Not unlike a teenage summer fling, my love affair with Ryanair was short, sweet, and ended in heartbreak.

Having never been afforded the opportunity to travel in my teens (no gap year for me!) I made my first trip abroad aged precisely 24 years and 2 days. One cold October day saw me feverish, coughing and spluttering in bed. Having fallen ill, I found that I was not only susceptible to what felt like the plague, but also to the devil that is clickbait. “Flights to Europe for £5!” or similar. I couldn’t resist. Within minutes I was fervently clicking through Ryanair’s many offerings, and within the hour I had spontaneously booked a trip for two to Madrid in late November. Not being able to afford any of the many extras offered, I knew already that there was a chance I'd be seated away from my partner. But having checked in at exactly the same time, we got assigned neighbouring seats for both the outgoing and return trips - hooray!

I realised that the 'random allocations' policy meant there was a chance you'd be seated separately, but unless the entire plane had checked in before you, or you were checking in separately, the odds were very much in your favour. In any case, the flights were seamless and whilst not particularly comfortable, they were nonetheless great value for money. You get what you pay for, right?

Fast-forward six months and I begin itching for another budget mini-break in mainland Europe. With a break from work already booked, I casually peruse Ryanair's offerings and get all misty-eyed over (extremely) cheap flights to Portugal. Cheaper than the three day trip to Devon I had originally toyed with. The trip was booked in seconds (who can honestly say they don't splurge a little on pay day?) and pretty much planned within days.

I started to see a little bad press about alleged changes to Ryanair's allocations policy in the weeks running up to the trip. Apparently, there had been a sudden shift in allocations, where people were 'randomly' allocated seats up that were *consistently* apart from their travel companions, despite nearby seats being empty. Accused of separating parties to force them to pay the additional fee for seat selection, Ryanair insisted that no change had been made to their allocations policy and that all was as it had been.

Intrigued, I checked in at the earliest possible opportunity (without paying extra for early check-in, of course!) and was disappointed but unsurprising to find that I was sitting apart from my boyfriend on both legs of our trip. On both occasions, neighbouring seats were vacant. We had been sat 25 rows apart for the return journey, and both in middle seats!

To be perfectly honest, this didn't - and still doesn't - bother me to any great extent. I understand that by booking cheap flights with budget airlines I will be getting the absolute minimum and know not to set my expectations very high. Yet the media coverage of this was of itself intriguing. So much outrage. A hen party of 15 all seated separately, in different rows and *all* in middle seats. An Oxford University research study for BBC Watchdog where 4 sets of flights for four individuals were booked, all being allocated separate, middle seats (the probability of such an allocation happening randomly is apparently lower than the odds of a person winning the lottery). It wasn't the policy itself that caused the outrage, but the blatant denial by Ryanair that any change had occurred. Not the action, but the cover up.

I now wait eagerly to see where this goes. Personally, I suspect a tweaked algorithm (so technically they wouldn't be lying when they maintain their policy hasn't changed). It is clear to me that a no-frills airline who makes money from selling extras would want to seize every possible opportunity to capitalise on it's bargain-hungry customers. Basic capitalism, no? But I don't appreciate the dishonesty and as a customer, find it pretty insulting.

With this new faux-random seat allocation practice attracting much scrutiny in the press, let’s hope that Ryanair gets its act together soon – I could probably be persuaded to reconcile!

What do you think?