Jasper2009

Sorry, could only find the article in German:

http://www.welt.de/regionales/muench...ss-Lounge.html

Apparently a pax bought a fully-flexible MUC-ZRH C ticket and rebooked the ticket (free of charge) 36 times, after using the business class lounge each time.

LH took the pax to court, arguing that the pax didn't have any intention to fly. LH won the case and the pax has to pay 55Euros per lounge visit.

That's some expensive beer and potato salad.

Doc Savage

Was für ein Dummkopf....

david7031

Here is another link to an article (in German) in the Sueddeutsche Zeitung, the major newspaper in Munich:

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/reise/man...unge-1.2024046

Some additional details are: The (non-)passenger bought a fully flexible ticket, checked in, used the lounge in Munich, then changed the reservation. The reaservation was changed 34 times. At the end of the year, LH refunded the ticket. The ... customer? ... then bought another ticket used the lounge again, and tried to rebook. Instead of rebooking, LH cancelled (and refunded) the ticket, and then sent the customer(?) a bill for 36 lounge visits at 55 Euros each. The customer refused to pay and LH filed suit in Munich. LH won the case. The article doesn't mention whether or not an appeal is allowed...

hugolover

Woah what is this English law? I'm surprised that in the land of good faith and fair dealing that LH were awarded anything more than the €2-3 costs they actually incurred as part of the lounge contracts. Appeal .

gum

Thanks for the link, Jasper2009!

I am always astonished how far artificers of fraud go to damage the business of other people.

It would be fine if someone would shed light to this behaviour during criminal proceedings. Due to the fact that the "buyer" never wanted to buy and use the product itself, just rip-off the airline.

On the other hand I don't really know what the culprit wanted there so often?

Doc Savage

Maybe he worked at the airport and wanted a free lunch.

There was a similar episode somewhere in China last year.

scibuff

Can't they just prevent this by changing the fare rules so that the first segment can be no longer changed after a check-in / lounge access etc.

Jasper2009

Sure they could, but it would greatly limit the flexibility of the ticket. Full-fare Y/J fares are extremely expensive and there are many legitimate circumstances where pax cancel/change the booking after checking in / arriving at the lounge.

oliver2002

Additionally LH & co usually autocheckin most pax nowadays. So you have to have the option to checkout from the flight.

YuropFlyer

He should have used the FCL with a F ticket at least

And 55€ per lounge visit - really? It's a shame that LH got through with that.. (not that I think what he did was anywhere good, but I can't support LH's "pricing" scheme at all either)

aster

55 Euro, interesting.

Could I sue LH for not letting me into a lounge with a child and an infant for claiming that the infant is also a guest as part of my *G limit of 1 guest? Seems like I was denied my 55 Euro's worth (or actually 2x that).

RTW1

I think that's a perfectly fair price to charge those that are cheating and to be charged at a later date..... Paid lounge access is available for €30, and all those call to reschedule aren't free either. So not that big a markup for using the LH brand :-)

weero

Kind of. Hard for a SEN judge to understand that if an airline offers ridiculous products in the hope to reap (I mean rip off the customer) that they have to bear the consequences of those products themselves.

Bavaria proves once more that the customer is at fault for what the airline offers.
The higher the court the better won over they are ...
I agree. 745 EUR for a 20 minute hop in the NEK is highway robbery or at least racketeering.
That's because all these judges only know the SEN and FCL lounges. They don't know how frugal the offerings in LH's Business lounges are.

No one who seriously considers the offerings of a Biz lounge seriously would award 55 EUR for a visit there. Maybe 15 for the overhead but not 55.

Rambuster

IIRC the €55 cost was an estimation by the court.
(" Der Wert der in der Businesslounge angebotenen Leistungen sei auf 55 Euro je Besuch zu schätzen.")

Here more details:

https://www.juris.de/jportal/portal/...enachricht.jsp

weero

Which accidentally was exactly what the airline asked for: "Für jeden unberechtigten Besuch verlangte die Fluggesellschaft 55 Euro".

What a completely unbiased, professional, and serious effort to estimate the true cost of a lounge visit by the court .

Well other countries privatised the penal system, so why not hawk off the legal system? It would make for a great merger with an airline or telecommunications or a power grid operator 10 years down the road .