<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bpauker:
Does anyone know about or has anyone tried the following? Purchase a full-fare ticket for a (hopefully) overbooked flight, offer to give up your seat, collect vouchers, let the plane you were *supposed * to be on leave, return to ticket counter, have ticket refunded. Does this work? Is this ethical? I've got a weekend to kill, and I thought it might be fun to pick up a few hundred dollars worth of vouchers. THanks!</font>
What happens if the flight is not oversold? You could end up going on a very expensive trip, or being in a very awkward position.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">it used to be real popular and i even tesitfied in court about a high profile case involving this from a few years back. Ethical? Well, the courts didn't think so and the guy was sent to jail for a few years. Intersting because the guy was a member of President Nixon's staff many years ago. The diffiultly for anyone is "intent" and a check of refunds would likely sink anyone's best efforts. </font>
I agree that "intent" is the key here. Randy, can you provide more details about the case you refer to?
I would imagine that in the situation of the original poster, where they did this once, there would be no possible way of the airline proving that there was an intent to defraud, let alone even suspecting it, unless the person was exceedingly stupid in how they did it.
I think it's similar to the situation of a frequent flyer having the occasional throw-away or back-to-back flight posted to their account. There are any number of legitimate reasons why this might happen, not the least of which is actual flown segments not posting to the account due to the airline's fault. As such, most airlines won't think twice when this happens occasionally. But when a pattern of behavior becomes evident, then someone might look into the circumstances in more detail.
I would imagine that the same would hold true for the "false booking with intent of receiving involuntary denied boarding compensation" situation. I would be very surprised if someone did this once and the airline made an issue of it. After all, who's to say that after accepting the bump compensation and rescheduling on a later flight, the passenger discovers that the delay will negate the purpose of the trip, or the reasons for the trip change? That's one of the reasons that you might buy an unrestricted ticket in the first place - your plans are highly subject to change, and you want to remain flexible.
I don't mean to recommend or condone doing this, but I remain skeptical that doing it once (or twice) would raise any flags, especially if you are otherwise a regular customer of the airline in question.
I don't know the circumstances of the case where Randy testified. If I had to speculate, I'd guess that the defendant's actions were "over the top" such that there was no question as to what they were trying to do.