An $8000 "entry fee" for LH Gold lounge
#106
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eurozone
Programs: LH SEN, HH Gold
Posts: 3,002
You can step back from a LH flight as the doors are closing and still get all portions refunded on a refundable ticket. (Well, at least I can, and have, on a few occasions.)
#107
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: BCT. Formerly known as attorney28
Programs: LH HON,BA GGL GfL,Hyatt LT Glob,Mrtt LT P,Hilt LT D,IC Amb,Acc P,GHA Tit,LHW Strlg,Sixt/Av/Hz D/Pres
Posts: 6,827
Well, you already have. And you need to, because otherwise your legal opinion does not hold water, as your failure to be able to address the fact that there was no misrepresentation and no error shows, based on the report of the OP.
#108
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eurozone
Programs: LH SEN, HH Gold
Posts: 3,002
P.S. I'm thinkin' Kevinsac fulfilled his contractual obligations as well. It's not been sufficiently stated otherwise. Fraud, smaud. Zwei dicke Daumen nach oben. The judge that would rule otherwise would most likely have stock in LH.
#109
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Capetown
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Plat, IHG and Hilton Diamond, LH SEN, BA Gold
Posts: 10,175
I will start with the original post and in a nutshell and not with the later amendments the story underwent and leave out the unimportant details and will for sure not include your or my less or more polite judgemental remarks:
I arrived in FRA. I asked if I might wait at the Senator Lounge. They declined to let me in. I went to the ticket counter, and bought a fully refundable one-way ticket to MUC. I could always go back and refund the ticket later. I went to the Senator Lounge and she said that since I was flying onward domestic, I should use the Senator Lounge at A26. I went back to the ticket counter, turned in my Euro 360 and got a refund. Agent found an F seat available on the afternoon Hong Kong flight. Showed the lounge agent that ticket, and she huffed and puffed, and let me in. I returned the ticket after my friend had arrived. Many ways to skin a LH cat.
#110
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MHG/DTM
Posts: 336
Interesting legal discussion you're having there. Enjoyed reading it.
>>>But I promise you, I will present the case either to my students or when I sit next time on the panel in the second exam.
Oh my god, you're one of THEM?!? I hate you!
Anyway, having been in that dreadful situation not too long ago, I would have answered the following:
Fraud or not, could it be a case of aiding and abetting the ticket agent's and lounge wardens' respective breaches of trust?
Oh, and my company charges daily rates for me, not hourly ones, yet I hope I'm still qualified to participate
>>>But I promise you, I will present the case either to my students or when I sit next time on the panel in the second exam.
Oh my god, you're one of THEM?!? I hate you!
Anyway, having been in that dreadful situation not too long ago, I would have answered the following:
Fraud or not, could it be a case of aiding and abetting the ticket agent's and lounge wardens' respective breaches of trust?
Oh, and my company charges daily rates for me, not hourly ones, yet I hope I'm still qualified to participate
Last edited by Airsicknessbag; Apr 18, 2007 at 5:22 am
#111
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Capetown
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Plat, IHG and Hilton Diamond, LH SEN, BA Gold
Posts: 10,175
#112
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MHG/DTM
Posts: 336
Aw, "creative", means the candidate is precluded from anything above six points because his idea is nowhere to be found on the streamlined solution to the case
Don't have my Troendle/Fischer with me right now, so I'm kind of "flying blind". But in any case we're moving in circles around the central question:
Do you actually need to have the intention to fly or just the contractual right to do so in order to be eligible for lounge access as per the access rules stipulated in (presumably) the TOS?
Don't have my Troendle/Fischer with me right now, so I'm kind of "flying blind". But in any case we're moving in circles around the central question:
Do you actually need to have the intention to fly or just the contractual right to do so in order to be eligible for lounge access as per the access rules stipulated in (presumably) the TOS?
#113
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Capetown
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Plat, IHG and Hilton Diamond, LH SEN, BA Gold
Posts: 10,175
Agreed. And I believe there is a third alternative: Do you only have the contractual right of access under the condition that you (at least) plan to fly.
#114
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: BCT. Formerly known as attorney28
Programs: LH HON,BA GGL GfL,Hyatt LT Glob,Mrtt LT P,Hilt LT D,IC Amb,Acc P,GHA Tit,LHW Strlg,Sixt/Av/Hz D/Pres
Posts: 6,827
I will start with the original post and in a nutshell and not with the later amendments the story underwent and leave out the unimportant details and will for sure not include your or my less or more polite judgemental remarks:
Agree that this is the original story in a nutshell? (allthough you would not get in a lounge with just a ticket and no BP) and I am sure my students will love the closing remark "Many ways to skin a LH cat".
