HandsomeRob

United YYZ > IAH > PHO

If I check in a bag, do I get to retrieve the bag for customs in IAH, prior to the hidden city leg (PHO)?

jsloan

Pretty sure you mean Phoenix (PHX), not Port Hope, Alaska (PHO), but the answer is the same either way: No. YYZ has customs pre-clearance, so you will go through US Customs there instead of IAH. Flights from YYZ to the US are treated like domestic flights. Your bag will go through to your final destination.

HandsomeRob

Correct, I meant PHX good sir! Thank you for the prompt reply. I guess the person who told me otherwise through past experience was referencing an older practice. I see that there is a somewhat new process in place.

EmailKid

VERY past experience. Preclearance in Canada has been in place over 10 years.

jsloan

Happy to help. :-) Pre-clearance has been in place at YYZ since 1952, so I'm guessing this person wasn't traveling from Toronto. If you were coming from a non-preclearance airport, such as London*, the advice would have been correct, as you would have gone through customs at IAH and could have exited the airport with your luggage at that point.

* either London, UK, or London, Ontario -- but I don't think there's any YXU-IAH service. :-)

EmailKid

Isn't there recent practice where luggage at IAH (and only IAH for UA) goes through and is not responsibility of pax?

jsloan

Only if you are connecting via IAH to another international location (e.g., PTY-IAH-LHR). There are no changes to the process if you are connecting to the remainder of the US.

sincx

Does anyone personally know of an individual (not travel agent) who's gotten an invoice or had a frequent flier account closed due to over-using hidden city ticketing on UA? If so, what was the cut-off?

The $300 US-China open-jaw with a throwaway YVR segment over on the mileage run board is interesting, but not if there's any sort of risk.

physioprof

If you're asking this question, there is almost certainly some risk.

sincx

Which is why I'm asking if any one has any concrete data points on the risk actually materializing, instead of mere conjecture.

cfischer

for the occasional use ... never had or heard of any issues. It is like with most of such 'options' ... if you make it a weekly habit then UA will figure it out and go after you.

Aussienarelle

Exactly. Occasionally I will skip the LAX-SAN leg of my flights. This generally occurs when the connecting flight was delayed and I can get home via car/Uber before the flight departs. I generally tell an agent, although there have been times when there has been no UA agent in which case I just leave. Probably occurs once a year or so.

The last time it happened I wrote in as I was very upset about the experience as the originating flight was cancelled and then delayed resulting in the connection and the rebooked flight well let's say I just wanted to get home. They refunded me the LAX-SAN fare which was a surprising result (to me).

jsloan

There is a significant difference between hidden-city ticketing and IRROPs. UA (and most other airlines) want to dissuade people from booking flights that they never intend to fly. In the situation you describe, it would be perfectly reasonable for any traveler to prefer to drive that last leg, even if they fully intended to fly it originally. I'd be surprised if UA (or any other airline) would complain in that situation, and I think "my flight was going to be delayed 2+ hours, and I can drive to SAN in 2 hours" would convince them if they did.

OP: You asked if there were any risk. Yes, there is, especially if you're talking about doing something that's been popularized on a public forum. It wouldn't' be hard for UA to look up all itineraries that meet those criteria and flag them. I think the question you're actually asking is "how big is the risk?" I'd say, there are three factors to consider: 1 - obviousness, 2 - lost revenue to UA, 3 - frequency.

I took a look at the specific flights they're describing in that thread. If you're trying to take advantage of the EWR-CAN fare, presumably you have to get back to NYC eventually, whether it's from YVR or SFO. I don't think you save that much money by throwing away the last segment and buying a separate ticket vs. just returning to EWR in the first place.

Try other airports across Asia. You may find that you can get these low fares and get all the way home without having to worry about hidden cities.

findark

Believe sincx is talking about the US-HKG-HGH-Canada self-dump that's been available for a shockingly long time. It works for almost any US/Canada city pair, so would be e.g. SFO-HKG-HGH-SFO-YVR and skip the final segment. The intended fare SFO-HGH is ~$519 ai, but with the YVR return it self-dumps down to ~$289. My only guess as to why UA hasn't fixed it is that they don't know how.

There's always risk, especially when dumping and HCT on the same ticket, but for a one-off it's hard for UA to prove anything. Because it's been advertised as a "regular" MR deal over on that board I suspect there will a high volume of FTers doing this, either dropping the Canada segment or positioning home on an award ticket.

jsloan

Ah. I didn't read far enough into the thread to see ex-SFO departures. Still, there are other city combinations that produce a similar effect. Unfortunately, the fares between SFO and those destinations aren't quite as low as the ones that are being bandied about in that thread.

YVR isn't a bad place to spend a weekend, though. Consider SFO-HKG-HGH / PVG-SFO / SFO-YVR (at some later date). The UA G fare for SHA-YVR allows a C$150 stopover at SFO, so this currently prices out at $421.55 all-in.

Another way to answer this question, I guess -- my risk tolerance is such that I would book this latter itinerary without a thought, but I'd be nervous about booking it as a hidden city. Your risk tolerance may vary. :-)