Unnecessary reissue demanded by Qantas?
 

Hiya

A friend just called me from New Zealand very upset because Qantas are demanding a reissue fee on her AONE4.

The itinerary is ticketed as AKL-MEL-PER, with AKL-MEL very early in the morning and MEL-PER late in the evening on the same day. She wants to change the AKL-MEL segment to the day before, while leaving MEL-PER as it is on what would now be the following day. QF are saying that she is changing her itinerary from a transit to a stopover and so a reissue is required.

From my and her knowledge of the Technical Rule Sheet this does not seem right but there is no movement from QF and they even put the phone down on my friend when she politely tried to argue her case. What do you think/know about this? Is this one of those esoteric xONEx rules that one only discovers through experience or is the reissue fee frivolous?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

I'm far from an xONEx expert, but it seems like an obvious reroute to me. Fare constructions changes (AKL-MELx-PER becomes AKL-MEL-PER) = get dinged with a reissue fee.

If the earlier AKL-MEL is scheduled to arrive more than 24 hours before the MEL-PER flight departs then it is definitely a "stopover"!

From June 9th, there are three AKL-MEL flights, maybe a later one get in less then 24 hours before the PER flight departs.

6:30 AM 8:35 AM
1:00 PM 3:05 PM
8:55 PM 11:00 PM

Is QF demanding a change fee (US$125) or a re-issue fee?

There should be no change fee as there is no re-routing and only a change of date and time (which is explicitly permitted). Conceivably, the taxes might change if MEL changes from a transit to a stopover (though I doubt they would).

Whether or not a re-issue is required if you change a transit to a stopover, I don't know. Did QF issue the ticket originally? Whether or not an individual airline wants to impose a re-issue fee is up to them. AFAIK, AA does not - if QF does, then it's just one more reason to avoid having your RTW tickets issued by QF. How much is the fee they want?

But unless the ticket was issued in SWP region stop overs vs transits do not matter unless taxes change. No restriction on stop overs on such an itinerary. Stop overs/transits in the issued region and transits Asia on SWP-EU. ex some African countries etc are restrictions

As advised often on FT if you think the answer given is incorrect phone again.
May be worth phoning QF Au [61 (2) 131313 or +61 (2) 9691 3636] and not QF NZ

A change from a transit to a stopover has always been a change & reissue with any airline. It doesn't matter whether the transit was not necessary as part of the rules, if the ticket was issued as a transit and you now want to stopover then it's a change & reissue. And US$125.

The ticket office is correct.

Australia has many charges and fees. I cant find the link but it has been listed before on this forum. I have always book all of my segments as stopovers in AUS. My last ticket was AKL-SYDx-PERx-ADLx-MELx. Then I was covered. I changed it to AKL-SYD-PERx-ADL-MELx at no charge albeit with the AA RTW desk. I then changed it again to AKL-SYDx-PERx-ADL-MELx. The agent said she needed to see about the new stopover and I reminded her that the cost had already been collected. NO re-issue.

In North America ( IN MOST CASES ? ) transits and stopovers do not matter as there are no new fees. DFW-SJOx-MIA-LHR is the same as DFW-SJOx-MAIx-LHR. You have to do all the imigration/customs/yada yada stuff regardless.

The one you are sure to get called out on is the the Gordon Brown "Greenie BS" tax. £80 for a longhaul flight if you go from a transit to stopover. They have always got me on that one and rightly so.

These are a few experiences I have had .

Wrong. A "change and re-issue" is not US$125. If there is no change in routing - which there is not, it is simply a date and time change, which is explicitly permitted without charge - then there is no US$125 change fee on a xONEx ticket. If QF wants to impose a 're-issue' fee (of some unknown amount) then that is up to them but it is not the US$125 'itinerary' change fee.

It is a change in routing since there is now a stopover whilst before there was a transit

Dave

sorry , but there is a change in routing

the old routing was AKL x/MEL ( transit ) PER

the new routing is AKL MEL (stopover ) PER

while I appreciate that the average layperson sees this as not being a re-route because the cities havent changed the routing on the ticket has changed as a transit has been changed to a stopover .

When training retail travel agents in RTW fares this was a point I always took care to emphasise as it is important that pax understand which changes will incur fees and which ones will be free ( subject to availability of applicable booking class ) .

If the pax changes both sectors and still only transits at MEL then you would be correct , it would only be a date change , if the pax changes a transit to a stopover ( which is what they are doing ) that is a re-routing and a re-issue is required .

