My RTW was issued last year : ....... IST-MAD-HAV, MEX-YVR-JFK-YYZ-HKG....

When the ticket was first issued, I don't think MX was an option yet. So I had a surface HAV-MEX. I was prepared to buy a separate MX ticket.

MEX-YVR was a JL flight. This has now been changed to a MX flight. So I thought, since MX is part of the team, I could now get a HAV-MEX segment included too.

So I called Qantas this evening and was told some rather strange information -
There would not have been any problems adding an additional MX ticket at this stage but because the segment involved Cuba, it was illegal! So I still have to purchase a separate bolt on ticket from HAV to MEX.

I'm really puzzled. My RTW was issued by Qantas. No AA flights involved. So I can get into Cuba via Europe but I can't get out from Cuba to MEX unless I have a separate ticket? Any idea what the rationale is?

I don't mind buying a one-way HAV-MEX as planned previously but I'm really curious to know why it is illegal to fly me out from HAV on the RTW ticket!

This is so confusing!

I think they may have miscommunicated to you. If MX wasn't in OW when your ticket was issued then they will never be a valid airline for the ticket (the T&Cs are the T&Cs at the time you bought the ticket). The MEX-YVR is an exception because you had a confirmed reservation on JL on that segment and the flight has been withdrawn so QF is obliged to find some other means of getting you there. It happens to be on MX, but not because MX is valid on your ticket (it isn't) - the replacement flight could have been on any airline.

It was definitely not miscommunication.

The agent and I had initially thought it would not be possible to add the MX flight due to the reason you stated below, so she went off to check.

But came back saying it would have been possible if Cuba had not been involved. She told me to google for information relating to Cuba travel restrictions.

I did and found this relating to travel from LHR to HAV on a RTW:
"There are two key airlines in the round the world flights market that can be used to get between Cuba and the U.K. without going via the USA : Virgin fly from London to Havana on a direct non-stop flight twice weekly and Iberia have a daily connection via Madrid. The rest of this article will assume that you are flying round the world in a Westerly direction, though the same flights / conditions apply if you are flying in an Easterly direction.

If you fly out to Havana on Virgin, your next on that ticket will be out of L.A., San Francisco or Vancouver across the Pacific. To get there, 99% of people will need a separate bolt on ticket from Havana to Cancun (cheapest) or to Mexico City and make their way to the U.S. from there.

If you fly out to Havana on Iberia, you have the additional option of flying out on Iberia’s fellow One World carrier, Lan, who operate a once weekly flight between Havana and Santiago in Chile. Otherwise, the next cheapest option will be to add a bolt on ticket to Cancun or Mexico and make your way from there (Lan Peru have an interesting flight from Mexico City to Lima in Peru for example). If you are heading to the USA having started your trip with a flight out to Havana on Iberia, the key thing to remember is that you won’t be able use any American Airlines flights as part of your main round the world ticket."


Just curious, that's all!

I think the QF agent was wrong, not surprising as this is a very specialised part of travel rules. Most probably they just think that any ticket with Cuba and the US in it is not allowed. Or they can't comprehend how you can fly YVR-JFK-YYZ without AA.

I think that the agent is wrong in the reason on why it is not allowed but correct that it is not allowed since MX is not a valid carrier given when the ticket was issued

As posted if MX was not in oneworld when the ticket was issued, then MX segments should not be able to be included now.

The actual xONEx rule regarding Cuba is:As such the Agent is wrong about Cuba. (There is no way the ticket should have been issued in the first place had it contained any AA segments.)

No they shouldn't. The rules are those in force at the time of original ticket issuance. Since MX would not have been listed as a valid carrier then, it still would not be now

Whether rules change for the better or worse, the ones that count are those at time of purchase

Dave

OW thinks that a reissue causes a repricing and therefore also the new rules to become effective.

If travel has not started , then a reissue can cause a complete rebooking with new pricing and new rules

Once travel has commenced on an OW ATW ticket, then it can be changed in accordance with the rules in force at the time of issuance. This is regardless of whether rule changes to newly issued tickets have been changed benefically or banefully. e.g. if change fees / cancellation penalties were to be increased on new tickets, this would not affect someone whose journey was already underway

If MX was not listed in the valid carriers for the ticket rules when the OP's ticket was issued , since it is already underway, MX will not become a valid carrier now.

I still think that QF's statement that MX change is invalid is correct, but that staff member's explanation of why is flawed

Puzzle solved!

I called Qantas again today. The reason why a HAV-MEX flight could not be added on is because Qantas is a travel agency in the United States, so it is illegal for them to do so.

When I booked the ticket on-line using the OW internet tool, the agent in Korea could issue it (hence Cuba was fine), using Qantas stock. But once travel commences, any changes would have to be made directly with Qantas.

Had not realised that Qantas was involved in the embargo too. This embargo against Cuba is getting rather tiresome!

(I'm not entirely sure if MX was with OW when the ticket was issued in April 09 actually - in which case Qantas would have been unable to add any MX segments anyway.)

Talking about embargo against Cuba... would I be able to credit my miles on the IB MAD-HAV and MX HAV-MEX segments with AA?

Fully agree - there was a be rather than a not in that reply which made the post to be not correct.

Mexicana joined officially November 10th 2009.

oneworld News - oneworld alliance welcomes Mexicana on board

Thanks for confirming that, serfty.

Fully agree this is how it should be. Just saying that the reality sometimes looks different.