ClareT101

I booked an international itinerary on united.com that included a flight segment on a different airline. I wasn't notified when I completed the booking online that the fare was subject change based on the other airline confirming the seat until AFTER I received an email from United with the record locator. It was then that I read that United needed 24 hours to confirm the itinerary with the other airline before issuing the ticket.

When I called to question why the itinerary had not been ticketed after 24 hours, I was informed that the airfare that I had booked originally was no longer available with the other airline. I was told to pay the difference in fare despite the mistake on united.com.

Any tips for recouping this fare difference? I don't understand how united.com cannot guarantee the fares on their own website, and why they are punishing their customers for their mistake. It is deceptive advertising.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

iflyuaaa

did you pay the fare difference or just cancel the ticket?

Bonehead

Welcome to FlyerTalk, ClareT101!!

So were you given the option to cancel outright and receive a full refund? It's not clear from your post. If not, that's a problem.

transportprof

Were these flights code-shared with United, or were they simply inter-line booking on foreign airlines?

Under IATA rules airlines have 72 hours to look back on reservations made by other airlines and accept or reject the request.

Given the state of UA's reservations IT, it's entirely possible that UA picked up some phantom fare category (e.g., no zpace at that fare actually available) and the operating carrier said "No".

ClareT101

They did not give me the option to cancel for a full refund, but I had already told them that the travel was not flexible.

The only flight option they could offer at the original was a different routing with an additional layover - on a different carrier.

The flight was not a code share flight, so it seems this airline rejected the fare that was offered on United's website.

Shouldn't United have some responsibility, even if advertising flights on different carriers, to advertise accurate fares on their own website?

iflyuaaa

united has been doing many deceptive practices for several years...whether intentional or not, people still continue to fly them, so they figure they might as well keep ripping off their customers. as long as their unethical behavior continues and people continue to give them business, there's not really any incentive for them to change.

if you end up wanting a refund, good luck with that. many stories here will tell you it will take months and many phone calls to actually get your money back.

Dieuwer

File a complaint with DOT immediately.

Often1

You may, of course, file a DOT complaint if you wish. But, you will find that you get nowhere. That is because not one thing in the OP remotely suggests a violation of DOT rules. If you have spare time to waste, it's free and can be done on the DOT website.

This has zippo to do with UA and everything to do with the other carrier's decision either not to honor the fare or, more likely, having the fare, but having sold the inventory to one of its own customers rather than UA's customer.

That is why UA, along with AA, DL and other international carriers, all advise that it can take as long as 72 hours (24 in this particular case) to confirm space. Until that point, OP is not ticketed and, I presume that he is not ticketed now.

He has three options:

1. Cancel, or perhaps better put, do not proceed to ticketing, for a full refund.
2. Locate other inventory (UA has proposed one option, maybe there are more to be found) and purchase that.
3. Pay the difference.

This is neither limited to UA, nor to US carriers and it is expressly not false or deceptive under DOT rules. It is also not (likely) an error on the UA website as it is almost certain that the inventory on the other carrier was available at the time OP sought to confirm, but was sold or removed by the other carrier.

sincx

You can't make United ticket at the original fare and routing if the other carrier rejects it, but you should be able to get a full refund (the reservation shouldn't have ticketed anyways).

MSPeconomist

It could be a case of UA IT not updating the other carrier's inventory often enough, especially at the point that the OP decided to purchase the ticket. This is a matter of how the software is set up to interact with other carriers, almost all of which would be automated in real time by the operating or marketing airline. The 72 hour rule made sense when tickets were written manually and required individual communication (such as a phone call) with the other carrier to confirm space, but IMO airlines should now be forced to do this much faster with few exceptions.

exerda

I have had this happen with ANA before. .bomb saw a good fare, but couldn't ticket it. Calling in, the agents saw two other (higher) different fares. Web help desk for .bomb explained it was an ANA inventory issue and that .bomb was lagging on their inventory.

I paid the higher price; my other choice was to not ticket.

Dieuwer

Then the "other carrier" was engaging in deceptive advertising.
You specifically state "inventory...was available", but then state "was sold or or removed". Those things are mutually exclusive. Either it is available, or it is not. You should not advertise something that is not available. The DOT is VERY clear about that. At a minimum it is bait-and-switch.

In that case, UA should not ticket (part of) the itinerary until ALL flights on the itinerary are confirmed as being available. And if this behavior of UA is true, UA is liable. The OP should not suffer the consequences of the crappy UA IT infrastructure.

txflyer77

It depends on the sequence of events.

1. OAL carrier shows E1 (made up fare bucket) for desired flight.
2. OP sees the fare for E1 on ua.com.
3. OAL customer buys ticket in E1.
4. OP tries to purchase fare, UA tries to ticket with OAL but now the bucket is at 0.

Of course it's also possible that inventory was taken hours before but due to caching ua.com showed stale information.

Ultimately we're talking about a huge distributed system. It can't be perfectly consistent and race conditions and the like are just reality, which is why airlines have 24-72 hours to actually ticket partner fares like this.

Dieuwer

This is easily rectified:

1. OAL carrier shows E1 (made up fare bucket) for desired flight.
2. OP sees the fare for E1 on ua.com.
3. UA real-time queries OAL carrier, returns: 0.
4. OAL customer cannot buy ticket in E1.
5. OAL customer will look for other options.

mduell

In theory yes if they've taken your money:

14 CFR § 399.88 Prohibition on post-purchase price increase.
(a) It is an unfair and deceptive practice within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. 41712 for any seller of scheduled air transportation within, to or from the United States, or of a tour (i.e., a combination of air transportation and ground or cruise accommodations), or tour component (e.g., a hotel stay) that includes scheduled air transportation within, to or from the United States, to increase the price of that air transportation, tour or tour component to a consumer, including but not limited to an increase in the price of the seat, an increase in the price for the carriage of passenger baggage, or an increase in an applicable fuel surcharge, after the air transportation has been purchased by the consumer, except in the case of an increase in a government-imposed tax or fee. A purchase is deemed to have occurred when the full amount agreed upon has been paid by the consumer.

However the recent DOT notice says UA can claim it was a "mistake" and they're off the hook (take your full refund or pay up the difference to the arbitrary new fare).