mysong

Hi guys,

I faced a problem now when trying to book the following flights using avios. The fare team rejected it saying they are not “the most direct flight”,

LHR-DUB
DUB-DOH
DOH-MEL
MEL-NAN (Fiji)
NAN-HKG
HKG-TFU (China)
TFU-DOH
DOH-LHR

My question why BA thinks they are not the “most direct” in such situation? In another word,

1, If I delete the first leg LHR-DUB will it be eligible?
2, If I delete the last two legs, TFU-DOH-LHR, will it be eligible?
3, If I change the last two legs to TFU-LHR not via DOH (if it exists) will it be eligible?

Your advice and comments are appreciated!

BA6501

It's very much down to the individual agent (or agent who picks this up in the Fares team).

Removing LHR-DUB and making the return HKG-LHR gets it far closer to being the "most direct route".

DeathSlam

This isn't a RTW itinerary it's a 'there and back again' to NAN.
There have been reports here that the guidance for Multi-Carrier rewards have changed and no longer allow RTW itineraries and require you to be booking a 'there and back' itinerary on a reasonable route. The intent seemingly being that multi-carrier is there for your convenience when a single OW carrier and BA together are unable to service your return journey, and not that you can book any 16 segment routing you like and can find availability for.
LHR-DUB-DOH-MEL-NAN has a bit of a dogleg in it. Presumably there is a reason why you wanted it? LHR-DOH-MEL-NAN would be more direct and should be ok.
A map from the Great Circle Mapper - Great Circle Mapper (gcmap.com)
NAN-HKG-TFU-DOH-LHR is not direct, but it is a more linear route. You can fly direct from HKG to LHR though so it isn't a viable direct return routing from NAN. NAN-HKG-LHR should be OK.
A map from the Great Circle Mapper - Great Circle Mapper (gcmap.com)
LHR-DOH-MEL-NAN-HKG-LHR looks a lot less adventurous but a lot more reasonable. So it would depend on why you wanted DUB and TFU.
A map from the Great Circle Mapper - Great Circle Mapper (gcmap.com)

marcolau317

This explains the restrictions imposed by the agent when I tried to book HKG-DOH-N America // N America-TYO-KUL-HKG last week. OW AONE3 fare was referenced in ticket issuance. The agent said the restrictions for that is:
- Outbound segment of HKG-DOH-N America must be flown together and stopover is not permitted. This is added to the ticket specifically.
- On return segments stopover at TYO is permitted and ticketed, but TYO-KUL-HKG only allows transit, as it's not the most direct route but no other more direct routes are available (again, this is remarked in the ticket specifically and regardless if TYO stopover is taken or not).
- When asked if further segments can be added in NA, the agent replied depends on the seat availability and routing requirements, not sure if that is possible for this booking.

In OP's case though, for outbound starting at LHR or DUB and direct to DOH onwards should fix the issue. For the inbound, the stopover at TFU could be the problem, removing it and book separately could address the issue but it requires travelling back to HKG to pick up the segments.

etiene

This is all rumour level, since they don’t publish the actual rules for these - most of the blogs on these tickets say there’s “no backtracking” allowed. i.e. you can’t go back through the same transit point at DOH, so that could be your issue? Granted it doesn’t really match what you’ve been told.

DeathSlam

No backtracking would apply to a paid round the world ticket. That's not what a multi-carrier reward flight is, so I don't think going to DOH twice will be an issue.
You are correct that all we have is rumour and speculation. And the earlier poster was undoubtedly also correct in saying it depends who you get on the phone and who you get in the ticketing dept.
I am hoping to book a complex multi-carrier award at some point so I have been following the discussion on here closely, but I don't have any great inside knowledge or recent personal experience.

etiene

I've seen it said that to book an award itinerary, a similar cash fare has to be available - but I can't remember if that's true at BA, or if it applies to multi-carrier rewards. I've done a couple of these, but I've always planned around the no backtracking rumour so haven't tested the Fares Department on that one. I did manage to confirm the one open-jaw limit though. I get the impression that there's less scope for YMMV with the Fares people than with the phone agent who pieces things together. Since basically everything goes to the Fares team to get a quote on the TFCs the rules are probably less squishy than we'd hope - they're just entirely unknown even to the considerable knowledge base on FT.

