Simple - the show WANTS you to see that the cutoff time is inviolate. Anyone watching the show is then very aware of their tight restrictions.

I think it is about time that there were restrictions on these practices. There is nothing wrong with having strict terms as long as they are reasonable.

45 minutes prior to a domestic departure with no baggage? Is that reasonable? These restrictions have NOTHING to do with preventing delayed flights at all. If it was 30 minutes with baggage, I might just be inclined to believe it.

To prevent delayed flights the key is when a person is at the BOARDING LOUNGE, not the checkin. If they were serious they would have a "holding pen", like in Singapore, and close access to it 5 minutes prior to departure.

How about for my flight where the Qantas and Melbourne Airport websites showed it as delayed, however the Jetstar website showed it on time? I called the airline, who confirmed it was recheduled for 4 hours later, however checkin would be closing based on the original scheduled departure time, and I would lose my fare if I wasn't there?

That is a completely UNREASONABLE demand by an airline,
and it is time that there was a reasonable level of scrutiny by an external body.

I've flown with easyJet on a number of occasions and found the staff neither rude nor unreasonable. Quite pleasant in fact.

I've never gone through Luton but Stansted is no fuss at all... the Stansted Express operates from a station within the terminal to Liverpool Street in London. Goes every 15 minutes and takes 3/4 of an hour. Stansted as a whole is a very easy airport to go through.

Stansted is very easy BUT very expensive to get to. Often the rail fare to STN is multiple times the price of the air ticket!

I haven't been to Luton either, but i hear it's even worse (expensive and a long way away)

Also, I've never understood why there isn't decent public transport connections to cater for those passengers leaving on 6am flights who might need to be at the airport before 5am. Surely a bus service at the least could operate (or perhaps it does now? never used to).

Probably because they are too scared to book with Tiger after seeing the catastrophe on air and have booked elsewhere.

How much say does Tiger have in the final editing of the show?

Personally, if you book with a low cost airline and you do not prepare yourself to arrive with plenty of time to check in, then bad luck.

But if you arrive with plently of time and you are actually in the check in queue prior to the cut off time, then you should be processed as you have made the effort to arrive prior to cut off.

Just saw on the BBC news that Ryanair had issues at Stanstead this weekend. Apparently 700 people 'missed' their flights despite arriving in plenty of time all because the airlines agent (Swissport) didn't have enough staff to process everyone.

So lots of people have missed their holiday and Ryanairs attitude seems to be "if you checked in on-line and had no bags you would have been on the flight".

Great isn't it. Now I know the majors have staffing issues too, but at least when the problem is caused by their issues they try their hardest to look after you, not tell you to go home and try again another day.

So what's the answer then? LCC's specifically appeal to people/families, normally when they are going on holidays, so for an airline to say as in the post above "if you checked in on-line and had no bags you would have been on the flight" is pathetic, as is for people who arrived on time only to miss their flight because the airline couldn't check them in.

Do we boycott or regulate? All airlines have genuine issues at times, but so few, including the big ones, actually show the slightest care for good customer service outside the aircraft, that I don't think you could "fairly" boycott one and not all.

Government regulation appears to be the only real answer. They've had decades to self regulate and not done anything. Change the access to the check in area in some way so you can determine correctly who arrived in time, and you're not allowed leave without them. Perhaps some sort of rebate to airlines for flights that arrive on time (once had a flight from Melb to CBR depart 20 mins late & arrive only 5 late!)

It's good that the Airlines TV show is showing the disgusting behaviour of some passengers, drunk, arriving late, sleeping through the call etc, but the airlines have allot of disgusting behaviour to answer for as well. And I don't think they will without being forced to.

Stephen unfortunately with just about every industry nothing changes unless they are forced to. The LCC airlines will probably be no different.

Personally I have flown with both DJ and JQ and have found both to be quite good experiences. The only reason I fly JQ now over DJ is that my ears seem to fare alot better on the A320 as opposed to the B737.

That's why I started the post

It is so nauseating listening daily to complaints on talk-back radio.

People are getting sick of it

Hi Ash,

I would bemoan any carrier who did not accept me in this instance, not just LLC. The issue is staffing. If there is enough staff to process what was a full flight with special needs (large group), in a timely manner to ensure all pax who did turn up on time are processed, then there is no argument.

If you turn up late, then that is the pax issue. I have absolutely no issue with that. Pax need to read the little box that says I AGREE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS before they click the magic button.

The issue is who is responsible for the check in delay. If it is the pax who has not allowing enough time, tough. if it is the carrier then that is their problem to resolve, and not the fault of the pax. There was another counter open, but they would not accept my checkin, despite my complaints regarding the group in front.

Nick, my issue is not about bending over backwards, its about meeting the obligations of travel as per T/cs and almost being denied boarding due to lack of staff. (PS btw I am not precious). The reply I got to my written complaint (which was fair and polite) agreed with my sentiments, and agreed that the second counter should have made some attempt to resolve the delays. There was no 'last call'. It also agreed with my point that the check in staff should have made her supervisor aware of the potential issue when she was told she had 70+ in one group to check in, and they should have organised another staff member to process pax not part of that group.

On the fares issue, I do think that the paid fees should be transferable, however the pax should pay the balance between what they have paid, and the purchase now price of the seat on the next flight.

The morale of the story is get there very early,and you should not have an issue missing your flight.