perezoso

So there's a national strike in Peru, and Cuzco is filling up with protesters who plan to try to overrun the airport on Saturday. There was already one attempt yesterday. Several other airports are already closed.

I'm sitting here in Cuzco with tickets for me and the family on Saturday morning.

Although it's common knowledge that there will be a confrontation Saturday at the airport, quite likely involving real bullets (see the news from Juliaca), between many thousands of irate campesinos and the well-armed police, LATAM is refusing to allow passengers to change their tickets.

What exactly its policy is depends on which customer service agent you ask. The first time we called, we were told we could change our dates for a mere $33 per ticket. Sold. No problem. Happy to pay it,. When the actual invoice to pay came, it wasn't $33 but rather over $300 per ticket (almost as much as the tickets cost in the first place). I actually tried to pay it, but the LATAM Peru website is dysfunctional and it would not let me log in to pay (tried several times).

I called again. This time, after being told LATAM would waive fees for a change and that I could pay them a minor fare difference with a credit card over the phone, after waiting on hold for nearly an hour they walked back the waiver and said we could not change the tickets at all except to a later date (not an earlier one).

A third attempt resulted in LATAM saying nothing more than that our itinerary was confirmed (for Saturday) and we can view it online.

LATAM's strategy clearly seems to be to wait until the airport closes to offer any rebooking possibilities to passengers. And probably to sell empty seats to panicking people wanting to get out. At the point the airport presumably closes, however, it could be days or longer before flights resume. Or, I suppose, in the alternative, if the airport remains open because the police use the Juliaca strategy and start shooting people left and right, then we'll have the pleasure of trying to get to the airport on Saturday morning through crowds of people whose friends have just bled out on the street.

In a world of ever declining airline service quality, this one is a new low for me. LATAM flights are going out with empty seats, it's damn near criminal that they aren't filling them with customers that want to get out before the planned attack on the airport.

perezoso

And, ta-da, they've closed the airport!

The fact that they let flights leave with empty seats yesterday and today, knowing that all hell was going to break loose, and that they refused to let us change itineraries, even if we paid (and it was a mid-fare ticket, not a cheapie) ...

There will never be forgiveness for LATAM.

carlosdca

how do you know the flights left with empty seats if you were not on those flights?

perezoso

There were tickets for sale.

Rich Peruvians like to say that poor campesinos who protest are "terrucos" ("terrorists" more or less).

For me, the criminals here are LATAM.

It was impossible for them not to know what was coming, but they refused to help their passengers. They flew out airplanes with empty seats instead of allowing itinerary changes. Que verguenza.

Semphyra

LATAM just published a policy for those flights to CUZ, AYP, JUL, AQP and TCQ. This allows changes without penalties (and paying the fare difference), if your flight is cancelled the fare difference is also waived

Link only in Spanish at the moment https://www.latamtrade.com/es_cl/com...jar_a_Peru_SSC

perezoso

We tried. They haven't officially cancelled flights for Saturday yet, so there is nothing for us. But, again, per the second representative (after an hour), they would not even let us *pay* to change the tickets to an earlier date.

This is the LATAM modus operandi: They refuse to offer "flexibilidades" (flexibilities) until the airport is closed. Then, and only then, do they offer you the "privilege" of rebooking. But there are no flights to rebook since the airport is closed. They are trying to milk change fees and (re)booking out of their own customers in the face of widespread civil unrest ... rather than offering a modicum of decency to their customers by allowing rebookings (before the airport is closed), given the situation, even into empty seats.

They would not even fly us just to Lima in an empty seat yesterday or today ("hay que respectar el trayecto Cuzco - Bogota") ... where we would stay at our own expense for a day or two ... to pick up our original connecting flight. As if we were flying out of Cuzco por gusto and not because the airport was about to be overrun by rioters.

