CSTAR crie victoire dans le dossier BSPlink

Le PDG de CSTAR, Bruce Bishins se réjouit d'une mesure prise par l'IATA vendredi dernier dans le dossier BSPlink. " Un pas dans la bonne direction" selon Bruce Bishins qui rapporte que dans un memo envoyé aux agents de voyages la semaine dernière," l'IATA a finalement concédé la possibilité que les montants des débits contenus dans les rapports hebdomadaires du BSPlink puisse puisse être erronés et puisse être, de la part de certains transporteurs, en violation avec les règlements". Selon Bruce Bishins, l'IATA a introduit une procédure interimaire qui permettra à une agence d'aviser l'IATA qu'elle conteste le montant d'un mémo de débit et qu'elle règlera les montants qui ne sont pas contestés, par transfert électronique. Bruce Bishins estime toutefois qu'il reste bien des problèmes à régler.

Voici le communiqué intégral (en anglais) de CSTAR

Dear Colleagues:

I am very pleased to report that CSTAR's efforts on your behalf have borne results, and IATA has taken the first steps, albeit somewhat contentious steps, in moving in the right direction. Late last Friday, 03 November, IATA issued BSP Canada Communiqué 13/06 to all agencies in Canada. In doing so, IATA has finally not only conceded the possibility that weekly BSPlink debit amounts could contain processing errors and carrier ADM violations, it has also provided an "interim" remedy, the first such relief since the inception of BSPlink, which will allow agencies to advise IATA that the agency rejects the amount of the debit and will pay the undisputed amount by wire transfer.

While IATA's policy is a positive step forward, it still falls short as follows:

1. IATA's communiqué does not resolve the requirement to provide agencies with 10-days pre- notification of any PAD amount to be debited. Notwithstanding IATA's attempt to cloud the issue with its self-serving "calendar of settlement dates", the issue in this matter does not relate to the fact that agencies do not know they will be debited Wednesday of each week, but rather, that they be provided ample and lawful pre-notification with respect to the amount to be debited.

2. IATA's communiqué does not address the fact that agencies have not provided proper and lawful consent and authorization to IATA for approving the specific amount to be debited.

3. Nothing short of a proper and duly signed "Payor's PAD Agreement", fully consistent with Canadian Payments Association (CPA) Rule H1, is acceptable, and nothing short of said Agreement, signed and agreed to by the parties, would alter any of the rights and privileges which surround the PAD matter.

4. IATA's interim measure to allow agencies to reject the IATA PAD within such a narrow and unduly constrained window (effectively one day), including providing 24 hours advance notice to IATA that such a PAD will be rejected, and requiring that the agent must bear whatever costs of a wire transfer to IATA, is both unwieldy and financially burdensome. It is for this very reason that the 10-day pre-notification of the PAD amount as provided for in Rule H1 is appropriate and necessary.

5. While IATA's solution to travel agencies is perhaps that which IATA prefers, travel agencies may also avail themselves of a bank instruction to achieve the same end.

6. IATA, despite its admission that errors and improper debits could affect a PAD transaction, has threatened agencies with "declaration of default" unless the agency agrees to IATA's burdensome and costly method of addressing this matter, as opposed to those provisions of relief already enshrined in Rule H1. IATA has indicated that this is an interim measure through the end of November 2006. CSTAR will give IATA some latitude, through the end of November 2006, pending a review of the long-term solution IATA plans to propose. CSTAR reserves all rights to continue to pursue this matter should IATA's solution be deemed burdensome, unwieldy, costly, or non- compliant with CPA Rule H1.

This said, IATA's version of its compliance with Section 14(d) of Rule H1 is purely IATA's conjecture and is not supported by the facts, so much so that IATA has now advised that it intends to amend current IATA resolutions accordingly.

As for IATA's statement that it is currently working with "industry players", including ACTA, IATA has yet to take any steps to work with CSTAR towards a resolution of this matter; ironic indeed since it was CSTAR which first brought this matter to IATA's attention and proposed to work cooperatively with IATA towards a solution. It was only after IATA's own intransigence that CSTAR took the matter aggressively forward.

As for ACTA, not only did ACTA not understand the issues or address them accurately with ACTA members, it couldn't even get the facts straight in its own "Scoop" newsletter. Make no mistake, had it not been for CSTAR's assertive pursuit of this matter, IATA would never have even considered changing policy.

I have been asked many times over the last two weeks as to why ACTA would be so misguided as to blindly support IATA in the face of such clear angst from travel agencies, including ACTA's own members. It is so very hard to imagine why any association which purports to defend the interests of travel agencies would be as unsupportive as ACTA has been in this matter. My personal view is as follows: Given that ACTA is on the cusp of having its agreement to manage and administer the profitable IATA/IATAN ID Card terminated in Canada, said contract to be terminated by the end of December 2006, it is my personal belief that ACTA has been cozying up to IATA in the hope that IATA will reconsider or amend its plan to cut ACTA out from the ID card program. Under the current program, it has never been a requirement for any travel agency to be a member of ACTA to obtain the ID card. CSTAR members have always been entitled to have equal access to the card program without joining ACTA. I guess time will tell whether my belief about ACTA's approach to IATA and ACTA's addiction to the cash- cow ID card is valid or not.

Furthermore, IATA has gone to great pains to suggest that some party (could it be CSTAR?) is "spreading false information" that IATA is contemplating switching to daily remittance in Canada. The issue of daily remittance is by no means a new topic of speculation, and IATA routinely amends reporting and remittance cycles for various BSPs around the world. What CSTAR actually said was that "IATA's current practice could very well move to a daily debiting cycle". Such hypotheses is wholly within anyone's rights to speculate. Only time will tell if that assessment becomes true. As for IATA's comment that only BSP Canada can debit bank accounts, perhaps IATA should have avoided requiring a waiver of notice from agents allowing BSP Canada airlines' debits to trust and bank accounts. It seems IATA has a very short and skewed memory of what it has foisted upon travel agencies in this matter.

CSTAR will continue to pursue this BSPlink debit matter without delay. I have been in touch with the provincial regulators, as have several travel agencies, regarding IATA's debits to trust accounts. In addition, the Travel Agency Commissioner will soon undertake investigating the many complaints the Commissioner's office has received in this matter.

Lastly, I will once again extend my offer to work with IATA to bring this matter to a mutually satisfactory conclusion. To date, IATA has not chosen to sit down with CSTAR to discuss possible solutions, instead, IATA has favoured sending threatening letters from its attorneys to scare CSTAR off. I can assure you that CSTAR will not be intimidated by such threats, and we will continue to work aggressively and diligently for the benefit of the agency community in Canada - work which already speaks for itself.

For a copy of IATA BSP Canada Communiqué 13/06, please click here.

Best regards,


Bruce Bishins, CTC
President and
Chief Executive Officer