Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
flee

MAVCOM Sees 92 per cent Increase in Complaints Received

Recommended Posts

MAVCOM Sees 92 per cent Increase in Complaints Received

Penalty and Compliance Matrix to be implemented


KUALA LUMPUR, 16 OCTOBER 2017 – As part of its ongoing efforts to foster a more consumer-oriented aviation industry in Malaysia, the Malaysian Aviation Commission (MAVCOM) released its second Consumer Report, making it available to industry players and members of the public.


The Report detailed key insights and statistics on complaints lodged with the Commission for the six-month period of March-August 2017. MAVCOM, established in March 2016, earlier this year issued its inaugural Consumer Report which covered complaints statistics for the period March 2016 – February 2017, being its first 12 months of operations. All subsequent Reports will now evaluate complaints on a half-year basis in keeping with the Commission’s aim to release bi-annual Reports.


Within the six-month period under review, MAVCOM received a total of 677 complaints, marking a significant 92 per cent increase in the number of complaints filed by consumers compared to the corresponding period in the previous year.


YBhg. Gen. Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Abdullah Ahmad, RMAF (Retd), Executive Chairman of MAVCOM, said, “The rise in the number of complaints being lodged with MAVCOM is a clear indication of the growing awareness among air travelers of their rights as consumers. It is heartening to note that the educational activities initiated by MAVCOM over the past 18 months on this matter has empowered more Malaysians to exercise their rights.”


Abdullah said that MAVCOM had successfully resolved and closed 99.1 per cent of the total complaints received during this time.


Key Highlights


Overall, an average of 17 complaints were received by MAVCOM for every 1 million passengers.


Malaysia Airlines was highlighted in the Consumer Report as having the most number of complaints received by MAVCOM, followed by Malindo Air and AirAsia. Notably, while both Malaysia Airlines and Malindo Air saw more than double the number of complaints, cases filed against AirAsia dropped by 9.8 per cent compared to the corresponding period in the previous year.


The top three categories of complaints filed with MAVCOM were refunds, mishandled baggage and flight delays, which collectively made up 62.6 per cent of total complaints. All three categories also saw a higher number of complaints reported by consumers, increasing by 68.5 per cent, 54.2 per cent and 134 per cent year-on-year respectively.


In terms of airports, while the total number of complaints remained minimal, MAVCOM nonetheless reported receiving complaints pertaining to facilities provided at the airports.


“The top three complaints categories are similar to those recorded in our inaugural Consumer Report. This is in part due to these particular categories being a common issue, not only in Malaysia but for aviation industries worldwide. However, it also serves as a reminder and a gauge of where industry players can improve their service levels to their consumers,” Abdullah remarked.


Upcoming Developments


MAVCOM’s Consumer Report also provides brief updates on two key initiatives currently in the pipeline, namely a Penalty and Compliance Matrix (Matrix), as well as a Quality of Service (QoS) Framework for airports.


Under the Malaysian Aviation Consumer Protection Code 2016, airlines may be subject to financial penalties of up to RM200,000 for non-compliance. MAVCOM is therefore developing the Matrix, a framework which serves to quantify the financial penalties which could be imposed on an airline for instances of non-compliance.


Meanwhile, the Quality of Service Framework aims to set expected levels of service standards and key performance indicators for airports in Malaysia, including cleanliness, queue times, quality of infrastructure and more. Similarly, the framework will also detail financial penalties for airport operators in case of service levels falling below expected standards.


The implementation of the Matrix and QoS Framework will be announced by MAVCOM in due course.


“As our aviation industry evolves, it is vital for us to adopt higher standards in line with international best practices in order to grow from strength to strength. This is why MAVCOM has been working on various initiatives focused on encouraging enhanced service levels, not only for airlines but at airports as well. We have worked closely with stakeholders and industry players on these initiatives, and look forward to implementing them in the near future,” said Abdullah.


MAVCOM’s Consumer Reports will be released on a bi-annual basis by MAVCOM. The current Consumer Report is available to members of the public on MAVCOM’s website at www.mavcom.my


More here:


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/mavcom-chairmans-rm85000-monthly-salary-be-reviewed-along-glcs-govt-statutory-bodies

 

I think the RM85,000 salary per month is unjust.

