Originally Posted by
infinitium
I have 2 ticket numbers indeed --
- UA domestic leg LAS-SFO: 016XXXXXXXXXX
- SQ intl leg SFO-SIN: 618XXXXXXXXX
Does that help?
That indicates that you had one ticket with United (016) and one with SQ (618). I think an incorrect ticket prefix for SQ was posted earlier; I just looked it up to verify. This is exactly the situation that you described originally. There have been a couple of suggestions that, since UA was able to see your SQ segment, maybe you actually had one ticket, since a ticket can span multiple ticket numbers. This is definitively not the case — you had two tickets, and thus two contracts, and it led to all of the problems you ran into.
Originally Posted by
infinitium
Yep, there was no SQ codeshare on the LAS-SFO segment, and likewise, no UA codeshare on the SQ long-haul SFO-SIN. Typically, in past biz travels, I'd always ask my corp travel agent to book codeshares... w/the goal of keeping all flight segments with the same carrier (thinking ahead for situations like this, where dealing with a single carrier is infinitely easier).
Codeshares are a red herring. They’re a sufficient, but not necessary, element toward getting what you want, which is a single contract (single ticket) from origin to destination. A quick search of singaporeair.com for sample dates in March comes up with options via Seattle or San Francisco on Alaska Airlines (AS), or via Los Angeles on a SQ codeshare of a UA flight.
My guess is that your travel agent was trying to obtain a cheaper fare by booking SIN-SFO and SFO-LAS separately. Many of us — myself included — have done the same thing when flying for leisure; the shorter SFO-LAS leg is a “positioning flight” in this context. However, I would
never do it when traveling for business, and if the travel agent insisted upon doing it, then I would not expect the airline to honor the contract that I didn’t purchase. I’d either expect the travel agent to take care of it — if it was done without permission / contrary to company policy — or I would bill the company without a second thought, as the costs you experienced are all the direct result of this decision.
Originally Posted by
infinitium
Checked bags -- yep, I had checked bags at LAS, all the way to SIN.
This is one way that UA knew about your SQ leg, and almost certainly resulted in the UA rebooking notice.
Originally Posted by
infinitium
Given I missed my long-haul connection SFO-SIN, my bags were stuck in SFO. I had to trundle all the way to UA's baggage office @ SFO upon arrival, and to get them to retrieve for me.
The entire process took about 5 hours. (no typo there).
There was no need to retrieve your bags from UA. They would have eventually arrived in SIN — you’d have filed a baggage irregularity report with SQ when you arrived. UA may have been able to offer an amenity kit if asked, but the Hyatt probably had just about everything you’d need for the night anyway.
Originally Posted by
infinitium
"I suspect the costs were a fare difference." -- again, yep... you are likely right. I'll reconfirm later today when my corp travel agent sends me their booking receipt, which has the breakdown of that $1,500 cost (which, for the record, is associated w/costs on rebooking the SQ long-haul, and nothing to do with the domestic leg.)
"But your travel agent let UA off the hook here. I respect your principles, but I still believe your concerns are misdirected. You’re asking UA to compensate your company for something that was out of their control." -- Good point. I don't disagree. I will lean hard into my travel agent to get them to claw back those costs... either via insurance claims or other backroom channels they have with UA.
"It is possible that UA will decide that the corporate account is worth the money and will reimburse the costs." -- possible. A boy can dream 😅
Once I talk w/my corp travel agent later today during my daylight AM, I'll email UA's top exec outlining my case and politely/respectfully ask them to make this right by reimbursing both overnight SFO hotel + the SQ rebooking charge.
We’re speaking past each other. You’ve clearly made up your mind on next steps, and that’s fine. As I said, they may be successful. But if so, it’s not because any of this is or was UA’s responsibility; it’s UA bribing your company to try to keep its contract, essentially. Your company / travel agent would be trying to have its cake and eat it too here — trying to get the discount by booking as two separate tickets, but then get UA to honor the protections that would have been baked into the more expensive ticket if you’d purchased it that way.
