Yahoo News 'I'm a travel expert and can tell you the biggest rip off when it comes to cheap flights'
Which? has crowned the dubious victor of its second annual 'Shoddy Awards', shining a light on the worst consumer let downs. In the travel sector, numerous websites could be sneakily inflating your costs.
To qualify for a 'Shoddy Award', contenders had to miss the mark in areas such as failing industry standards, potentially flouting the law, inflicting consumer detriment or bewilderment, or consistently scoring poorly in Which?'s customer surveys or lab assessments.
Included in the list were some essential travel tips, particularly useful if you're on the hunt for bargain flights or train tickets.
Opodo was singled out as the "biggest let down" in the flight booking category. The site may present the lowest upfront prices, but customers are often blindsided by a slew of concealed charges, reports the Mirror.
By the time consumers reach the checkout, they're confronted with "hefty fees for baggage", choosing seats, and an unexpected year-long Prime membership "you didn't know you asked for". In a 2024 survey by Which? Connect Panel, Opodo's customer satisfaction plummeted to just 28 percent based on members' experiences with online flight bookings.
Which? Travel didn't hold back in its critique of Opodo, signalling out the booking site for a poor customer service reputation, noting: "Opodo may offer the cheapest fare when you use comparison sites like Skyscanner, but don't be fooled. In our latest survey, the flight booking site garnered an abysmal customer score of 28 per cent. One respondent complained that Opodo offered them 'zero customer service'."
The report didn't stop there, as disgruntled customers revealed they were inadvertently subscribed to Opodo's Prime service and hit with unexpected charges. Which? said: "Others said they unwittingly signed up for its Prime service and only noticed when they were billed later on. We also found examples where it charged over the odds for extras such as baggage and seat selection."
For travellers looking to save a few pounds, Which? Travel was firm in its advice to bypass the middleman, urging passengers to book direct: "A word of advice: always book flights directly with the airline. Even the very best of the online travel agents are just an unnecessary middleman that makes your holiday harder."
When discussing train journeys, Which? Travel highlighted a common pitfall that snags countless travellers ticket machines at stations.
With a video expose, they explained: "I always fall victim to and I bet you do too. It's train station ticket machines. Our mystery shoppers found that most have outdated that don't sell the cheapest tickets, or can charge more than double compared to booking online."
The staggering difference in price didn't go unnoticed with their findings showing "On average, same day tickets were 52 per cent more expensive. And when only one in six UK train stations have a full time ticket office, it's pretty shoddy that the self-service alternatives are not up to scratch.
Which? has revealed that some of its mystery shoppers discovered many operators use outdated machines that don't offer the cheapest tickets. Instead, they found these machines can charge over twice the price compared to online booking, with the best-value fares often being unavailable or difficult to locate.
A spokesperson from Opodo commented: "Which?'s flawed research breaches fundamental principles they must follow, and the crux of this so-called research is arbitrary sampling targeting specific brands. While we value every customer experience, their conclusions are based on samples of just 42 respondents or fewer, which is statistically unrepresentative given our 21 million customers.
"Our regular surveys with 1.5 million customers consistently show that 9 out of 10 are satisfied or very satisfied - this metric is independently verified by external auditors. Which? claims to be a serious consumer research body, but this evidence shows it is more interested in clickbait than providing customers with genuine, meaningful information. To protect the public from their misleading research, we are filing a formal complaint against them.”
