KARFA

If the flight is cancelled you can have a refund or rebook as normal, or under the Pucci Policy you can now choose to instead get the TPs and avios. I can't see any argument for getting both, it would appear to be taking the p*** if you did.

abligh

I am only suggesting this for the period that the airline itself appears to, um, not be flying frequently ...

DYKWIA

It is, but this seems to be the BA approach at the moment :-

orbitmic

I think it would be BA taking the p*** saying that if you get TPs when your flight is cancelled, you are not getting your money back! In fact I suspect that a court would likely agree! (the idea being that you are offered to get much less than what you bought for the price you paid for a lot more!)...

It's a bit like saying that you bought a hotel room with dinner and breakfast and if the hotel can't provide the room when you arrive in the evening, they say that you can still have the dinner if you want, but then you won't get the room rate refunded!

PS: the current situation is that if BA can't fly you on the same day, they should allow a rebooking on an other airline, and will then still give your TPs and avios through ORC. I'm assuming that the question is only about what happens when even other airlines are not an option as otherwise, the other airline route on the same day should take care of most situations when BA can't suitably accommodate on themselves or partners.

KARFA

Of course I accept there are temporary issues, and I have had plenty of cancellations recently too, but there are plenty of flights atm and I am still managing to fly frequently.

Also this doesn't even take in to account that many people can and do earn TPs from other airlines - you can earn status without ever setting foot on a BA aircraft and facing the BA/LHR problems atm.

abligh

From ZRH - a reasonable airport - I think I have the option of PHL (AA), MAD (IB), HEL (AY) or DOH (QA); and that's assuming they are all flying. I guess I should just be a bit braver when I'm trying to get to LHR/LCY, JFK and SFO!

KARFA

No, it would be your choice. If TPs and avios are so important to you then you can still have them for a flight you are not taking, but you can't also have a full refund.

I am taking on board Pucci suggestion here. I personally don't agree and I don't think you should get any aspect of the flight if it is cancelled and you opt for a full refund.

OldFruity

Yep agree that one's gotta pay for what one wants / needs re status. And it is expensive out there even in Y. . Only a lowly Gold but have managed to scrape together just enough TPs travelling back and forth to Mel in Y since covid killed the cheap ex Eu QR flights and sensible/competitive BA J pricing and First A class upgrade availability particularly out of Prg in my case. But OW Emerald status is a must for quite a few practical reasons when down the back, particularly when travelling with QR who almost go out of their way to be especially nice to you, much to the amusement of some seat neighbours who think you are some one special! (data point new Gold lounge in Doha for Emeralds in Y is by gate A1 in case you were wondering - took me a while to find it). So I have just booked a cheap rtn flight to Jersey in a few weeks, with Mrs very OF ( shes 91.5 so wish me luck) just to meet the 4 BA flight requirement this year as I am 2 short. Sadly 2 extended (multiple times) upgrade vouchers about to expire in a a few weeks so 3500 TPs earnt back in the day for nowt as no TIA fares about on my preferred routes, in the forseable future. So for me and for now RIP J & F But I will get therapy and I will overcome ......
OF

orbitmic

In my example too, it is "your choice" - you have been inconvenienced by a hotel cancellation that is none of your fault, and now the hotel gives you a "choice" that you can get your refund, or you can have the dinner which represented a very small part of what you purchased as you are exhausted by now, need to eat, and there may not be any other food anywhere nearby - but then you forfeit your refund.

In other words, in both cases, the airline/hotel profits by their own fault and how it inconveniences you.

To me, that is exactly what consumer regulation protects citizens against, and in this particular case, I maintain that courts would overrule any such "free choice" arrangement based on EC261/2004 // UK261. In other words, to me, within the current system, a choice of full refund, rebooking at the earliest opportunity, or rebooking on another date is a non-negotiable given. Airlines can offer miles, TPs, or whatever they want on top of that, but if they try to make such offer subject to passengers renouncing their regulatory rights, and especially where it can be demonstrated - as is the case here - that the airline is leaving the passenger worse off than initially contracted as a result, I think courts will have some interesting things to say and with good reason.

KARFA

Ah, well if that's your reasoning then the whole idea of still getting certain aspects of the flight even when you choose to get a full refund is not going to happen. Sorry Pucci

crazy8534

Interestingly, BA obviously has a view on this and their latest interim results presentation makes it clear they are aware that business travel remains below norms but that overall premium travel is above historic levels.

They seem to be content with the situation that business travellers will move down frequent flier tiers and leisure travellers will move up (vv the ‘bucket and spade GGL thread’). My own opinion is that the situation is temporary and that a large proportion of the money saved from not doing much or going anywhere over lockdown is now gone and the ‘cost of living crisis’ will shortly make its mark on holiday bookings.

orbitmic

It is. And I am even meaner than that: whatever an airline wants to offer (or not) will not invalidate duty of care or compensation due if the cancellation takes place less than 2 weeks before for a motive not considered exceptional circumstances. You can offer what you want, or indeed nothing at all, but not as a way to try and supersede/exonerate yourself from regulatory obligations.

Now if BA want to create a voodoo doll to my image, that's fine by me

bisonrav

It's not going to happen anyway. The group of customers wanting tier points without flying is going to be very small. BA's target market is presumably now premium leisure flyers and business flyers, both of which groups will require refunds if not travelling. The group of dedicated status seekers is small and if we're perfectly honest not very lucrative.

The idea of a top up payment for "close but no cigar" members is used for some US airlines, but £2 per TP is cloud cuckoo land I'm afraid. It would be likely at least double that. The idea would be to hoover up people who hadn't quite earned what they needed, small numbers of 100 points.

Imaginary BAEC enhancements generate a lot of smoke and heat, but never really amount to very much.

HIDDY

If that were the case then a "Which flights have a high chance of being cancelled?' thread would soon appear.

xxxxx

The double tier points on holidays, reduced thresholds and extensions have gone on long enough. There are many golds and silvers who wouldn’t hold the status if it wasn’t for these initiatives.