From the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, which implements the EC Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts (the Unfair Contract Terms Directive):
Excessive rights for the supplier. Cancellation of a contract by the supplier
can leave the consumer facing inconvenience at least, if not costs or other
problems. Where that is so, a unilateral right for the supplier to cancel
without any liability to do more than return prepayments is likely to be
considered unfair (see Group 6(b), on terms which exclude even that
liability).I've travelled EasyJet a couple of time, it's a cheap low cost airline. Just don't expect any customer service whatsoever if something goes wrong, it's like talking to a bunch of incompetent monkeys.
That's exactly what they did and that's exactly what happened.
>but there almost certainly wouldn't have been any legal liability for the airline.
Legal liability is the least of their worries today. It's a PR nightmare. People all over the world think they're thin-skinned bullies.
I wish it actually amounted to something. They probably won't get any drop in ticket sales, because in cheap airline market you pretty much don't have many (if any) alternatives. People are still going to fly with them because they're the cheapest / only ones flying to the destination they want.
The problem is that beneath the feigned outrage, everyone can see that this is just a stupid bully of middle manager making a stupid decision. Nobody really cares enough about it to actually change real-world plans.
The second point though. This must have come from higher up. I mean, I doubt that manager was actively watching Twitter so this must have been identified by some automated system and trickled to the manager as a notification...
Many scenarios are possible, and we can't expect easyJet to air their dirty laundry, so we probably won't know exactly what. What is completely inconceivable is that there is a company-wide policy that came into effect (and was subsequently immediately withdrawn this morning) to hunt down and deny boarding to passengers that criticizes easyJet on Twitter.
Denying boarding is more than merely refusing a private service. It's effectively revoking freedom to travel. It can also be more than simply an inconvenience to miss a flight. Even when merely overbooking passengers through no malice at all, European airlines are required to pay significant fees to customers who must miss flights. This is true in the U.S. as well due to the precedent set after Nader v. Allegheny Airlines, 426 U.S. 290 (1976). Airlines attempt to offer vouchers, but you are entitled to cash payouts.
I once made an actual profit from a trip to Europe because Lufthansa overbooked us and paid more per ticket in fees than the cost of my flights and hotels.