flolee

Why do you give the op such a hard time?

Of course, BA might legaly be right, is (probably) following its T&C and, of course, it is the ex who did the wrong here.
That said, BA did not refund any money and the op just wants the same ticket for the same flight reinstated, having a perfectly fine (human) explanation of what happened. Life is never black or white, life draws stories like this and even a large company as BA should not lose the human sight of things, especially not for their higher tier members. and yes, besides my studies my line of work has to do with situations like this (although more the legal aspect of it), and we would always find a solution for our customers in such a situation, even if we are legaly not obliged to.

so, since op wants to stay on the same flight there is no need to be anxious about some form of circumvention of a nonflex ticket rule and there is no direct loss of money (since they did not refund any). the only downside for BA might be the the loss of some extra revenue selling the same seat again - but on the cost of losing a valuable, loyal (almost gold tier) customer. I really don't get the problem...the argument about setting a precedent in such a special situation is imho negligible, esp. since there is a SCH and no direct loss of revenue involved

virgin did the only right and is surely happy about a newly aquired customer ^

HIDDY

Yes they could just reinstate the ticket despite not knowing whether the OP will ever get his cash back or not. However this is just one sad story amongst thousands when it comes to losing money on an air ticket. Should an airline reinstate/refund them all?

We have to take the odd hard knock in life rather then expect favours all the time.

Often1

This is the key point. Bad things happen to people every day. BA, on the other hand, is an operating business. If every sad sack story generates a variance from the t&c, there will be no difference between flex and non-flex tickets and nobody in their right mind will purchase flex tickets.

BA will not rise or fall based on this one pax and this erstwhile ticket. But, that is not the point. As just one example, OP paid the money to her then SO. Now, OP says that she refuses to speak with him about it. Sure, it is easier to have a conversation with a disembodied voice at BA somewhere in the world, than a difficult conversation with one's ex. But, an unwillingness to have that conversation informs just how important this is or is not.

Passmethesickbag

Perhaps the difference is that BA, if they have the good will, have the power to reinstate the reservation, whereas the ex, even if he was not as vindictive as he manifestly is, does not.

Flexible preferences

Although the ex does have the power to rectify the situation - by purchasing a new ticket, or at the very least refunding to the OP the money paid for the flight.

angatol

.....

TabTraveller

Uhhh really? I would say that the T&Cs go to the heart of whether BA have the right to cxl the OP's ticket. My view would be that they do not as the contract is with the OP and not the person whose CC was used to provide BA with consideration for the contract. Termination of a contract by a third party without the consent of the contracting parties quite obviously has no effect.

The issue of "goodwill gesture" is a sideshow in my view. The OP should be seeking to assert his/her contractual rights rather than relying on BA being nice about it.

Falcs

Wrong. In this case the cancelled ticket netted a total refund of 0 so BA is not "protecting" their business and has nothing to lose and a lot of goodwill to gain by reinstating the ticket.

angatol

.....

orbitmic

Isn't the discussion going a bit in circles by now? I think we now have a full picture of the OP's situation, the T&Cs have been well established, and the argument regarding whether BA would be morally right to offer a goodwill gesture or not have been discussed quite effectively. In effect, the OP now knows what to try to hope for their favourite outcome and will hopefully update us as to whether this has led to a change in BA's answer or not.

nux

A % of non refundable tickets are cancelled (or no show) which partly allows the carrier to offer discounted non refundable (or with heavy penalty) in the first place.

muscat

Could this be posted automatically at, say, position number 10 in every new thread?

cazoz

As a commercial approach, BA would be best trying to resell said seat. Hence it may not be revenue neutral.

But I hope they do reinstate your ticket especially given the different PNRs - do not have my breath held though!

irishguy28

So the moral of the story is:

When booking a ticket that is just for yourself, make and pay for the booking yourself.

When making a booking on behalf of a couple or of a group, make and pay for the booking yourself, but make sure all parties pay you in advance before buying the ticket.

And, most importantly, if you even suspect even the slightest possibility of any shenanigans on the part of any of the travellers, payers, bookers, or travel arrangers - including yourself - book with Virgin, not BA.

angatol

.....