In many cases the taxes will be different between the routing ABC x/DEF GHI and the routing ABC DEF ( stopover ) GHI so an additional collection will often be necessary as well as the re-issue fee ( not sure whether there will be any additional taxes at MEL as a result of the rerouting although I suspect not )

No. As others have stated. Changing a transit to a stopover is a change in routing.

Given this comes under xONEx rules the following is correct, but irrelevant to the topic:

Is it me or may people be missing a major point here. Your friend called from New Zealand? As in, they live there? So... is this the start of the xONEx? I thought changing the very first segment brings with it a total reissue. It's not clear to me reading this thread that AKL-MEL is the first segment, but it is not clear to me that it is not the first segment either.

This would not necessarily be correct if the AKL-MEL coupon (still transit in MEL) is the first coupon.

According to CX rules, this would require a reissue.

Furthermore, even transit case, TAX maybe different.
Some airports waive tax for sameday transit only.
So, if you change a connecting flight to the next day, but still in 24-hours transit rule, your TAX increases in some airports.

In this case, there is no transit-stopover change, but a TAX recalculation needed.

I guess I will add to the chorus. A change from a transit to a stopover is a routing change. This is one of the reasons why in the past I had my aonex's issued routinely with stopovers instead of transits on most segments(except of course in LHR) so I would have flexibility with my routing and not have to worry about reissues and tax recalculations.

I obviously stand corrected by the volume of opinion. However, how anyone can infer that the written rules require you to pay a $125 fee when all you do is change a transit to a stopover is beyond me. I would suggest that the OP complain loudly to oneworld that their written rules are deceptive - if the rules clearly state (as they do) that date and time changes are permitted without charge, no reasonable person could possibly conclude from that statement that changing a transit to a stopover would be considered a 're-routing' and thus invoke the $125 fee.

Hiya

Sorry to keep you all hanging like that - I was on a flight, LHR-JFK. :)

My friend is in NZ but the itinerary started at JNB.

I think that what has happened is that the ticket was mistakenly issued as a transit when it should have been a stopover and this is what has caused the problems. As correspondents above have indicated, this has meant a reissue (and hence the fee) rather than the straightforward revalidation that goes with a normal date/time-only change.

I had a similar runaround with Qantas last year when I changed an AWC3 twice from DPS-HKG-JNB to DPS-HKGx-JNB and then back to DPS-HKG-JNB on a revalidation basis for both changes. QF asked for a reissue fee the second time but because I was able to show the original itinerary then this was eventually decided not to be necessary. Unfortunately those circumstances do not apply in this case.

That said, for a comparison and because I needed to do it anyway I just successfully changed the dates and revalidated my current Finnair DONE4 from MEL-HKGx-ICN to MEL-HKG-ICN and no reissue was requested!

Either way, in future bookings I am going to lock in stopvers when I book the ticket initially to avoid any confusion. I mean, we always end up changing the dates/times anyway, don't we? :D

Change from a transit (X) to a stopover (O) is always a re-route. This applies to all tickets, not specific to RTW fare rules. AKL-MEL-PER and AKL-xMEL-PER are two different routings.

It is just some fares don't have a fee for re-routing while there is a $125 fee for xONEx fares.

I am the one with the problem in Auckland - Matter resolved
 

After an hours debate with Qantas the senior supervisor put the phone down on me and refused to email me the reason for the $125 fee in writing.

I rang BA in MRU and they changed the date immediately without a re-issue fee only a local charge of $30 plus airport taxes for Melbourne (that was not due in this case).

The rules state that you only pay a re-issue cost if you re-route, simple as that.
:)
Its ironic that this flight gives me the tier points for lifetime Sapphire with Qantas and I'm on a first class ticket and was treated in this way. Qantas are normally great but this really annoyed me as I have now had 8 of these tickets and know the rules.

Now I have it changed I will be writing to Qantas, I'll keep you posted on their reply.

Correct, but that is a re-route. If you can get away with it, all the more power to you. ;)

So you got lucky with an ignorant agent in MRU... The only possible effect of getting heavy with Qantas is that they will feed back to BA, and the agent in MRU will be "retrained" so I don't see the point really.

Having said that, with e-tickets the effort involved in reroutes is significantly less than in the old days of paper (particularly handwritten paper), so it could be argued that the reissue fee is something of an anachronism.

Certainly a reissue should been required for a re-route, i.e. Effective AKL-PER to AKL-MEL-PER:To paraphrase: "There is no USD125 fee payable after Departure for Date/time/oneworld carrier/inventory changes provided ticketed points remain the same.". The ticket points are changing, so that should have applied.