 

For this position, the ceiling should be only RM20,000 per month at its highest job grade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/mavcom-chairmans-rm85000-monthly-salary-be-reviewed-along-glcs-govt-statutory-bodies

 

I think the RM85,000 salary per month is unjust.

 

For this position, the ceiling should be only RM20,000 per month at its highest job grade.

It is a tough job, having to deal with issues like the MH A350 row 1 scandal and misrepresentation :p Edited by Chris Tan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/mavcom-chairmans-rm85000-monthly-salary-be-reviewed-along-glcs-govt-statutory-bodies

 

I think the RM85,000 salary per month is unjust.

 

For this position, the ceiling should be only RM20,000 per month at its highest job grade.

 

Mavcom, spad, etc were removed from MoT to reward cronies with high positions, high pay and donation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope they would press and overhaul CAAM as well. Crew Annual hours of 1000 now approved for ak,Mh,Od without taking any account from pilots input and probably taking on crew performance from coolie low cost carriers in USA and Europe where their airline unions have been battling a loosing game on fatigue issues with management and airline safety regulations. So 105 hours per month is legal now and does not need paperwork to be submitted to CAAM. Suspect Airline executives been giving favors to CAAM folks to approve all of these. CAAM know there's a shortage of crew and simulators industry wide but rather then asking the airlines to halt expansion they're promoting the airlines to push the crew further which is also contributing to even more pilots resigning and leaving for overseas carriers.

Edited by jahur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCA/CAAM unjustified license renewal fees for pilots/technician should be reviews too. Previously costs only MYR 150 ish then roughly 2 years ago we gotta pay more than 1000.

 

What a load of bollocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCA/CAAM unjustified license renewal fees for pilots/technician should be reviews too. Previously costs only MYR 150 ish then roughly 2 years ago we gotta pay more than 1000.

 

What a load of bollocks

The funny part is majority of the payment centre for license renewal don't even accept credit/debit card transaction. All in cash term which is stupid when u look at them increasing the fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCA/CAAM unjustified license renewal fees for pilots/technician should be reviews too. Previously costs only MYR 150 ish then roughly 2 years ago we gotta pay more than 1000.

 

What a load of bollocks

 

Think of it as helping the government reducing its debt. Way better for DCA/CAAM to fund themselves than depending on government funding.

 

And definitely way better than contributing to that Tabung they just opened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Think of it as helping the government reducing its debt. Way better for DCA/CAAM to fund themselves than depending on government funding.

 

And definitely way better than contributing to that Tabung they just opened.

 

It is like consumers paying indah water and tax didn't reduce to compensate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

reported, dont try to be funny and relieve old issues

I'm most certainly trying to relieve the forum of the unpleasantries that have bedeviled it. Indeed. this is no laughing matter.

 

But that doesn't change my stance on the Mavcom chief's salary. The A350 row 1 fiasco hasn't even been resolved, and he's supposedly earning 85 grand a month. If he's going to be so highly paid, he ought to deal with issues like this. If anything this would teach those airlines a lesson so they'll stop robbing consumers blind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Think of it as helping the government reducing its debt. Way better for DCA/CAAM to fund themselves than depending on government funding.

 

And definitely way better than contributing to that Tabung they just opened.

I have no qualms paying to the current ruling government but it was the previous one that made me feel bitter.

 

Not helped when they were not consistent with their working hours as well. Try dealing with them on Friday.

 

One colleague made his frustration public, then director responded they would investigate. Nothing heard ever since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit off topic here, what is MH A350 row 1 fiasco?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AirAsia says Mavcom's reason for rejecting additional flights is 'misleading'

 

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2018/06/14/airasia-says-mavcom-reason-for-rejecting-additional-flights-misleading/

 

PETALING JAYA: AirAsia has hit back at the Malaysian Aviation Commission (Mavcom), calling their rationale for the decision to reject the budget airline's application to add more flights as "grossly misleading".

 

On Wednesday (June 13), Mavcom said its decision to reject AirAsia's application for more flights to the Kota Kinabalu-Sandakan route and the Kuala Lumpur-Haikou route was done in the interests of airline customers.

Protecting consumers against scams like bait-and-switch seat assignment changes is in the interest of airline customers. Deciding which route and frequency is suitable for customers is not. Edited by Chris Tan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Protecting consumers against scams like bait-and-switch seat assignment changes is in the interest of airline customers. Deciding which route and frequency is suitable for customers is not.

