Do I get protected on separate itineraries?
Nov 30, 2015, 1:57 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2015
Programs: MPC SL
Posts: 110
Do I get protected on separate itineraries?
I am flying AA DFW-BOS on Jan 24 and then IB (BA-operated) BOS-LHR at 7:30am, Jan 25. The AA domestic flight is the last flight of that day. They are separate tickets. In case AA flight is cancelled, will I be protected onto a later BA flight to LHR? Both airlines are OneWorld would help? I am also OWS.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Nov 30, 2015, 2:15 pm
#3
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Programs: AMEX Plat / AY Plat, BA GGL-CCR / Bonvoy Titanium (LTP)
Posts: 474
That should be officially Yes? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/ameri...d-tickets.html 
Nov 30, 2015, 2:18 pm
#4
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maine
Programs: AA Plat, FI Silver, DL alumnus
Posts: 1,432
Actually, not true.
The OP would have been better to ask in the AA forum, where there is an extensive thread on irrops protection. See the wiki at the top of that thread, or check out AA's published policy on OW reaccommodation.
The OP would have been better to ask in the AA forum, where there is an extensive thread on irrops protection. See the wiki at the top of that thread, or check out AA's published policy on OW reaccommodation.
Nov 30, 2015, 2:19 pm
#5
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
That should be officially Yes? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/ameri...d-tickets.html
So, indeed OP may be rebooked or he may not, unless someone can come up with an "official" policy which is current and applicable to OP's ticket.
Nov 30, 2015, 2:37 pm
#6
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
That should be officially Yes? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/ameri...d-tickets.html
Nov 30, 2015, 2:37 pm
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Not here; there!
Programs: AA Lifetime Gold
Posts: 29,584
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry: BlackBerry8530/5.0.0.1030 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/417)
AA would be obligated by its own policy to re-route the OP to LHR -- perhaps, but not necessarily, on BA. (AA might just put the OP on its own DFW-LHR nonstop.)
AA's re-accommodation policy has not changed. It was always on AA's travel agency page. The only thing that's changed is that the travel agency page is no longer accessible to the general public. If you search around FT, you'll find a thread that contains a link to AA's separate-tickets protection policy, in PDF form.
AA would be obligated by its own policy to re-route the OP to LHR -- perhaps, but not necessarily, on BA. (AA might just put the OP on its own DFW-LHR nonstop.)
AA's re-accommodation policy has not changed. It was always on AA's travel agency page. The only thing that's changed is that the travel agency page is no longer accessible to the general public. If you search around FT, you'll find a thread that contains a link to AA's separate-tickets protection policy, in PDF form.
Nov 30, 2015, 2:42 pm
#8
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
It most certainly was on AA's consumer-facing website until a few months ago. At that time, the provision was removed while the page with other information is still active. That suggests the page was consciously edited.
If it was a mistake, it has not been fixed. As AA has no obligation to have had the policy under either DOT rules or its own COC, I would not rely on it until AA provides whatever passes for "official" clarification. Preferably by reinstating the website reference.
If it was a mistake, it has not been fixed. As AA has no obligation to have had the policy under either DOT rules or its own COC, I would not rely on it until AA provides whatever passes for "official" clarification. Preferably by reinstating the website reference.
Nov 30, 2015, 3:11 pm
#10
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GGL+GfL, ALL Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,525
It most certainly was on AA's consumer-facing website until a few months ago. At that time, the provision was removed while the page with other information is still active. That suggests the page was consciously edited.
If it was a mistake, it has not been fixed. As AA has no obligation to have had the policy under either DOT rules or its own COC, I would not rely on it until AA provides whatever passes for "official" clarification. Preferably by reinstating the website reference.
If it was a mistake, it has not been fixed. As AA has no obligation to have had the policy under either DOT rules or its own COC, I would not rely on it until AA provides whatever passes for "official" clarification. Preferably by reinstating the website reference.
Nov 30, 2015, 3:37 pm
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Not here; there!
Programs: AA Lifetime Gold
Posts: 29,584
Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry: BlackBerry8530/5.0.0.1030 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/417)
Indeed, I had not noticed the change and it is quite worrying. I can confirm that as you rightly say, the AA policy was explicitly stated on the website earlier this year, detailing cases (one reservation: fine, separate reservations: not fine unless they are both OW).
If anyone is truly concerned about this, why not just submit an inquiry to Customer Service at aa.com and ask whether the re-accommodation policy -- which still appears on the travel-agency page -- is still in effect?
I do not recall seeing a single report on any forum here on FT of AA's refusing to honor this policy -- at least not after a printout of it was shown to the appropriate AA staff member. (Reports do indicate that not all of AA's front-line staff are aware of the policy.)
Originally Posted by orbitmic
It most certainly was on AA's consumer-facing website until a few months ago. At that time, the provision was removed while the page with other information is still active. That suggests the page was consciously edited.
If it was a mistake, it has not been fixed. As AA has no obligation to have had the policy under either DOT rules or its own COC, I would not rely on it until AA provides whatever passes for "official" clarification. Preferably by reinstating the website reference.
If it was a mistake, it has not been fixed. As AA has no obligation to have had the policy under either DOT rules or its own COC, I would not rely on it until AA provides whatever passes for "official" clarification. Preferably by reinstating the website reference.
I do not recall seeing a single report on any forum here on FT of AA's refusing to honor this policy -- at least not after a printout of it was shown to the appropriate AA staff member. (Reports do indicate that not all of AA's front-line staff are aware of the policy.)
Nov 30, 2015, 4:00 pm
#12
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD, LHR, FCO
Programs: BA Gold, etc. etc.
Posts: 1,402
It's still available on this supposedly password-protected AA server, however I would not rely on this as it may be an outdated document...
https://ssc.aa.com/prmportal_enu/Age...ng%20Index.pdf
https://ssc.aa.com/prmportal_enu/Age...ng%20Index.pdf
Nov 30, 2015, 6:17 pm
#14
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Maine
Programs: AA Plat, FI Silver, DL alumnus
Posts: 1,432
Nov 30, 2015, 7:03 pm
#15
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
That policy does not appear in the current COC and it has been removed from the customer FAQ.
Smart move rather than trying to waive paper you printed off the Internet in some agent's face would be to have AA document this for you if you plan on relying on it.