Scoot Boeing 787 Dreamliner on display at Singapore Airshow on 16 February 2016 in Singapore from Shutterstock.com

Scoot, a Singaporean low-cost long-haul airline owned by Singapore Airlines, offered its apology and a refund after a complaint was raised about the disreputable treatment during a Singapore-Gold Coast flight towards an Australian woman on Tuesday (7 March).
Ms Amy Tobin, 22, has cerebral palsy. Therefore, she needs to be in her wheelchair to be able to travel.
According to Gold Coast Bulletin, Ms Amy and her best friend from New Zealand went on a cruise from Brisbane to Singapore.
They then travelled around the country for five days for her friend’s belated 21st celebration.
Ms Amy stated that she always takes her electric wheelchair every time she has to travel overseas, as well as a manual one for emergencies in case there are problems due to different power point voltages in other countries.
According to her, the trip was booked three months prior and she said that she had rang Scoot to reconfirm her booking, mentioning her wheelchairs the night before they left on the cruise.
Ms Amy, who lists her job as marketing director at ACO Marketing Solutions in Burleigh Heads, said, “My friend flew over from New Zealand for us to go overseas, so obviously, something has to be pre-organised.”
She told the media that it was not her first time flying with budget airlines, saying that she had been with AirAsia and Jetstar before, adding that there were never any problems when she travelled with those airlines.
“I’ve been to most of the USA, Asia, Singapore before with my family and Noumea and I’ve never ever, ever, ever had a problem with any other airline,” Ms Amy said.
If one browse through the Scoot Australia’s website, he/she can look under the special needs section that all guests with disabilities must be able to travel independently or have an accompanying passenger to assist them.
It also added that Scoot did not have the systems, staff or facilities to assume responsibility for such assistance or supervision.
The Scoot website directs passengers with mobility issues to contact its call centre at the time of booking or three days before their departure date.
The website also says that failure to notify the Airline in the specified timeframe may result in the service being unavailable at the airport and being denied carriage.
“For safety reasons, if you require assistance to and from the aircraft even though you are travelling with your own wheelchair, you will be required to check in your wheelchair as checked baggage upon departure,” it said,
“We will be able to provide assistance to and from the aircraft. Your wheelchair will be returned to you at the baggage claim belt upon arrival. Please note that there may be a charge for this service,” it added.
However, when Ms Amy and her friend arrived four hours early for their flight home Tuesday, a Scoot check-in agent first denied her boarding because of the electric wheelchair.
When she finally managed to check, she was asked to check-in both wheelchairs, as well as pay an excess baggage fee because she had two.
The check-in agent also told her that there was no airline wheelchair for her to borrow to the gate.

When they were told to wait at the check-in counter, Ms Amy discussed her possibility to get a refund and catch the next flight home instead.
However, the agent said she was she would not be refunded for her flight, even if she transferred to the next Scoot flight days later.
She was also discovered by that time that the next available flight was a $1400 on Emirates at 3.15pm Wednesday (Singapore time).
A few hours later, she was finally that told she could board her original flight on Scoot, with an assurance that both of her wheelchairs would make it on board.
In addition to all the difficulties that she needed to went through, the agent told her that she would have to walk or be carried in order to use the toilet on the eight-hour flight.
She responded, “It would be embarrassing, would anyone like that?”
“For starters, how were people going to even do that? The airplane hallway is narrow so there’s no way to do it. And, it’s not exactly the most dignifying thing with all these people on a flight,” she said.
“It shouldn’t matter if you can walk or not, you’re still human,” Ms Amy said, adding that the other airlines she has travelled on had a special aisle wheelchair for use by disabled passengers.
When the plane landed at the Gold Coast airport early Wednesday morning, she said that there was more problem as the Scoot staff handed her over to the airport ground crew. The staff discovered neither of her two wheelchairs was on the flight.

Finally, they provided her with a manual airport one while they hired a temporary electric one.
She was also told that her wheelchairs would be delivered via Singapore Airlines on Thursday (9 March).
On behalf of Scoot, a spokeswoman said the airline would like to apologise to Miss Tobin and would contact her to refund the cost of her flight.
She said, “We wish to apologise for the inconvenience and unhappiness caused to Miss Tobin.”
“We take feedback from our guests very seriously and are investigating internally to determine how we can improve our processes.”
Late Wednesday, the Scoot spokeswoman said the budget airline was working with the Gold Coast airport to expedite the return of the wheelchairs, saying, “We have made arrangements for the wheelchairs to be delivered to her by tomorrow.”
“We will also be refunding Miss Tobin the cost of her Singapore-Gold Coast flight,” she added.
Just this morning, Ms Tobin posted on her Facebook page, claiming that the returned wheelchair was damaged.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

高庭驳回迪哥达索取警方录供的刑事动议

本月3日,大法官梅达顺在高庭驳回了本社总编许渊臣,以及被控刑事诽谤男子迪哥达的刑事动议。 检控官拒绝公开两人此案中的警方录供,他们个别针对此事提呈刑事动议。 不过,梅达顺在口头陈述判决依据时表明,提呈在他眼前的凭据,未能说服他要求高庭审核国家法院裁决的最高门槛已达到。 早前,迪哥达辩护律师拉维,依循刑事诉讼法(CPC)第22条文,要求控方在开审前出示迪哥达的口供,但遭国家法院法官驳回。 至于许渊臣辩护律师朱正熙,强调许渊臣此前录的口供,能力助此案,因为当时当局并没有盘问被告,确认他是否有诽谤内阁的意图,以及他是否认为文章陈述是中立或不利的。 梅达顺则认为,辩方大可在上诉时提及此事,惟朱正熙也指出有凸显程序错误的重要;梅达顺也提醒检控官,考量有关口供是否和辩方有关联。 拉维律师则提及,早在开审前,检控官就已知道被告索取有关口供,但当时对方就已拒绝。可是控方仍辩解被告可走刑事案件披露会议(Criminal Case Disclosure Conference,简称CCDC)程序,但依据《刑事诉讼法》第159条文,却需要征得控辩双方同意。 一开始控方就拒绝让被告索取口供,对此拉维更形容控方的上述建议,形同让被告做“徒劳之举”(原文:go on…

Singapore probes couple over anti-death penalty shirts

A Singaporean couple who wore anti-death penalty t-shirts at a running event…

Chee Soon Juan: How to 'chiong' when the general is paralysed behind the front line?

Chee Soon Juan, the leader of the opposition Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), wrote…

Too many malls, not enough shoppers: forum letter writer

The sight of so many shopping malls around this tiny island is…