 

Not when an airline is trying to kill its competitors by flooding the market with frequency that nobody is able to make any money from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not when an airline is trying to kill its competitors by flooding the market with frequency that nobody is able to make any money from it.

That is assuming that there will be no growth in the market - what if the market grows and supply is not sufficient?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant say on haikou but for BKI-SDK everyday u hear on liveatc the pob barely 80+ for ak and for mh even way lower except for Raya and CNY on all the flights. Local MPs in Sandakan are asking airlines to increase frequency but there's no sustainable passenger load throughout the day. Recall the state gov even forcing Maswings to open up a extra 7pm SDK-BKI flight that only has average less than 12 pax most bthe time because one silly kinabatangan MP was bitching about no flights available that period.

 

More so in event Airlines add frequency and they pullout randomly due to low forward booking. It'll create nuisance for the consumers to rearrange their booking if they really need to fly at that flight time. Unless the airlines does not cancel or terminates flight last minute then it's okay for them to add flights.

Edited by jahur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More so in event Airlines add frequency and they pullout randomly due to low forward booking. It'll create nuisance for the consumers to rearrange their booking if they really need to fly at that flight time. Unless the airlines does not cancel or terminates flight last minute then it's okay for them to add flights.

Yes, it is too bad if airlines have to do that - but this is all part and parcel of running a business. If you don't make an offer, how can customers evaluate to accept the offer or not? It is not Mavcom's job to anticipate what business there is. Their main job is to ensure that the service is safe and the fares are reasonable. If airlines launch routes only to suspend them soon after, that is their problem. If they lose customer confidence, that is their problem.

 

Mavcom can only provide a regulatory framework for the industry. If they want to run airlines, they should start their own!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mavcom can only provide a regulatory framework for the industry. If they want to run airlines, they should start their own!

Oh my. Then who will be Mavcoms Mavcom? What if they scam customers with seat swaps within the same ticketed cabin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is too bad if airlines have to do that - but this is all part and parcel of running a business. If you don't make an offer, how can customers evaluate to accept the offer or not? It is not Mavcom's job to anticipate what business there is. Their main job is to ensure that the service is safe and the fares are reasonable. If airlines launch routes only to suspend them soon after, that is their problem. If they lose customer confidence, that is their problem.

Not really. It will be the problem for passengers who are inconvenienced. It will be the problem for the airports which may have committed resources to serve those additional flights.

 

So Mavcom's remit in this case is justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is too bad if airlines have to do that - but this is all part and parcel of running a business. If you don't make an offer, how can customers evaluate to accept the offer or not? It is not Mavcom's job to anticipate what business there is. Their main job is to ensure that the service is safe and the fares are reasonable. If airlines launch routes only to suspend them soon after, that is their problem. If they lose customer confidence, that is their problem.

 

Mavcom can only provide a regulatory framework for the industry. If they want to run airlines, they should start their own!

Til this date my relatives d7 Maldives flight and few other dozens others who opted for refund instead of credit allowance for another similar flights have yet to be settled even after lodging mavcom report and paging TF. Cases like this the airline should not even bothered selling nearly 1.5year of forward tickets and then pulling them out so quickly and acting so dramactically slow in solving passengers refund requests. This not only involves AK group but it involves Mab and Malindo as well, the amount of frequency screw up(cancelation) is happening too frequently compared to yesteryears I myself have been screwed by them many times . Regulatory should be there to kick them which in this case should have mavcom acted on hindsight instead of waiting for consumers to Lodge report only when the problem has occurred. Edited by jahur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Til this date my relatives d7 Maldives flight and few other dozens others who opted for refund instead of credit allowance for another similar flights have yet to be settled even after lodging mavcom report and paging TF. Cases like this the airline should not even bothered selling nearly 1.5year of forward tickets and then pulling them out so quickly and acting so dramactically slow in solving passengers refund requests. This not only involves AK group but it involves Mab and Malindo as well, the amount of frequency screw up(cancelation) is happening too frequently compared to yesteryears I myself have been screwed by them many times . Regulatory should be there to kick them which in this case should have mavcom acted on hindsight instead of waiting for consumers to Lodge report only when the problem has occurred.

On ak, one must spend the refund/credit within 3 months. Complaint to mavcom, asked to extend credit validity to 6 months, nothing happened. Mavcom is as good as useless in consumer protection.

Edited by KK Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...