2023, Chen Linan, director of Ctrip's public affairs department, made it clear in an interview that Ctrip's profit method for selling air tickets is to collect commissions from airlines, rather than earning the price difference from consumers. In July this year, Huang Yuanpu, the founder of Yiou, questioned the pricing mechanism of Ctrip's air tickets, to which Ctrip's headquarters gave a response that "the price of air tickets is adjusted by airlines in real time according to market demand, and Ctrip, as a sales channel, does not directly set prices".
"From this point of view, Ctrip's recognition of the industry profit mechanism for air ticket sales is by no means a contradiction between the price increase of air ticket sales and the defense in this case." In fact, Ctrip can list the handling fee, service fee and other content to charge a certain fee, so as to make the consumer price more transparent, rather than simply and rudely directly increasing the reserve price of the ticket on the itinerary, thus causing misunderstanding among consumers.
Text: Chen Feiqian
Photo: Courtesy of the interviewee
Editor: Wang Hongxia