Originally Posted by
skunker
That example was prior to the DOT rule.
BA has no ground to stand on to fight this. Not a $0 fare and includes all taxes and fees.
That case - BA's malfeasance over their own DEL misfile in 2009 - and all the fallout (complaints, SCC cases) was part of the driving momentum behind the DoT ruling.
No question, BA are nasty. They do like to renege and thumb their noses at customer complaints after the fact. They may even try it. However, if you read the FOIA RGN correspondence requested by deltahater and with archive link in the RGN thread, you will see the DoT have not been patsies in enforcing this ruling since it was promulgated. Their correspondence with the legal representatives of all major airlines on this matter was clear, firm, and brooked no nonsense. It was very encouraging to read this, and the DoT actions contrast with the CTA's slipperiness in their dealings with LX and other RGN renegers involving Canadian itins.
DoT has consistently enforced the strict liability doctrine subject to the stopover provision (itin must originate/terminate in US, not just touchdown for <24hrs). It would be amusing to see BA go to war directly with the DoT ruling, especially in light of the history of the ruling and recent precedent showing enforcement of the ruling. Perhaps I should buy one of these itins to see if they do so.