Agree that this is the original story in a nutshell? (allthough you would not get in a lounge with just a ticket and no BP) and I am sure my students will love the closing remark "Many ways to skin a LH cat".
No, this is not the story. You are leaving out the most important part, which is the fact that the OP reported that he fully disclosed his intention to return the ticket both to the ticket agent and the lounge warden, and which prevents this from being fraud.
In other words, you are leaving out facts so that they fit your premature assessment of the case.
You should use all facts available to you. You cannot just selectively take some of the report of the OP and leave out the rest, just so that your incorrect accusation of fraud could possibly stand.
#115
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: FRA, AMS
Programs: LH:SEN++ 2012, FB Plat,AMX:PLA/CRB, *WOOD:PLA,Sixt:Diamond , LuckyStrike:Red, others
Posts: 119
time to have my coming out as a criminal on this, too...
Actually, I've done a pretty similar thing a few times already...
Located very close to FRA ( max. 15 min by car ), I sometimes use an open 'C' ticket FRA-XXX I use to have on my ETIX database for espacially that purpose, to gain access to sterile areas and lounges, whenver a client or a friend of mine connects through my 'home base'.
And in my case, I have to admit, it's - more or less - double the fraud, cause I scam both security, passport control and the dragons / LH.
Another reason for insomnia ?
Actually, I've done a pretty similar thing a few times already...
Located very close to FRA ( max. 15 min by car ), I sometimes use an open 'C' ticket FRA-XXX I use to have on my ETIX database for espacially that purpose, to gain access to sterile areas and lounges, whenver a client or a friend of mine connects through my 'home base'.
And in my case, I have to admit, it's - more or less - double the fraud, cause I scam both security, passport control and the dragons / LH.
Another reason for insomnia ?
#116
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 170
It is the other way round in Germany. The people have to make evidence that you had the "wrong intentions", so don't worry. The OP made it very easy because he admitted it. I personally "would have changed my plans" as I frequently did in the very old days when I had no status but always a business ticket in my pocket to get lounge access at my home airport.
But let me ask this: What - prescription set aside - would put the OP's revelations into the grey (or black), while your above revelation shouldnt hurt your record? Would you assume that a criminal court would accept that subtle wording of "changing plans" when voiced in a context like above? You basically did the same, and even on a regular basis albeit with the finesse of a lawyer.
Anyway, valid case for any exam, and a welcome change to those questions asked by nutty old-style judges on such things as divorce procedures. ^
#117
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Capetown
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Plat, IHG and Hilton Diamond, LH SEN, BA Gold
Posts: 10,175
But it even makes the case more interesting because one can discuss whether acting in concert with a mala fide employee (or subcontractor) is a possible way to get away with criminal charges. (BTW: I only remember the disclosure to the TA, not to the lounge agent). Anyway: I would not think so, the TA is not Lufty. Airsicknessbag had some quite good ideas.
#118
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Capetown
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Plat, IHG and Hilton Diamond, LH SEN, BA Gold
Posts: 10,175
But let me ask this: What - prescription set aside - would put the OP's revelations into the grey (or black), while your above revelation shouldn’t hurt your record? Would you assume that a criminal court would accept that subtle wording of "changing plans" when voiced in a context like above? You basically did the same, and even on a regular basis – albeit with the finesse of a lawyer.
#119
Moderator: Asiana & Qantas Frequent Flyer
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: STR/SYD/SMF
Programs: QF Lifetime SG, LH HON, OZ Lifetime Diamond +, HH Diamond, Marriott Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 14,388
This just confirms to me why I went into business and did not bother to study law. At least there a balance sheet tells you the truth and never leaves room for any interpretation.......
The question within FT should not really be whether something is legal according to German, Norwegian or any other law but whether we as a communicty feel that this is acceptable.
The question within FT should not really be whether something is legal according to German, Norwegian or any other law but whether we as a communicty feel that this is acceptable.
#120
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: unique
Programs: half orphan (ie. STC before, but not really happy with M&M)
Posts: 110
Ive never seen lawyers fighting so intensively for no money - nevertheless almost every state attorney would drop this case and put the big red "minima non curat praetor" stamp on the document