Jun 19, 2013, 9:45 pm

FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides

Last edit by: fti

People, please edit/use the wiki so same questions are not always asked.

The current CTA decision on the Yangon deal is only for tickets canceled by SWISS Airlines for the seven merged complaints/companions and tickets canceled by Jet Airways for one complainant and companions
- It's not about other carriers because each carrier submits different tariffs.
- If you are not one of the complainants or their companions above who were mentioned in the respective cases, you need to submit a case yourself for hearing.
- There's currently one person who is on Iberia for CTA decision, one can either wait for results or submit a complaint to CTA.

Result of the current case for LX in brief is:
- CTA found 5(F) in the tariff used to be unclear for canceling tickets on erroneously quoted fares.
- 5(F) is unjust and unreasonable and must be revised or taken down by July 9, 2013 (or SWISS can appeal by then)
- SWISS did not use its tariff correctly to cancel the tickets.
- SWISS must compensate one complainant's First Class ticket and any related expenses by July 18, 2013 provided with evidence.
- SWISS must transport other complainants (and their companions) in the original price charged with same booking class and routing by June 18, 2014.

Result of the current case for 9W in brief is:
- Tariff on file had no clauses for "erroneous fares" and was updated subsequently, which means it is not relevant to this event
- Therefore, 9W is to reinstate the tickets with a 1-year validity for transport between the same points and the same booking class.

CTA official news can be read here for general overview of the case.

Actual CTA case review can be found here for reference should you wish to file a complaint.

If you have a similar case that's with SWISS, you need to file with CTA to get a result through informal process first before it gets to formal process. The entire procedure can take up to 3 months for each and the result may not be same cause it's case-by-base and the reviewer of the case can be different.

To file an informal complaint with CTA, see here. Click through all of the pages to get to the online form for the informal complaint. Or click here.

To file a formal complaint after informal complaint has been closed, see here. Continue on to the next page to see the address or email address for the formal complaint.

The July 17th and 18th responses from LX can be found here:

Other Letters:

Feel free to add dates, flights, etc., in order to plan DOs, etc.

Aug 4: SFO-ICN (UA893)
Jason8612

Aug 5: ICN-SFO (UA892)
Jason8612

Aug 7: SFO-ICN (UA893)
Jason8612

Aug 11: ICN-NRT-ORD (UA78, UA882)
Jason8612

Aug 14: BOS-IAD-NRT-ICN (UA285, UA803, UA79)
Deltspygt

Aug 19: ICN-NRT-IAD-BOS (UA78, UA804, UA352)
Deltspygt

Oct 1: UA433-UA893
JeredF +1

Oct 8: UA892-UA242
JeredF +1

Oct 9: BOS-SFO-ICN (UA433, UA893)
BigJC

Oct 13: ICN-NRT-ORD-BOS (UA78, UA882, UA744)
BigJC

Oct 21: BOS-SFO UA433 to SFO-ICN UA893
Sterndogg +1
flyerdude88 (SFO - ICN portion only)

Oct 23: ICN - SFO UA 892
flyerdude88

Oct 27: ICN-SFO UA892 to SFO-BOS UA286
Sterndogg +1

Nov 05: BOS-ORD UA521, ORD-NRT UA881
kokonutz, I012609, BingoSF +1

Nov 11: ICN-SFO UA892, SFO-IAD UA727
kokonutz, I012609, BingoSF +1

Nov 26: BOS-SFO UA433, SFO-NRT UA837, NRT-ICN UA79
thepla

Nov 27: BOS-ORD-NRT-ICN (UA501, UA881, UA196)
BigJC+1

Nov 29: Planning 2 days in TPE, been to ICN
thepla

Dec 1: ICN-SFO UA892, SFO-ORD UA698, ORD-BOS UA961
thepla

Dec 1: ICN-NRT-IAD-BOS (UA78, UA804, UA822)
BigJC+1

Dec 15: BOS-SFO UA433, SFO-ICN UA893
songzm

Dec 25: BOS-IAD UA285, IAD-NRT UA803, NRT-ICN UA79
Dinoscool3 +2

Dec 30: ICN-SFO UA892, SFO-BOS UA444
songzm

Dec 31: ICN-SFO UA892, SFO-BOS UA770
Dinoscool3 +2

Jan 11: BOS-SFO UA1523, Jan 12: SFO-ICN UA893
margarita girl

Jan 12: BOS-SFO UA433, SFO-ICN UA893
Zebranz

14 Jan: BOS-SFO UA433 to SFO-ICN UA893
ORDOGG

19 Jan: ICN-SFO UA892 to SFO-ORD UA698 to ORD-BOS UA961
ORDOGG

Jan 22: ICN-SFO UA892 SFO-BOS UA500
margarita girl

Feb 5: ICN-SFO UA892 SFO-BOS UA242
Zebranz

CMB-DFW EY F

FARE IS GONE

FARE RULES (thanks to SQ421)
FRTLK Fare Rules (RT)
FOWLK Fare Rules (OW)

WHEN ARE YOU FLYING?
Feel free to add any additional cities you're leaving from!
Please slot yourselves in!!!