It could be the BA MRU agent was doing whatever seemed simplest ...

So, by implication, a subsequent change from a stopover to a transit would not be a routing change?

Correct! However, some stopovers, versus transits, may cost you significantly more; HIP may also come into play for some fares.

That is why when booking 'dummy' (as disctinct from OPEN) segments it can be a good idea to ensure the departure time for each dummy segment is at least 24 hours or two days later then the arrival time of the previous segment (unless you are certain two consecutive segments will be booked and travelled as transit).

It avoids issues with any required additional collections.

... which, I think, is the point I've been trying to make all along. The ticket may need to be "re-issued" (whatever that means in an electronic world) and QF may want to impose a "re-issue fee" but that is not the $125 fee required by the xONEx rules for changing the routing, which is only imposed if the ticketed points change, which serfty's quote from the published rules makes absolutely clear (or so I would have thought). If you change a transit to a stopover (or vice versa) the taxes may change (as I noted in my original post) but that doesn't mean you have to pay the $125 change fee as well.

I think we'd need a definition of "ticketed points". AKL-xMEL-PER is, presumably, different "ticketed points" from AKL-MEL-PER. "transit MEL" is a different ticketed point from "stopover MEL".

In my experience over many years and many xONEx the change from transit to stopover always incurs the change fee.

It sounds like I was lucky to get my ticket changed for free by Finnair, then. :)

I was told by JAL and CX about it before.
According to the case above, the original route is AKL-PER, and then new routes are AKL-MEL for one, and MEL-PER for another one.
Therefore, this becomes re-routing.

By the way, I transited twice at London on my AONE4, and according to the T & C, this was not allowed.
However, JAL did allow me to do it:p.
So sometimes, it could be lucky that some agents did not understand the rules( or maybe sometimes, it could be unlucky that some agents did not understand):rolleyes:

It is? QF let me do it last year (SEA-xLHR-MAD-FCO-xLHR-SIN).

There's no limit on transits at LHR (or anywhere else) unless some other rule is being violated.

I am sorry I should explain my itinerary.
My route was AMM-LHR(x)-LIS-LHR(x)-LAX.

According to the rule below, I supposed not to come back to LHR for LAX, since I already used AMM-LHR and LHR-LIS(portugal) and third leg from LIS-LHR was not allowed.

(Not more than 2 of which may be between the UK and ALGERIA,
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA, BULGARIA, CROATIA, CYPRUS,
GREECE, ISRAEL, LIBYA, MALTA, MIDDLE EAST , MOROCCO,
PORTUGAL, ROMANIA, RUSSIA, SERBIA, TUNISIA, UKRAINE
whether part of the free continent allowance of 4 coupons, purchased as
additional coupons, or a combination of both)

I do not know why Portugal is included in this list because Portugal seems to me one of the European countries.

Anyway, One World Itinerary Planner said "NO" and has to re route the LIS-LHR.
But JAL did not say anything about it.

OK - so the issue is not 2 transits at LHR, but 3 segments in the "max 2 segments" group.

The issue here is one of illiteracy/incompetence on the part of someone at OW. The rule used to say "Funchal, Portugal" on the list of "long Europe" destinations. Basically adding Madeira to the list. Unfortunately, at some point some ignoramus in Oneworld wasn't able to understand this rule, and suddenly it became the whole of Portugal, not just Madeira.

I blame the falling standards of education around the world generally.

Thank you!
Now, I knew the reason why Portugal was here.

To add further confusion, I've changed transits to stopovers (and vice versa) on several xONEx tickets over the past 18 months and have never paid a fee. This was always done with AA, and granted, I'm not saying I shouldn't have paid a fee - just that AA never asked for it.

The plot thickens, as I've just heard from a pal in China that QF asked for a reissue fee when they changed their itinerary from a stopover to a transit. So it appears that QF ask for a a reissue fee either way. Hmmmm.

As an aside, QF also stated that if you buy an extra sector on a DONE4 then that must be in D also, but this seems to go against Rule 4(h), "The fare class of the purchased flight segments may be lower than that of the oneworld Explorer."

I might steer clear of QF in the future if I have a choice!

Indeed, most who frequent this forum do so ... if they have a choice.

If you ask them to reissue the ticket then yes. But there is no need to reissue the ticket in this case - you just need to change the reservation. You would only want to do a reissue if the saving in taxes is greater than the change fee (and I can't think of any cases where that would be so).

London, maybe, with the APD?

Dave