The afternoon flight that you chose is still an afternoon flight, operating nonstop, departing and arriving at the same time. Why would you expect to be able to change flights without a fee on a cheap non-refundable ticket?

Fare was $500--certainly not cheap when compared to other airlines servicing this route?

Cheap compared to a more-flexible ticket on AA, I'm pretty sure.

Presumably you were willing to pay more (than on other airlines) for the convenience of an afternoon nonstop, which you still have.

Yes, I wanted the afternoon flight--on the 767--not on the 757.
I am not interested in spending 6 hours plus on a 757--I would even rather fly the 777 to LAX and change aircraft, if they did not have the am 767.
Also much better chance of upgrade on the larger aircraft than the 757.

I've been on the losing side of that a few times: A380 to 744; 767 to 757; 777 to 767. There is never anything to be done about it. The ones I dislike the most are 767 to 757. You have my sympathies.

As they say, OP, stuff happens.

yeah--I will pay to make the change as I do not want to be on a 757--I know it is part of the game--but please AA stop sending me all that email telling me how important a customer I am and how you value my business and than never be yielding when you have a chance to show you mean it??

Yeah, it sucks, but you have no real recourse, and shouldn't, IMO. Thems the breaks.

Had something similar recently. We were flying ORD-SFO on the 20:25 flight, 738. F was looking full so I did CFC to the 18:45 763. It had 8 open F seats, with F0 (seats held against Y oversell), pretty much a guaranteed upgrade as we were top on the list.

We get to ORD and they've swapped in a 757L as the 763 didn't make it in from Europe due to ash activity (this was this past weekend). Now they have an oversell of 5 in F. So, we sit in Y. And the flight is about half an hour late. So:

We lost exit row seats, had no chance at the upgrade. We did still get in 1:10 early.

I do feel somewhat gipped by shelling out $100 for this, but I know that the equipment is not guaranteed. Oh well.

Cheers.

You purchased a relatively low, restricted fare, are unhappy AA changed the aircraft on you - you are pretty much SOL. Airlines do not even guarantee you a seat - much less which aircraft you will fly on. Your fee-free options include waiting to see if there is a schedule change, so you can then call and get a change you desire.

The abbreviation for this paragraph is S-O-L, since the C of C is the one-sided contract enforced on you when you purchase a ticket.

Then that would involve a schedule change and you'd be entitled to a free change or refund. In your real case, there is no schedule change.

What exactly is "nonsense"? The fact that a restricted ticket is not changeable without paying the penalty? Everyone here knows that equipment changes happen and there is never any guarantee, and we just have to accept that. The airline is certainly not trying to pull one over on us by swapping a 757 for a 767, they're just trying to run their business as optimally as they can.

That said, I'd point out that the CoC excerpt posted above is really related to AA's (lack of) liability for schedule changes or delay. Meaning you can't sue them for damages if you miss an important meeting. The issue of them waiving change fees for advance schedule changes is more a customer service issue than a contract issue, and while they still fall on the stingy side of things, most of us know that, and there's certainly no reason to expect any waivers.

OP, just to let you know that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction....

Recently I was flying BOS->SFO on quite possibly the cheapest transcon ticket known to man, about 214 a.i. if I recall correctly. My EXP gave me a nice, free bump into F on the 757 (typical equipment for this route).

Don't know what happened, and don't care, but walked onto the plane to find myself aboard a 763 with NGBC, and a FA staff which was 2x as friendly and attentive as usual.

So, your situation's ripple effect was much appreciated by quite a few people at least.

American planes listed in order of convenience: 777-767-757 . I feel your pain as well as 757s are not as comfortable as 767s.

Unless, the 757 is a 75L - I find those more comfortable on the average than 763 and 777, in that order.

gamehendge2000, goodonya.

I beg to agree and to disagree, fellow and respected FT member :) - the C of C in this instance both exonerates AA for the enumerated acts and protects them from a passenger suing to recover "special, incidental or consequential damages". Their legal eagles have protected them every which way to Tuesday, and the next paragraphs are even more onerous - as are the agreements governments slowed them two write themselves, like the Warsaw Convention, as amended at Hague, Montreal et al.

That's why the title is actually "RESPONSIBILITY FOR SCHEDULES AND OPERATIONS" and not something like "LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES" or the like.

The next paragraph in C of C excuses AA for practically everything else not heretofore covered: "FORCE MAJEURE EVENTS". (Includes "the devil made me do it" and "the agent was insufficiently trained" I am sure. :rolleyes:)

When they (AA, or any airline,) do cut us slack, which occasionally they do as documented in FT, we can consider they have deviated from their Draconian unilaterally imposed "contract".

Defensive flying requires passengers read the C of C, Customer Service Plan and the airline's "Rule 80 / Rule 240" at minimum.

Downgauge = little recourse, unless it comes with changes of time, destination and / or routing.