VDB Bait & Switch: The new norm?
Oct 12, 2018, 8:45 am
#46
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
EC 261/2004 is very clear that carriers and passengers are free to make their own arrangements.
In fact, it is often the case that a carrier will acknowledge compensation under the Regulation and offer the passenger a choice of the required amount in cash (equivalent) or a greater amount as a credit. Thus, it is quite normal to see an offer of EUR 600 cash or a credit worth EUR 900. For the regular traveler, the latter likely represents very good value. For the non-regular traveler, it is, of course, worthless.
In this case, OP was quite happy with the arrangement. Many would be,
Oct 13, 2018, 12:14 am
#47
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,406
It sounds that perhaps the agent wasn't aware of the flight timings for the non-stop to JFK? Perhaps originally she assumed it would be a later arrival which would atract compenation. Only after rebookuing the passenger it becomes obvious that it's an earier arrival, and therefore no compensation is due for the actual re-route..
The passenger on the other hand sees the offer of compensation as covering the inconveninece of missing their GVA stopover (and the opportinity to buy goodies). It seems the airline is not recognising this specific inconvenince (they only see it that the pasenger is getting in early and avoiding a stopover).
The passenger on the other hand sees the offer of compensation as covering the inconveninece of missing their GVA stopover (and the opportinity to buy goodies). It seems the airline is not recognising this specific inconvenince (they only see it that the pasenger is getting in early and avoiding a stopover).
Oct 13, 2018, 4:02 pm
#49
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Here there everywhere
Programs: Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, Hilton Diamond, IHG Plat, BA Silver, Aegean Gold, Aeroplan 25k, AA EXP
Posts: 2,825
My experience, this spring, also in FRA:
I was booked FRA(LH)TLS(AC)YUL. Had checked in and sat in the lounge waiting to board flight to TLS. I was paged in the lounge and asked to come to the reception.
Once there, an agent told me that my flight (to TLS, I presume) was overbooked and they can offer to reroute me on the AC non-stop FRA-YUL. If I accepted the offer, I would be given EUR250 in credit, applied to my credit card.
The FRA-YUL nonstop arrived in YUL 2h before my original TLS-YUL flight.
Besides not the same case, putting aside the TLS issue, you'd have misconnected LH would be on the hook for delayed arrival and duty of care.
In the OP's case the flight would have allowed him/her to connect to GVA-JFK.
I accepted and the credit was applied to my credit card by the same agent within minutes.
Understand that this was a personal offer, and I certainly would not have moved from my original itinerary (with pre-assigned seats etc.) if not for the EUR250 credit.
I was booked FRA(LH)TLS(AC)YUL. Had checked in and sat in the lounge waiting to board flight to TLS. I was paged in the lounge and asked to come to the reception.
Once there, an agent told me that my flight (to TLS, I presume) was overbooked and they can offer to reroute me on the AC non-stop FRA-YUL. If I accepted the offer, I would be given EUR250 in credit, applied to my credit card.
The FRA-YUL nonstop arrived in YUL 2h before my original TLS-YUL flight.
Besides not the same case, putting aside the TLS issue, you'd have misconnected LH would be on the hook for delayed arrival and duty of care.
In the OP's case the flight would have allowed him/her to connect to GVA-JFK.
I accepted and the credit was applied to my credit card by the same agent within minutes.
Understand that this was a personal offer, and I certainly would not have moved from my original itinerary (with pre-assigned seats etc.) if not for the EUR250 credit.
Oct 14, 2018, 2:42 am
#50
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: UA*G(1K), PC Diamond Amb, Marriott Titanium, Accor Platinum
Posts: 4,671
If that was the case, LH would do that constantly instead of carefully trying to come up with a special scheme where you don't know your transfer airport until a few days before departure -- in exchange for lower fares.
Part of the contract is the routing, and to a lesser extent even the aircraft model (in case they prominently display the A350 or A380 next to the flight to choose). Some people expect to meet someone in an intermediate destination or are supposed to pick something up there or drop something there.
HTB.
Oct 14, 2018, 3:33 am
#51
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
Do you seriously believe that? I don't think so.
If that was the case, LH would do that constantly instead of carefully trying to come up with a special scheme where you don't know your transfer airport until a few days before departure -- in exchange for lower fares.
Part of the contract is the routing, and to a lesser extent even the aircraft model (in case they prominently display the A350 or A380 next to the flight to choose). Some people expect to meet someone in an intermediate destination or are supposed to pick something up there or drop something there.
HTB.
If that was the case, LH would do that constantly instead of carefully trying to come up with a special scheme where you don't know your transfer airport until a few days before departure -- in exchange for lower fares.
Part of the contract is the routing, and to a lesser extent even the aircraft model (in case they prominently display the A350 or A380 next to the flight to choose). Some people expect to meet someone in an intermediate destination or are supposed to pick something up there or drop something there.
HTB.
Oct 14, 2018, 4:06 am
#52
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,406
Which is exactly why some (many?) people would actually like a direct routing if they turned up on the day and were offered it. A low fare, but now on the non-stop service.
