Virazuno

On one PNR?

Reply...with care. If you say yes, EVERYBODY is going to know exactly how you did this, and how they can do it too!

orbitmic

I guess our question is more whether conjunction ticket is meant literally here or not. That would typically involved reissued etix with consecutive numbers for instance and something frankly entirely unheard of at BA except on some fully flexible fully refundable tickets that allow reissue with end on end combination on multiple fares.

If not, then chances are that this is not really a conjunction ticket but rather that the PNRs were just cross-referenced (what people sometimes mistakenly call "linked") which sounds far more likely, and which would unfortunately have absolutely no value either in terms of either protecting your itinerary in case the flight from one itinerary is late and make you miss the second, or from the point of view of HMRC and APD refund.

frb98mf

Check out this thread which in turn has links to several others on this topic.

I have this exact situation coming up - landing on a Tues night on an F redemption, flying out Weds lunchtime on a J revenue ticket. I've corresponded with both HMRC and BA on this, and the consensus seems to be that BA should associate the two tickets by each referring to the other's PNR/timings in the notes (HMRC's definition of "conjoined" is actually pretty flexible and favourable to the traveller).

Then after the flight, I should be able to claim a reimbursement from BA, as according to HMRC, they shouldn't be charging it once they see me board the second plane within 24h of the first. They only account to HMRC in arrears, once travel has taken place anyway.

Given that my J ticket was one of those ex-US sale+AARP+Avios $800 jobs, clawing back the $200 in APD is a pretty material chunk of change!

nux

So do you have one ticket now?

By BA rep, do you mean a phone agent?

Unless your existing tickets are cancelled and reissued, I think all that has been done is a TCP providing a reference to one from the other. This is not a conjunction ticket.

So are they all BA marketed, operated and ticketed? Or some are AA operated (and marketed/ticketed?)? And you mentioned SK further up?

corporate-wage-slave

I would not assume this is going to happen. You could perhaps get the ticket reissued to reflect the connection.

kanderson1965

I find it disappointing that people are going out of their way, for their own personal gain, to find ways to deprive the British public of their rightful tax revenue.

orbitmic

In fairness, APD is only intended to apply to UK originating itineraries (minus exceptions) so it does not shock me that people attempt to have self-organised connections treated as TA arranged connections. Whether this will work or not is another question.

Incidentally, part of the reason why I think it might not is that it would create a bit of a can of worm. It is not unusual for UK-based business people to have two trips within 24 hours of each other. If I'm back from the states at 8am on Monday and then have my next business trip at 7am on Tuesday, should all stops below 24 hours be treated as effective connections, I would be able to claim APD back on my second ticket which could ultimately result in a fairly significant revenue loss for the State.

sts603

Seriously???? HMRC takes FAR more than their fair share of my paycheck. I have no issue with people going through length's to not pay HMRC, especially when we're talking about money that they really shouldn't be entitled to and only get due to technical limitations and the like. Alas I work in a field which makes it pretty impossible for me to deprive them of any material share of what I owe then. But game on to those who can.

ajeleonard

It's not "rightful tax revenue", HMRC themselves acknowledge that. APD does not apply to people transiting.

armouredant

I don't imagine the loss of tax revenue of a bunch of frequent flyers attempting to claim back tax that, in the letter of the law, they are owed will have any sort of significant effect on this great nation's state income.

The efforts of massive, enormously profitable, multinational corporations to avoid tax on an industrial scale, though.

*ducks, donning flame-retardant apparel for the remainder of this thread*

nux

Unless on one ticket or a conjunction ticket (which is further defined and discussed ad nauseam in the threads linked above) no refund is due.

kanderson1965

How is it not rightful if it is due? You either meet the criteria for exemption or it is due. There is a term for attempting to avoid paying tax that is due.

sts603

Rightful tax and tax due are two very different things.

kanderson1965

In what way?

paul4040

But the OP is trying to show that he does meet the criteria for exemption. I'm not sure what the problem is - though I am sceptical it will work in his case.