Just realised that OP was hoping to backtrack through both HKG and DOH - so the phone advice might comport with that, albeit not being as clear as it could be. I'm guessing TFU doesn't give other partner options to take an alternate route home? Maybe an open jaw to somewhere served by JAL and home via Japan...?

Anonba

Deleted

mysong

Thanks very much for the reply.

The reason for LHR-DUB is to aviod UK's passenger duty.
The reason for HKG-TFU is that I am staying there for two months. In another word, China (TFU) is the destination, Fiji (NAN) is just a short holiday.

From your reply, I have a new understanding of its rules now. In my (old) opinion, RTW ticket can be issued as long as you want to fly to 8 (NOT 16) different destinations and the route is reasonable. Eg. Europe-Asia-America-Europe but NOT Europe-Asia-Europe-America-Europe

Now it seems that I have to choose only one and the furthest place as 'there and back' and I have to explain the reason for each stopover. However the stopovers are where I would like to visited during the journey. I am very confused now. I am thinking if BA only allows a single destination in each itinerary, given mine as an example LHR-DOH-MEL-NAN which is NAN, then the inbound journey via HKG should never be allowed no matter how one plans it as the most direct route to fly back is the original NAN-MEL-DOH-LHR. If it could be permitted, say NAN-HKG-LHR is allowed, then the outbound journey should not be allowed in the first place as the most direct route would be LHR-HKG-NAN. Does it make sense or I still did not get the point?

An additional information is that I have made two bookings successfully late 2022 and early this year, please see below. Do you think these two routes are legit according to its 'there and back' regulation? Looking forward to your reply. Thanks once again. Other thoughts and comments are welcome as well.

etiene

I think the "there and back again" thing probably is highly YMMV. But looking at the others, you didn't backtrack through the same hub [I'm assuming CAN and HKG are not considered co-terminals, despite being very close geographically]. So that remains my guess at the real issue.

I did FRA-NRT;HND-SYD-WLG;ZQN-MEL-PER-DOH-AMS earlier this year, with stopovers in Japan, NZ and MEL. I don't think the "real destination" being TFU is your issue here, though admittedly the NAN stop being considerably shorter than the TFU stop could fall afoul of a "there and back again" interpretation.

mysong

For my case, yes, I am going to remove the LHR-DUB and travel back from Beijing to London, as below, but keep the TFU route, not sure if it will work in your opinion?

mysong

Amazing itinerary! Only one openjaw which is in NZ. From yours I learnt that if it is within the same city then it would not count as a openjaw (eg NRT and HND)
By the way, in my case, do you think the main problem is the TFU-DOH-LHR? I am now thinking to remove the LHR-DUB (if necessary) and change the last two legs to PKX-LHR. Will it work? Thanks

DeathSlam

Judging be your previous itineraries I would just try dropping the LHR-DUB and see if it works.
That will do two things.
1. It is no longer a roundtrip journey. (Neither of your previous two went back to the place they started).
2. You are not setting off from the UK so will avoid APD.

marcolau317

That's one possibility. I have been told at times that one can't cross the same location twice (stopover or transit) so you need to think carefully on this.
Removing LHR-DUB should help and with that new routing you should be able to get the agent to send it to ticketing team for a look again, though the concern here is either the agent will take NAN is the splitting point between outbound/inbound, and then whether it was possible to have further open-jaw on the inbound segment that way; or will the agent realize the actual splitting point should have been TFU and then the routing makes no sense (too indirect) and reject it once again. Good luck!

marcolau317

If your itinerary has a comparable cash fare on ITA Matrix it should help agents to identify splitting point of the itinerary and performing tax calculation faster (manual compiling 2 separate tickets together).
Being based in HK, recently on a good day the local call centre team might be able to give you the tax amount and do ticket issuance in the same call.