Oct 14, 2018, 4:11 am
#53
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,406
I'm sorry, but you are wrong. When you buy a ticket from A to B, you are merely buying transportation between these two points. It is in everyone's interest for that to happen as smoothly as possible. If an airline flies from A to B and you buy a simple ticket for this, there are rarely benefits for the airline to route you via an intermediate point. But, for reasons we are all familiar with, sometimes it is cheaper to construct a fare via an intermediate point C. The airline is fully within its rights and its contractual terms to, if necessary, route you through a different intermediary point D, or send you directly to B. You have no inherent right to a stop in C unless you have specifically brought C in a stopover point. This is where many hidden-city schemes come apart. If you start to argue with the airline that you needed to hand over a very important package in C, the airline will tell you that you should have bought a ticket A-C-B, not A-B via C. The former will probably be more expensive. There is no guarantee of any particular type of aircraft, either.
Oct 14, 2018, 4:17 am
#54
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
While I agree in principle the airline can re-route to a non-stop, there are other factors at play. Which is why, for example, many airlines will offer original routing credit for an FF scheme in the event they don't carry you over your original itinerary (which might include multiple stops to accure points and elite status). And in cases where airlines re-route, or can't offer a particular aircraft (for example an advertised new product), there is often the opportunity to cancel free of charge.
Just to note, this is from the LH conditions of Carriage. It is crystal clear that the fare covers actual departure airport and actual destination airport, no mention of any intermediary point:
Fares
4.1. The fare to be paid covers the cost of transporting you from the airport at the actual place of departure to the airport at the actual final destination. It is calculated in accordance with the tariff which is applicable on the day you book your ticket for the flight dates and itinerary shown on your ticket. Your fare does not include ground transport between airports or between airports and city centres. The fare may include carrier imposed surcharges.
4.1. The fare to be paid covers the cost of transporting you from the airport at the actual place of departure to the airport at the actual final destination. It is calculated in accordance with the tariff which is applicable on the day you book your ticket for the flight dates and itinerary shown on your ticket. Your fare does not include ground transport between airports or between airports and city centres. The fare may include carrier imposed surcharges.
Oct 14, 2018, 4:34 am
#55
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,406
The rest of 4.1 goes on to say:
If you alter your route, this may have an impact on the fare you pay. The fare is recalculated on the basis of the actual route taken and, if applicable, the difference subsequently charged. Your fare does not include ground transport between airports or between airports and city centres.
So the tarrif a passenger buys for example FRA-JFK might be different to the tarrif applicable for FRA-GVA-JFK. And the itinerary on the ticket (coupons) would reflect FRA-GVA-JFK rather than simply FRA-JFK. The passenger could perhaps argue that this condition has to work both ways... the airline can be held to the tarrif which might have provided a cheaper fare via an intermediate transit point.
Section 9 goes on to say flight times are not guaranteed. But there is no mention that flight routing is not guaranteed. In terms of aircraft, it says only in exceptional circumstances, beyond the airline's control, may it be necessary to change the aircraft.
Oct 14, 2018, 6:37 am
#56
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
None of this is relevant. This is simply about an agreement between a business and a consumer to induce the consumer to not board his scheduled and ticketed flight. It was a purely voluntary arrangement. Had OP declined the offer, he would have boarded and flown as scheduled (unless involuntarily denied boarding). But, he did not. Because he was promised a better routing and EUR / $250. He accepted, did not board, was rerouted, and is owed the EUR 250.
The question of whether a carrier may reroute a passenger so long as it meets the ticketed destination is not really in question. What is in question is whether, if the carrier does it, it must compensate the passenger.
Here, the carrier avoided involuntary denying someone boarding and thus paying compensation. It had a motivation to seek OP's voluntary agreement. OP, in turn, had a motivation to do so.
The question of whether a carrier may reroute a passenger so long as it meets the ticketed destination is not really in question. What is in question is whether, if the carrier does it, it must compensate the passenger.
Here, the carrier avoided involuntary denying someone boarding and thus paying compensation. It had a motivation to seek OP's voluntary agreement. OP, in turn, had a motivation to do so.
Oct 16, 2018, 5:28 am
#58
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 77
This is an interesting occurrence. Frankly, the airline should have looked ahead to see what other flights are available. Some people might have volunteered their seats for no compensation, just to get a faster flight to their destination.
Oct 16, 2018, 6:20 am
#59
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
None of this is relevant. This is simply about an agreement between a business and a consumer to induce the consumer to not board his scheduled and ticketed flight. It was a purely voluntary arrangement. Had OP declined the offer, he would have boarded and flown as scheduled (unless involuntarily denied boarding). But, he did not. Because he was promised a better routing and EUR / $250. He accepted, did not board, was rerouted, and is owed the EUR 250.
The question of whether a carrier may reroute a passenger so long as it meets the ticketed destination is not really in question. What is in question is whether, if the carrier does it, it must compensate the passenger.
Here, the carrier avoided involuntary denying someone boarding and thus paying compensation. It had a motivation to seek OP's voluntary agreement. OP, in turn, had a motivation to do so.
The question of whether a carrier may reroute a passenger so long as it meets the ticketed destination is not really in question. What is in question is whether, if the carrier does it, it must compensate the passenger.
Here, the carrier avoided involuntary denying someone boarding and thus paying compensation. It had a motivation to seek OP's voluntary agreement. OP, in turn, had a motivation to do so.
Oct 16, 2018, 6:37 am
#60
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: New York City
Programs: AA,BNV,HIL
Posts: 879
Agree
Agreed that the thread is about honesty, and an employee made an offer that wasn't kept. I'm certainly happy that I'm not the only one who thinks being yanked off a connection and put on a direct flight that gets in to the same airport earlier in the same class of service is fine by me. Some treat airline travel as an amusement park ride and if one of the curves isn't exciting enough then the whole ride was a waste.