A clear photo of the affected passengers holding their ID next to their face

Old Jun 12, 19, 1:13 pm
  #1  
htb
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: LH M&M (was: SEN), UA*G(1K), PC Spire Amb, Marriott Gold (by virtue of UA*G), Accor Gold
Posts: 4,586
A clear photo of the affected passengers holding their ID next to their face

My baggage was delayed on a recent flight and I had to purchase some clothing items for the next day, so I've contacted LH for re-imbursement.

The reply was quite positive up to and including the point that a copy of my ID (with the ID number blackened) would be necessary for the payment. But then it continued with

Furthermore, boarding passes are also mandatory and a clear photo of the affected passengers holding their ID next to their face.
Is this standard procedure or is someone attempting to make me jump through loops? I find it is highly unusual that anything but a copy of my ID (if at all) would be necessary to initiate the re-imbursement.

HTB.
hugolover likes this.
htb is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 1:26 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Programs: LH FT, AA Plat
Posts: 181
I find that very concerning, it smells of potential identity theft. Try to get it done without that step.
Spiff, chris63, orbitmic and 2 others like this.
mevr is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 1:36 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Brussels
Programs: Etihad Guest, Aegean & some other almost useless M&M programs; BA One World; spg; HHonors; Accor...
Posts: 23
Depends....can you tell if it's an official LH email address? Can you check the LH website and find a number to call them on to check?
Shiv01 is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 1:50 pm
  #4  
htb
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: LH M&M (was: SEN), UA*G(1K), PC Spire Amb, Marriott Gold (by virtue of UA*G), Accor Gold
Posts: 4,586
Thank you for confirming that this indeed seems unusual / confirming that it may be normal.

It's definitely from LH ([email protected]). I've reached out on Facebook and already got a reply requesting the feedback ID so they can check. I'll report back on what they'll find.

HTB.
htb is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 2:07 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 3,045
Originally Posted by htb View Post
Thank you for confirming that this indeed seems unusual / confirming that it may be normal.

It's definitely from LH ([email protected]). I've reached out on Facebook and already got a reply requesting the feedback ID so they can check. I'll report back on what they'll find.

HTB.
I had them request something similar from me recently. Sounds and is unusual, but apparently their way of doing things right now.
worldclubber is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 2:26 pm
  #6  
htb
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: LH M&M (was: SEN), UA*G(1K), PC Spire Amb, Marriott Gold (by virtue of UA*G), Accor Gold
Posts: 4,586
Answer is back: apparently they have implemented this new procedure. Absolutely appalling.

HTB.
wrp96, GalaxyChris, royng and 2 others like this.
htb is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 2:45 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,103
You don't have to do that. It could be considered an unreasonable clause and unlawful. If they refuse, sue, and let the judge decide if that is reasonable under for example, the UTCCR.
Crismyth likes this.
hugolover is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 2:51 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 8
Not talking about Lufthansa specifically, but ID selfies have become a thing over the last year or so. They're annoying, but expect to see more of this in future.

Look at it this way: with the increase in people conducting business relationships entirely online, it's increasingly commonplace for people to submit scans of their ID to open an account with some organisation that needs to check ID, such as a financial organisation (where previously we would probably have visited their offices and shown our ID).

As a consequence, there are potentially lots of companies that have scans of our IDs, and it's an increasing concern that, when companies suffer data breaches, ID scans might be amongst the data stolen. Personally I've given scans of my ID to enough organisations over the last few years that I'm quite pleased that people are realising that the fact that someone has got hold of one of those PDF files most definitely shouldn't be taken as definitive evidence that they're me...

That said, a simple selfie of you holding your ID is a very poor solution - there's nothing to stop such selfies being stolen in data breaches in future, either. A better way of doing this would be to ask you to take a selfie of yourself holding your ID and a note saying "For Lufthansa only". I definitely hear of this happening now, at least in the cryptocurrency space. And cryptocurrency exchanges seem to be at the forefront of these thiings, given the fact that they tend to conduct busienss enitrely online, and they have some *very* wealthy customers. Where they lead, other companies seem to follow...