ex-CMB
Feb

Mar
8 - Darmajaya
12 - Thaidai
22 - Deadinabsentia

Apr
21 - SQ421, penegal, jozdemir
26 - tahsir21

May
28 - Upperdeck744
29 - bonsaisai (positioning flights SIN-CMB, DFW-ORD)

Jun
12 - lelee

Jul
7 - HansGolden +6
8 - arcticbull + 1
11 - bonsaisai's friend (positioning flights: SIN-CMB, DFW-MCI)
25 - Tycosiao
30 - bonsaisai's friend (positioning flights: MCI-DFW, CMB-SIN)

Aug
17 - DC777Fan
26 - Yi Yang
31 - dcas

Sep

Oct

Nov
8 - harryhv
29 - stephem+4

Dec
6 - roastpuff and (soon) Mrs. roastpuff , JFKEZE (UL Code-share)
7 - DWFI
10 - jlisi984 + dad (CMB-AUH-DFW)
21 - bonsaisai (positioning flights SIN-CMB, DFW-ORD)

ex-AUH
Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr
27 - RICHKLHS

May

Jun
29 - yerffej201

Jul
9 - HansGolden +6
27 - Tycosiao

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov
30 - stephem+4 (to JFK)

Dec
7 - JFKEZE, DWFI [EY161 nonstop]
9 - roastpuff and (soon) Mrs. Roastpuff

ex-DFW
Jan

Feb

Mar
14 - Thaidai
15 - zainman +1

Apr
25 - SQ421, penegal, jozdemir

May

Jun

Jul

Aug
22 - arcticbull + 1

Sep
22 - bonsaisai (positioning flights ORD-DFW, CMB-SIN)

Oct

Nov
19 - harryhv->Paris

Dec
19 - Yi Yang, jona970318
24 - DWFI (EY160 nonstop)
26 - HansGolden +6 (CDG), LwoodY2K (AUH)

[PREM FARE GONE] RGN First class comes back again!!!!

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

May 28, 2014, 4:29 am

#10456

Dr. HFH

FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: Jan 2007

Location: BOS/UTH

Programs: AA LT PLT; QR GLD; Bonvoy LT TIT

Posts: 12,757

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRU2m10

... I find it odd that they can get away with the word 'mistake'. I know that mistakes can never be excluded, but the carriers are able to limit the number of mistakes by a little spending on IT.

You might find some reading on the law of mistake interesting. The problem with looking at what could have been done is that it wasn't. There's a guy over in the CX thread who was considering a complaint to CX based on what would have happened if his father didn't have a U.S. visa, or what would have happened if his father hadn't been a member of a lounge where he could get food. As I explained to him, yes, those things could have happened in different circumstances, but they didn't. His father does have a U.S. visa in his passport, and is a member of a lounge where can get food. Except in very specific situations, the law typically looks at what did happen, not what could have happened if things had been different.

May 28, 2014, 5:45 am

#10457

k_sheep

Join Date: Mar 2007

Location: BNE, OOL

Programs: QFF WP, VA SG, Hhonors Diamond

Posts: 361

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlqsko

It took me 5-6 EY agents until I found one who knew what to do, but they are the ones who locked the ticket and have to unlock it.

Just make sure they do it for both ways if you booked a return ticket

May 28, 2014, 7:32 am

#10458

sbm12

A FlyerTalk Posting Legend

Join Date: Apr 2001

Location: PSM

Posts: 69,232

Quote:

Originally Posted by skywalkerLAX

I'm more concerned about the precedent it sets for canadian consumers, not necessarily in the aviation sector but in general.

This case does not set a precedent so much as apply prior precedent to a different market. Essentially the ruling is that airfare is no different than other contracts in Canada.

Quote:

Originally Posted by danger

Is the decision available online yet?

There is a copy of the CTA ruling available in PDF form on my blog.

Quote:

Originally Posted by danger

I concur with others that the decision places 100% of the burden on consumers and leaves them with no protection.

False.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangkokiscool

Canada is now a jurisdiction that has zero protection for ticketed reservations, and airlines can cancel simply by arguing they made a mistake.

Not true at all.

There are still consumer protections available. An airline would not be able to wait weeks or months and then choose to revoke booked tickets. Even the 72 hour window doesn't mean that any fare is questionable for 72 hours after purchase.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lack

Not happy about the verdict at all. CTA simply choose to ignore the fact that Swiss was contacted about the fare and approved it (at least in my situation) both in it's merit and their conclusion ("nobody contacted LX to verify").

The discussion about who contacted LX and when vis a vis the ruling suggests that Swiss acknowledges they were contacted and that was their trigger to cease the sales and also that none of the ticketed passengers contacted the carrier, thereby indicating the intent to profit from the mistake. Two different types of contact being discussed.

n.b. The link above is to my blog or to one which I am a regular contributor. FT rules require that I disclose that in the post.

May 28, 2014, 8:14 am

#10459

polandspringuy

Join Date: Jan 2013

Location: NYC

Posts: 274

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahcjar103

completed time lapse of events in post 2087.

