I hope it is OK to revive an old thread rather than start a new one. This is my first post outside the CX Forum. :-)

I happened to be with a friend when she was checking-in in Hong Kong for an itinerary on EK which went HKG/DXB/BHX/DXB/HKG. Her husband was travelling on an identical itinerary but, for a variety of reasons, departed from Hong Kong a day earlier and would return from Birmingham several days later. He paid for both tickets, presumably on separate bookings, using his credit card.

My friend admitted that when the bookings were made, her husband saw the "failure to present the credit card will mean that all passengers in the booking will be denied boarding" message as quoted by Smoth 007. However, they wrongly assumed that it would be fine for my friend to present her supplementary credit card, bearing the same number as her husband's credit card, upon check-in. It turned out that the assumption was mistaken and my friend was denied her boarding passes by the check-in agent.

Since my friend's husband was by then in Dubai and could not be contacted, asking him to produce his credit card at the EK office in Dubai was not an option.

My friend offered two solutions to the agent. First, she could pay again for the ticket using one of her own credit cards and for her husband's payment to be refunded later. Second, she could "guarantee" her husband's payment (in case that turns out to be fraudulent) by paying for the ticket again using one of her own credit cards on the understanding that, once her husband's payment is verified (for instance by him producing his credit card at an EK office in the UK), her second payment would be refunded (less a handling charge, if that was what EK wanted). Both solutions were unceremoniously rejected.

The only way which the agent would allow my friend to travel would be for her to buy a new ticket costing HK$1,XXX more than the original ticket (presumably because the original sub-class was sold out) and then for her to have the original ticket refunded (less, needless to say, a hefty handing charge) once she returned from her trip. In the end, not wishing her holiday to be ruined, my friend had no choice but to comply.

Now, we have no qualms with EK seeking to protect itself against internet fraud. However, by rejecting two very sensible solutions (which the agent readily admitted would be acceptable to many other airlines, including CX) and by forcing my friend to buy a new ticket at a higher sub-class when she already held a confirmed booking at a lower sub-class (and being all too aware that she would have to pay a hefty handling charge when refunding her original ticket), EK made this whole episode smack of blatant opportunism. The fact that the agent was happy to volunteer the address of the local EK office for my friend to lodge a complaint suggested that this was not an isolated incidence and that such a complaint would probably not get her very far.

We are therefore considering lodging a complaint with the Hong Kong Consumer Council (the local quasi-governmental consumer watchdog), the IATA and/or the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Authority. Since a matter of principle is at stake, we would also not rule out legal action (my friend happens to be a lawyer) as it seems that, by imposing a term (if that is what it is) to the contract of carriage which mandated the production of a credit card without any substituted methods of payment, the term may fall foul of the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance making it liable to being struck out.

However, before my friend takes any action, we would appreciate any comments from frequent travellers on EK.

Many thanks in advance.