Originally Posted by
kaka
if there were a rule stopping that either AA or CX would have pulled it.
add to that cx staff suggested that makes it unlikely that theres actually a rule against it.
more reason to think its a made up rule and lazy staff.
Originally Posted by
percysmith
Well on the other hand I don't think admittance into HK after entry into the transit level is an as of right entitlement - in fact probably a discouraged practice if not an outright exception.
My understanding is, there is definitely a rule that you cannot enter without "intent to fly". HKIA executives have told me this. However, I think practically the problem is everyone knows you can't police it. How the heck do you have security enforce that? Boarding pass is enough, most likely, for any passenger to win any argument let alone legal fight about intent to fly. And nobody ever gets in trouble for this, maybe not one person ever. So it would be pretty silly for CX to report people for this. They lose a customer forever, get bad PR, and probably nothing happens to the guy on top of it since how can it be proved anyway. They still have pressure from immigration and security to curtail abuses, though. That's why the fellow who started this discussion is off base...because he essentially said "I'm entitled to abuse this rule, and why aren't you moving fast enough?" They cant obviously just agree to that. So he gets delayed.
There are ways to approach it, and not to approach it, if you're breaking this technical rule. Sadly, an "emergency" is a surefire way to do it. Of course enough abusing it, and this ruins it for those of us who eventually do have an emergency and have to leave. But definitely the way not to approach it is to harangue CX lounge attendants about wanting your arrival shower before you go into town and munch on dim sum for half the day, and criticizing CX for not having an arrival lounge, and saying that's the only reason you came airside.
At some point, folks on here forget not every perceived loophole is actually a loophole. It is just very poorly enforced and/or not yet tested.