Thank you for the entertaining & informative recap. You definitely had me for a second. I like your style.

May 28, 2014, 8:55 am

#10460

bangkokiscool

Join Date: Apr 2006

Posts: 1,259

Quote:

False.

Not true at all.

There are still consumer protections available. An airline would not be able to wait weeks or months and then choose to revoke booked tickets. Even the 72 hour window doesn't mean that any fare is questionable for 72 hours after purchase.

Day 1: Mistake fare sold online to consumer, e-ticket issued. Travel is for Day 1 + 60 days.

Day 59: Airline becomes aware of the mistake fare filed. 72 Hour window starts.

Day 60 (1 day before departure and 2 months after ticketing): Airline cancels ticket and refunds consumer.

There, it's been weeks and months and the airline canceled. CTA's ruling makes this scenario perfectly legal. Please don't spread misinformation.

May 28, 2014, 9:12 am

#10461

AA_EXP09

FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: Oct 2011

Location: Anywhere I need to be.

Programs: OW Emerald, *A Gold, NEXUS, GE, ABTC/APEC, South Korea SES, eIACS, PP, Hyatt Diamond

Posts: 16,046

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRU2m10

I do see a problem for (Canadian) customers with a odd routing combinations that drop the (fuel) surcharges. It will be hard for them to argue that they are not aware of the absence of the YR/YQ.

Base fares (and therefore fuel dumps) are cheaper exUSA anyhow (other than maybe DL's $10 fares to HK.)

May 28, 2014, 9:41 am

#10462

sbm12

A FlyerTalk Posting Legend

Join Date: Apr 2001

Location: PSM

Posts: 69,232

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangkokiscool

There, it's been weeks and months and the airline canceled. CTA's ruling makes this scenario perfectly legal. Please don't spread misinformation.

That may work and it may not. But it is also predicated on the fare being an obvious mistake and the airline acting promptly to cease sales of such.

Suggesting that there is zero consumer protection is simply untrue. That's not to say all mistake fares will be honored, but there's a very, very, very large space in between those two ends of the spectrum.

May 28, 2014, 11:01 am

#10463

Lack

Join Date: Mar 2008

Posts: 4,859

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbm12

While the "intent to profit from the mistake" is ridiculous on it's own, like I said, at least my reservation was verified and ok'd by LX before ticketing, which the CTA failed to acknowledge. Not to mention the fact, that when you call LX for ticket confirmation, you get a prerecorded message that none is necessary.

May 28, 2014, 2:59 pm

#10464

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: Mar 2001

Location: AU

Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)

Posts: 14,406

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lack

I did notice that in the decision... but it looked like the CTA said you just called to confirm the time of your flight and that you were in first class?

is that the case?

or was there something deeper along the lines of 'can you please ask your supervisor to check the ticket is valid according to the fare paid?'

May 28, 2014, 8:01 pm

#10465

CDKing

FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: Dec 2007

Location: BOS/ORH

Programs: AS 75K

Posts: 18,323

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnof

I think someone pointed out that wording can be interpreted as: 72hr after they realize that it was a mistake.
Which is exploitable, you can't really prove when someone realizes something.

In my case its documented in the Affidavit that US submitted to CTA. Also date of cancellation is noted as well. 31 days in my case yet CTA did not care, nor did they care to respond to my email questioning it. I brought up the delay in notification in my complaint.

May 28, 2014, 8:08 pm

#10466

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: Mar 2001

Location: AU

Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)

Posts: 14,406

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDKing

It seems to be that the CTA has stated its expectation. I don't think the CTA can overwrite existing contract law on mistake... although it may be that 72 hours is reasonable. But I wonder if they can actually list it as a hard and fast rule?

May 28, 2014, 9:45 pm

#10467

Deltahater

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: SAT

Programs: AA EXP BA Gold, TK Gold, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond, AS 100K, QR PLT, SAS Gold, IHG Spire, AMR

Posts: 5,898

I assume we have the same right to appeal as LX did to the initial 7, yes?

May 28, 2014, 9:58 pm

#10468

yerffej201

Join Date: Nov 2011

Posts: 6,385

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deltahater

I assume we have the same right to appeal as LX did to the initial 7, yes?

Of course you do!

May 29, 2014, 12:07 am

#10469

Lack

Join Date: Mar 2008

Posts: 4,859

Quote:

Originally Posted by LHR/MEL/Europe FF

That wasn't me - although I did try to call, possibly even under your advisement to test the theory of confirmation. Automatic systems says you're good to go with a ticket, end of story.

My TA made the reservation and sent it to the local LX office for review. Came positive, with a green light to ticket. CTA choose to omit that fact altogether.

May 29, 2014, 6:17 am

#10470

Pseudo Nim

Join Date: Jan 2006

Location: In the air

Programs: Occasional RTW club

Posts: 6,924

Isn't there an appeal that is worth making here? It seems like at least several positions of the CTA, ie "call to validate", were followed by travellers and yet the tickets were issued regardless. Surely, there is something to discuss there? Swiss appealed left right and centre until they had the decision swayed - perhaps, so should the consumers? It's only fair.