787

According to the the AA site, you can bring 3 minors into the Admirals Club if you purchase a day pass. The situation is my sons High School is on a trip to Ecuador and the 4 adults and 12 STEM High Schoolers had a 6 hour layover in MIA. Since the AA club allows 3 minors per adult I said I would pay for the 4 adults to have access and they could bring 3 minors in each, I even called AA before hand and they stated that would not be a problem. When they arrived the club informed them that the minors had to be in the same family, but it seems that they were going to give them a "special" deal and if they purchased 5 day pass instead of 4 it would be okay. Anyone have any experience with this?

donotblink

The website says:

Guest access

Up to 3 children under 18 (if accompanied by adult day-pass holder)

It does not have a same family requirement.

787

I called the Admirals Club number today and the Rep informed me the minors have to be your children which is not what the web site says, or what the rep said last. In the end the AA Club was happy to let them in, just as long as they forked over more $$$.

Uzzar

I wish i could make up my own rules for my job. Must be nice.

ESpen36

bchandler02

Just tell the staff that they are adopted. Let them challenge that.

Often1

Whatever the intent of the policy, it is not the policy. The policy is as published by AA.

It is unclear whether the group actually paid out the additional funds. If they did, AA ought to refund each adult's payments above the single. If not, then it is worth a complaint to AA and one would certainly want the original 4 passes refunded.

787

The AA Club agent said she would make a "special exception" and let them in if they paid for 5 passes instead for the 4. I had told the group I would cover the cost, so they were on the spot to pay the extra $59 instead of the $236 it should have been. My son was not sure what to do, so he just used the CC we had given him for the trip to cover the full cost $295. I understand that the lounges may not be specifically intended for school trips, but this was early on a Sunday Morning, so i'm pretty sure the club would not have had a capacity issue. At the end of the day AA has a posted policy, but they seem pick and choose how it is enforced. And hitting up a group of High Schoolers and their teachers for more $ is obviously not an issue for them.

mvoight

I am a bit confused about which rule would let buying a 5th pass would make everything OK. As noted, unless the rule says the minors have to be related, it seems that 3 minors should have been permitted for every adult with a pass.

AlwaysAisle

My understanding is that OP purchased the day pass, but OP was not one of adults traveling with high school students. Is it possible that was the problem?

What was the name on the day pass OP purchased?

787

No, I was not with the group, and the plan was for them to just use my son's CC to purchase the day passes at the club. They were not pre-purchased. There was no rational given from the agent at the club desk why purchasing an extra pass (5 instead of 4) made everything okay. Maybe she works on commission for all I know.

USFlyerUS

I think it's pretty clear the intent of the policy is to come in with one's own children. I don't think it's reasonable to think the marketing analyst who wrote the text for the web site should have envisioned this scenario (and likely several others) where one may come in with minors not one's own.

Also, "children" is often used to mean descendants.

mvoight

It sounded like 4 passes were expected to be purchased, one for each adult.
There were 12 minors on the trip, or 3 per adult.

mvoight

Yes, but the creator of the contract is responsibile for what is missing in the contract.
That is, in court, I would expect a ruling in favor of the person who bought the passes, as the contract clarity is up to the contract provider.

trooper

Really? On what do you base that conclusion? As complex as the English language may be it would be incredibly easy to write the policy to ACTUALLY state that. I think it ENTIRELY reasonable to expect whoever wrote the policy to make it mean what it was meant to mean. (If that restriction was indeed intended) What I think is unreasonable is to expect paying clients to read in to written policies what is NOT stated.