How good any of this really is at deterring fraud all depends on how good they are at spotting photoshopped selfies. But I guess it makes it harder, at least. Maybe that's all you can hope for....
mrcool1122 and PAX_fips like this.
roybadami is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 2:53 pm
  #9  
htb
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: LH M&M (was: SEN), UA*G(1K), PC Spire Amb, Marriott Gold (by virtue of UA*G), Accor Gold
Posts: 4,586
Originally Posted by hugolover View Post
You don't have to do that. It could be considered an unreasonable clause and unlawful. If they refuse, sue, and let the judge decide if that is reasonable under for example, the UTCCR.
I'd love to do that. But I'm not sure 50€ warrant this path... I was thinking of spreading this publicly as wide as possible to shame them. Any ideas where to send this story to?

HTB.
htb is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 3:03 pm
  #10  
htb
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Programs: LH M&M (was: SEN), UA*G(1K), PC Spire Amb, Marriott Gold (by virtue of UA*G), Accor Gold
Posts: 4,586
Originally Posted by roybadami View Post
Not talking about Lufthansa specifically, but ID selfies have become a thing over the last year or so. They're annoying, but expect to see more of this in future.
Thanks for the background. When I searched for "ID next to face" on goolge, I could only find one obscure site that was requesting this.

I share the fear that this may become commonplace and anyone with a copy of such a picture with ID will be able to pass as me...

Also, I just don't see why any of this should be necessary for requesting a claim for a confirmed baggage delay with a scan of the original claim receipt issued by a Lufthansa station, that was recorded in the Lufthansa system, and is requested by the passenger on file with receipts from the day of the delay. Even asking for boarding passes is not warranted because the information leaflet passed out does not mention that one should keep boarding passes for a later claim. Only "Write to LH with copies of your receipts."

All of this is clearly laid out to discourage people from claiming compensation by making them jump through loops and hoping that maybe they have disposed of the boarding passes.

HTB.
Grog, HMPS, strickerj and 1 others like this.
htb is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 3:08 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 8
Agreed it seems over the top in this instance.

Fo resetting the password on a miles and more account when you no longer have access to the original email address (for example) they absolutely should be taking these kind of precautions. For delayed baggage claims, it seems surprising that this is necessary.
strickerj and nancypants like this.
roybadami is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 3:14 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,103
Originally Posted by roybadami View Post
Agreed it seems over the top in this instance.

Fo resetting the password on a miles and more account when you no longer have access to the original email address (for example) they absolutely should be taking these kind of precautions. For delayed baggage claims, it seems surprising that this is necessary.
Exactly.

The challenger banks are doing this, but then they need to fulfil money laundering regulations and they are all online only.

To pay a baggage claim is ridiculous. I wonder if their contractors are subject to such payment terms. Like the company that makes those frozen cakes they serve onboard. The CEO takes a lovely selfie every month and sends it to Helga’s WhatsApp.
hugolover is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 4:26 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: The Netherlands
Programs: BA, KLM, Alitalia
Posts: 52
Originally Posted by htb View Post
My baggage was delayed on a recent flight and I had to purchase some clothing items for the next day, so I've contacted LH for re-imbursement.

The reply was quite positive up to and including the point that a copy of my ID (with the ID number blackened) would be necessary for the payment. But then it continued with



Is this standard procedure or is someone attempting to make me jump through loops? I find it is highly unusual that anything but a copy of my ID (if at all) would be necessary to initiate the re-imbursement.

HTB.
Isn't lufthansa based in the country that banned google streetview over privacy issues? Very strange practice. I'm filling two claims this week and will not comply if they request it. Had quite enough of them.
Crismyth is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 6:28 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,103
Originally Posted by Crismyth View Post
Isn't lufthansa based in the country that banned google streetview over privacy issues? Very strange practice. I'm filling two claims this week and will not comply if they request it. Had quite enough of them.
Yes.

And the posts on the ramifications for taking a photo of the Police at Frankfurt Airport 😂.
hugolover is offline  
Old Jun 12, 19, 9:04 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: California
Programs: AA EXP...couple hotels and cars too
Posts: 3,436
Unless the terms of a ticket require this, Id tell them to pound sand. Then sue.

It seems odd to me to ask 'hey is this a real policy?", in response to a policy that they are applying retroactively or without a contractual/legal basis- and when people confirm "yes that is their new policy' the response is "Oh, OK- just wanted to be sure"

Like "Oh, the policy says I need to send my child to them? OK, just wanted to be sure it really is their new policy...I'll send the kid straight away"

I dont care if it IS their new procedure...its not MY new procedure...
mmff, A Lyford, strickerj and 1 others like this.
Exec_Plat is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread