De Vial told an Elman Wall seminar on Tuesday (2 June) Abta had received assurances from the CMA its investigation was "much less concerned" about delayed refunds, particularly where there is financial protection in place.
In the absence of explicit confirmation from the government or CAA, Abta insists Atol protection carries over to delayed refunds, including so-called refund credit notes, as per the payment terms of the Air Travel Trust fund.
De Vial explained the CMA’s focus had been largely confined to sectors where all refund rights were being denied, citing weddings, theatres, booking websites and accommodation-only sellers.
He added that despite "a lot of contact" about package holiday refunds following its work with consumer champions like Which?, the authority’s position was unchanged.
Abta has been critical of the government and CAA’s failure to clarify their stance on deferred refunds, albeit with some acknowledgement the CAA’s hands are largely tied owing to its relationship with the Department for Transport, which is responsible for Atol legislation, and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, which is responsible for the Package Travel Regulations.
While the CAA is understood to be aligned with Abta on deferred refunds, the association – citing a lack of clarity on the matter – has championed a makeshift refund credit note regime and devised a set of strict guidelines firms should adhere to if they are to issue them.
De Vial said that the government’s failure "to come out and make any real clear statements regarding financial protection" was "deeply frustrating" for all those affected. "It’s quite inexplicable, and inexcusable," he said, adding ministers were "lacking the courage" to expose themselves to any public pushback by confirming financial protection arrangements do cover delayed refunds.
