Passenger video leads to scathing ruling by a judge against Air Transat

Adrian Ghobrial has more on an Ontario couple’s cautionary tale for travellers after being denied boarding by Air Transat on their return flight to Toronto.

An Ontario couple’s decision to record video of their negative interaction with an Air Transat attendant has been applauded in a recent, scathing decision by an Ontario judge.

On March 31, 2024, husband and wife Midhun Haridas and Parvathy Radhakrishnan Nair arrived at the Dominican Republic’s Punta Cana International Airport, on time, to check-in for their direct flight home to Toronto.

The couple were wrapping up their first vacation away as husband and wife. “It was so fun, except the last day, that was not so fun,” recalls Radhakrishnan Nair.

That’s because, when they arrived at the airport on the final day of their vacation, they say they were spoken down to by an Air Transat agent who refused to check them in for their flight unless the couple erased video they had taken of their poor customer service experience.

At the time, Radhakrishnan Nair was travelling with only an Indian passport and a Canadian work permit. She says her husband asked an Air Transat agent if there was a specific line he and his wife should stand in since she was returning to Canada without a Canadian passport.

The family says they were told to move aside to a separate line and then abruptly instructed to stand behind a red line. A short while later, they say they were told they were standing in the family check-in line and directed to another line, so they moved. Haridas then says an Air Transat Supervisor began raising his voice.

“When he didn’t stop yelling at my wife, I intervened and said, ‘we need to stop shouting.’ He didn’t like that. Immediately, he said, ‘I’m not going to allow you to check-in.’ He then instructed his staff to not allow us to check-in,” says Haridas.

At that moment, a crucial decision was made: “When he didn’t allow us to check-in, and he allowed everyone else to check-in, that’s when I began taking videos,” notes Haridas.

‘Delete all pictures’

In the video, you can hear Haridas speaking to a female Air Transat attendant at the check-in counter.

“Here are our passports. Can you tell us why we’re not being allowed to board?” The airline employee looks on and doesn’t say a word.

In a separate video, a male Air Transat employee who Haridas had identified as the check-in manager asks the couple for their passports. The agent then says, “I need you to delete all pictures and all video (to be allowed) for check-in.” When Haridas refuses, the agent hands the passports back.

When Radhakrishnan Nair tries to plead her case, the Air Transat agent in the video points at her and quickly tells her to be quiet. “Delete all information with me in your cellphone,” demands the agent.

The couple continue to try and plead their case in the video saying, “We just want to go home. We have a ticket we were denied boarding for no reason. You were rude to my wife,” replies Haridas.

“It is a form of extortion or blackmail essentially. An airline employee had no right to tell the passenger that, ‘I’m only going to check you in if you erase the video.’ That is absolutely unacceptable and has no basis in law,” says Air Passenger Rights President Gabor Lukacs.

The couple were never allowed to check-in for their flight; they had to walk over to an Air Canada agent and purchase an expensive last minute ticket home to Toronto with a layover in Ottawa.

Haridas and Radhakrishnan Nair decided to take their case to small claims court. In a court decision handed down in June, Justice Marcel Mongeon found Air Transat’s conduct to be “effectively egregious.”

Judge issues scathing ruling

In his written ruling, Justice Mongeon wrote, “Thank goodness” Haridas took video, “so that I can actually see how terrible the customer service that he received at the hands of the defendant corporation was.”

“Audio and video recordings when you have a dispute with an airline, or any other powerful large corporation, are essential to establish to the court that it is not simply your word that you were wronged, but that the judge can actually see with their own eyes what you had to experience as a customer,” says Lukacs.

In its defence, Air Transat claimed the couple were a safety concern. The judge didn’t buy the airlines argument.

“If safety was a concern, legitimately, then why when the (check-in) manager says, ‘Delete the videos from your camera and we’ll let you board the flight,’ they were no longer a concern?

“Similarly, if Mr. Haridas and Ms. Radhakrishnan Nair were such safety concerns, why did Air Canada quietly check them in for a flight to Ottawa a few hours later?” wrote Justice Mongeon.

The couple believe their story is an important one for Canadian consumers. “As a passenger, you should know your rights,” says Radhakrishnan Nair.

“In any kind of conflict, we need to have proof of what took place,” notes Haridas, who goes onto share that, “When airlines deny a passenger compensation and deny you of your rights, most people don’t know they can fight this out in small claims court, which in my experience is better than going to the Canadian Transportation Agency.”

The ruling found that the passengers “were denied the ability to check-in for the flight. At no time were they given a reason for that,” wrote Justice Mongeon who awarded the couple $7,000 in damages.

Air Transat has paid the couple. In the airline’s final email to the couple, an Air Transat representative congratulated them on their “victory.”

Lukacs believe this ruling is a big victory for consumers.

“It’s long overdue,” says Lukacs who adds that “you have a right as a consumer to document evidence and take video in a public place like an airport to ensure that when you are being wronged, you will have evidence.”

CTV News reached out to Air Transat requesting their reaction to the small claims court ruling. In an email an Air Transat spokesperson wrote “we acknowledge that a judgment has been rendered in this matter and we confirm that we have complied. We will not be commenting any further.”