B747forever

Looking to book a one way CPH-LGW-LAX ticket on Norwegian. However, my trip will start from LGW, and by booking the LGW-LAX flight as a connecting flight from CPH it reduces APD and the fare becomes about $30-40 cheaper.

I believe that Norwegian allows one to skip segments booked under one PNR without canceling the remaining flights, though not 100% sure about that. Does anyone know for a fact that Norwegian allows this without consequences?

UKtravelbear

Phrastus

I'd only say that unless you have that verbiage _in writing_ from Norwegian (that you can skip segments) I would not try that. I'd argue that _especially_ with a LCC, and doubly so with a carrier that is teetering a bit like DY, they'd be only too happy to cancel your entire itinerary. And of course $30 or $40 is a meaningful savings but it would not be if that translates into a cancelled ticket and emergency last minute purchase.

marconess

I would absolutely not in any way expect them to allow you to just start your journey in LGW.

I have heard zero states where this is the policy. It may have happened a few times but for $40 it would be stupid to try this.

irishguy28

That is one hell of a risk you're taking for a mere 30-40 bucks!

If you fail to board your flight at CPH, then you have no valid ticket.

B747forever

btonkid12345

Even if Norwegian did allow that - they wouldn't in this case. Because your difference in ticket price is due to a government tax, not a fare difference - so its not something for them to waive or overlook.

Changing the departure location of your flight to pay a reduced APD would actually be committing fraud against the UK government. And if Norwegian did allow you to begin from LGW after having missed the initial flight from CPH, they would still have to charge you the difference in APD because you are originating in the UK.

Totally not worth having problems with the local authorities over such a small amount of money (or any amount of money, really). The UK government does not take fraud perpetuated against them lightly.

irishguy28

That's only partially correct, and that's why you were on the verge of making such a big mistake.

A more correct statement would be: the outbound journey and the inbound journey are effectively booked as separate virtual "one way" tickets.

That means you can miss the entirety of your outbound journey, and not affect your ability to complete the inbound journey as booked. However, missing any part of your outbound journey will cancel the rest of the outbound journey.


For instance, if I book an outbound AMS-OSL and a return OSL-AMS, I end up with two virtual one-way tickets. I could skip/miss/forget the AMS-OSL outbound, and this in no way affects my return OSL-AMS, which I can take, although I never flew the outbound journey.

But let's say my outbound is a multi-segment journey. Let's change my example to an outbound AMS-ARN-OSL and a return OSL-AMS. I end up with two virtual one-way tickets, the first being AMS-ARN-OSL. But, if I miss AMS-ARN, they will mark me as a no show for my AMS-OSL trip, and therefore my ARN-OSL segment will be cancelled. Even if I was in ARN, I would not be able to board that ARN-OSL flight, because I failed to board the AMS-ARN segment sold in conjunction with that outbound trip. But, even here, I could still take my return OSL-AMS for the return trip (second "virtual" one way, unaffected by my no-show on the first "virtual" ticket).

This sort of ticketing is quite common for low cost carriers in Europe - but in my experience this type of behaviour is only tolerated on European/shorthaul flights. I know that, for example, Aer Lingus operates in this manner on shorthaul, but NOT on transatlantic flights. I would suspect that Norwegian would also cancel the entirety of the ticket - outbound AND inbound - if any sector is missed on a longhaul flight. And beware that practices may differ within Norwegian (it is not just one entity; there are a number of different airlines under the single Norwegian banner)

WARNING: Never rely on posts online when planning what to do with a ticket. Practices may change at any time. Always consult with the airline prior to throwing away any part of the ticket to make sure that the consequences of your action are fully understood by you; past practice cannot always be taken as a guarantee of future practice. Strategies involving deliberately missing sectors are high-risk, may have consequences different than what you expect, and should not to be done without fully informing yourself of the consequences of your actions

ajeleonard

Even if they were willing to let skip a leg, if the fare difference is only caused by a difference in APD then they would be obligated to charge you the correct APD if you depart London.

irishguy28

Of course, this is all theoretical anyway because DY simply wouldn't allow a pax supposed to fly from CPH to instead fly from LGW without first having contacted them to change the ticket.

But Norwegian does have history for coming after pax for taxes imposed by the Norwegian state after they had already sold tickets, even as other airlines (such as SAS who would have been impacted to the same, if not greater, extent) "ate" the tax increase: Invoice from Norwegian for outstanding amount

Often1

When a carrier is cash-starved, it is a fair bet that one of the first places to crack down are on rules violators where something such as this would effectively lead to OP having to purchase new tickets at LGW.