Clearly a situation of policy over common sense, and squeezing money out of customers' pain, i.e. taking advantage of unrest to attempt to profit.

carlosdca

Hindsight is 20/20.
Airlines can't implement waivers of policies based on what "could happen".
What is happening in CUS is an unfortunate and sad political situation.
You are stuck in CUS because of that political situation, not so much because of LATAM.
But feel free to direct your anger to whoever you want.

perezoso

I disagree. It was abundantly clear several days ago that this would happen, and we contacted them then. The plans for popular movements to close the airport in Cuzco were widely announced and common public knowledge. Initially there were 'only' about 20,000 protesters in Cuzco, but it was known that more would arrive (apparently ~50,000 right now and growing) and that they would target the airport. Moreover, on Monday, a takeover of the next closest airport (Juliaca) was attempted by protesters, resulting in the death of 17 people. Other airports (Jaen, Ayacucho) were similarly closed. It is impossible for LATAM to say that it did not know it was coming.

Under the circumstances, with foreknowledge that an attack on the airport was imminent, and with one small attack already having been thwarted, it is unconscionable that LATAM refused to let passengers change tickets and fill empty seats in the days before an airport closure that everyone knew was very likely to take place, probably in the midst of serious violence.

Carlos, we all become fanboys of one airline or another at one time or another, and you may like LATAM this week, but placing their passengers in danger when they were completely capable of resolving many such problems at no cost to themselves and in advance of a known threat is inexcusable.

And, to repeat myself once again, we were denied the opportunity to change our tickets AT ALL. No "waiver" requested. We could not even pay to change the tickets, in violation of the company's own terms, except to select a later date (not a sooner one). You should recognize and acknowledge serious misbehavior by your favorite airline.

And by the way, the airport code is CUZ, not CUS. You can maybe blame that one on the gringos, but the pishtaco here is LATAM.

carlosdca

Again, hindsight is 20/20.

Semphyra

Did you try again after my post? The waiver wasn't published when you created this thread

Still it sounds weird that they didn't let you change your tickets to an earlier date, it should be possible as long as there is availability. Looks like it makes space to make a complain to the airline

Eastbay1K

The OP might as well just continually hit his/her head against a wall - it will likely be as useful as a complaint. As to the airline, it can't do anything about the unrest. It could have had a more flexible waiver issued earlier. What was the POS of the original ticket? US? EU? Peru? Other? Your remedies might be best with a complaint to the authorities that govern the ticket itself. If it is Peru, who knows where the "libro de quejas" might be.

perezoso

Yes, we did try again after the waiver, no luck. As I have been saying, LATAM doesn't offer any "flexibilities" until the airport closes for the time/date that your flight is to depart. Then your flight is cancelled. And you don't know when the flights will resume. Right now CUZ is closed until 0500 tomorrow (Saturday).

Eastbay has it right. Talking to LATAM Peru customer service is a horror story. Ticket issued by LATAM in Miami, so US point of sale.

This was completely predictable, the social movements had been advertizing their intent to close the airport for days in advance, there was the massacre in Juliaca, etc... Yet LATAM sent empty seats out of Cuzco because they refused to allow changes of itinerary. With the full knowledge that thousands of irate campesinos were descending on the place with the intent of closing it.

I for one will never forgive this airline.

perezoso

At least the Colombian media has picked up the story...

RCN Colombia: Colombianos atrapados por cierre del aeropuerto de Cuzco

Key quote: "Frente a esto, las aerolíneas no han dado una mayor respuesta, e incluso, han indicado que los turistas que ahora se encuentran sin información de una posible reapertura del aeropuerto deberán pagar la debida multa de incumplimiento y el adicional de un nuevo viaje."

Summary: To obtain a new seat, the airlines are demanding rebooking fees and the cost of a new ticket.

And I can say that I was personally told this by LATAM (one of three people we've spoken to, others said different and also incorrect things). This is illegal, at least for a US ticket, no?

At this point I'm becoming convinced that the airlines (the situation with SKY is apparently very similar) didn't just fail to adequately reaccomodate passengers before the airport was predictably closed, the may actually be trying to actively exploit the unrest to generate additional revenue.

andreadbc

I agree that LATAM should've let you change your ticket but as you mention that the flight was supposed to connect to BOG, that might've been part of the problem (LIM was just a connecting point). I've seen my share of situations that availability isn't the same for separate segments than when both flights are a connection --- not that there shouldn't be a way to override this, but it does complicate things.

I understand that the airport did reopen this morning so I hope that you were able to fly as scheduled...

carlosdca

It appears that's true and all LATAM flights operated today.
So the OP was not affected at all?