Skipping the middle leg of a 3 part flight?

Old Mar 8, 19, 4:40 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Programs: Flying Blue Silver, Miles & More pleb
Posts: 296
Skipping the middle leg of a 3 part flight?

Hello, I managed to secure a crazy ticket which will be really good for my FB Miles. Path is BHX-AMS-BRU-JFK with the first leg landing at 15h00 in AMS, and the next 2 segments in the early morning.

I have some good friends in BRU so I was contemplating going there via train/plane on the same day, skipping the middle leg, and just catching the plane again in BRU the next morning. (although I will lose some XP for that segment, but oh well....)

However, I assume it's impossible to leave my luggage checked-in for the flight if I choose to deplane? Assuming I'm even allowed to skip the segment?
Flight was booked with dodgy OTA so change with KL pretty much guaranteed to be impossible.
However I would also be prepared to buy a one way AMS-BRU on the 16h55. Assuming I do that directly with KLM, would they be able to route my luggage through this new flight, just for the middle segment?

Wondering if anyone has ever tried

Otherwise I'll just have to spend a nice evening in Amsterdam

Many Thanks
Maestro Ramen is offline  
Old Mar 8, 19, 5:21 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Accor 25+ Badge
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Paris, France
Programs: AF/KL Flying Blue Platinum for life/Club2000 Ultimate, UA Mileage plus, Le Club Accorhotels platinum
Posts: 13,954
If you skip the 2nd leg, the rest of your itinerary will be cancelled.
Often1 likes this.
Goldorak is online now  
Old Mar 8, 19, 5:55 pm
  #3  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 42,901
This has nothing to do with your luggage. You must fly your ticket in segment order. If you no show for any segment, the remaining segments will be cancelled and retain whatever value they have under their fare rules. That will most typically be nothing.
Often1 is offline  
Old Mar 9, 19, 3:02 am
  #4  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Programs: Flying Blue Silver, Miles & More pleb
Posts: 296
Gotcha, will stick with the original plan. Cheers.
Maestro Ramen is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 7:26 am
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 11,576
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
You must fly your ticket in segment order. If you no show for any segment, the remaining segments will be cancelled and retain whatever value they have under their fare rules.
A Belgian court has today declared these fare rules null and void. The court ruled that AF-KL may not cancel a ticket if a pax doesn't fly one or more of the segments. Should the airline not comply, it will have to pay damages of 2,500.-- per day.

Source (in Dutch)

A similar court case is pending in the Netherlands.

Johan
johan rebel is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 7:33 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by johan rebel View Post
A Belgian court has today declared these fare rules null and void. The court ruled that AF-KL may not cancel a ticket if a pax doesn't fly one or more of the segments. Should the airline not comply, it will have to pay damages of 2,500.-- per day.

Source (in Dutch)

A similar court case is pending in the Netherlands.

Johan
I wonder if the consumer organisation realises that this means the cheaper tickets originating from a foreign airport to the hub of the airline will be a thing of the past?
pepe C is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 9:55 am
  #7  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 16,065
Originally Posted by johan rebel View Post
A Belgian court has today declared these fare rules null and void. The court ruled that AF-KL may not cancel a ticket if a pax doesn't fly one or more of the segments. Should the airline not comply, it will have to pay damages of € 2,500.-- per day.

Source (in Dutch)

A similar court case is pending in the Netherlands.

Johan
There have been similar decisions in Germany and Italy. As always with those cases, however, the devil is in the detail. Just saying that a clause that results in the cancellation of the ticket if a sector is missed or is taken out of order is void as unfair does not necessarily mean that the passenger has the right to skip a segment at no cost and continue. The article you reference is very vague and does not contain enough information to give a clear sense of what was actually decided in the case.
NickB is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 11:08 am
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 11,576
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
The article you reference is very vague and does not contain enough information to give a clear sense of what was actually decided in the case.
I found the website of the court concerned, but unfortunately the judgment is not available there.

Johan
johan rebel is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 12:01 pm
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 16,065
Originally Posted by johan rebel View Post
I found the website of the court concerned, but unfortunately the judgment is not available there.

Johan
OK. A little bit more information from a Belgian newspaper here (in French). The argument seems to be one of insufficient clarity in the contract as to what the clause means rather than objecting to the principle of requiring passengers to fly segments in succession per se.
NickB is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 4:20 pm
  #10  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Programs: Flying Blue Silver, Miles & More pleb
Posts: 296
Nice unexpected update, thanks!

I'm not ballsy enough to risk it so will stick to original plan.

I never wanted to cheat the system tbh - merely to skip a leg on my own dime or even pay extra for it.

Fyi after this I contacted my "dodgy" OTA and they actually kindly contacted KLM to see if I could change the middle leg for a fee. KLM replied they would only change me to an AMS-JFK direct but not willing to change only the AMS-BRU flight.

Guess they don't really like people who book long winded xp runs... so in the end Im sticking to my guns and planning to enjoy all the lounges
Maestro Ramen is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 4:28 pm
  #11  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Programs: Flying Blue Silver, Miles & More pleb
Posts: 296
Well... apart from the aspire bhx becsuse that one is hard to enjoy...
Maestro Ramen is offline  
Old Oct 3, 19, 6:38 pm
  #12  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 16,065
Originally Posted by Maestro Ramen View Post
Nice unexpected update, thanks!

I'm not ballsy enough to risk it so will stick to original plan.
... especially as, with your itinerary, Belgian courts would be unlikely to have jurisdiction so you would in all likelihood have to argue your case before a UK court if you had to litigate.
NickB is offline  
Old Oct 4, 19, 12:20 am
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 11,576
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
The argument seems to be one of insufficient clarity in the contract as to what the clause means rather than objecting to the principle of requiring passengers to fly segments in succession per se.
It would appear so. However, the very last sentence in the L'Echo article states that the court has ordered AFKL to no longer enforce the no show clause. I suppose that means that until the airline changes its T&Cs and reformulates the offending clause so that it complies with the court's standards for clarity, pax cannot be penalized for skipping legs.

Johan
johan rebel is offline  
Old Oct 4, 19, 2:40 am
  #14  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 16,065
Originally Posted by johan rebel View Post
It would appear so. However, the very last sentence in the L'Echo article states that the court has ordered AFKL to no longer enforce the no show clause. I suppose that means that until the airline changes its T&Cs and reformulates the offending clause so that it complies with the court's standards for clarity, pax cannot be penalized for skipping legs.

Johan
Indeed.
NickB is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread