Downgrade Compensation Question/Issue
Jan 31, 2017, 7:46 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 335
Downgrade Compensation Question/Issue
Hi all -
Wondering if I can get some advice.
A few weeks ago, my husband and I were scheduled to fly PRG-FRA-IAD-PHL in business on the short, 2-cabin flights and First from FRA to the states on a combination of LH and UA.
The first LH flight was cancelled (thus affecting the remainder of the itinerary) so were re-booked onto another flight to FRA later in the day, had to stay overnight in FRA and were to catch SQ26 in suites the following morning back to NY.
Upon arrival at the gate, we were informed that SQ26 had mechanical issues and according to the GAs, all passengers were required to rebook to other flights (we later found out that that flight actually did go after a 4+ hour delay). We rebooked onto a LH flight to EWR leaving 6 hours later however they only had 1 seat in F. I was involuntarily downgraded to J with assurance from Singapore that I would be compensated. I didn't need the assurance as they are legally obligated to compensate me under EC261, but nonetheless, I was given that assurance without question.
I am now making my EC261 claim. Singapore has approved the delay portion of the claim but are now telling me that the Frankfurt office has told them that I originally held a ticket in J, I was upgraded out of the goodness of Singapore's heart to F "for no additional charge", and then I was downgraded back to my original class of travel. I sent my original itinerary/receipt showing that I was always in F, and it wasn't until Singapore came into the picture that I ever held a ticket in J and they informed me that they would investigate that and let me know their decision.
I have provided all of the required documentation and have gone through all of the appropriate channels. I am wondering if I should begin pursuing this legally (and if so, any suggestions on that process)? Singapore also requires people to communicate with the head office only via email, which is making me crazy, as I have to wait for a week between each correspondence before receiving a response. When I received the email this morning that "because I was in J originally, they would not be compensating me for the downgrade", my head almost exploded. Trying not to totally rage, and would be greatly appreciative of any advice the smarter and more seasoned travelers here may have to give. Thank you in advance!
Wondering if I can get some advice.
A few weeks ago, my husband and I were scheduled to fly PRG-FRA-IAD-PHL in business on the short, 2-cabin flights and First from FRA to the states on a combination of LH and UA.
The first LH flight was cancelled (thus affecting the remainder of the itinerary) so were re-booked onto another flight to FRA later in the day, had to stay overnight in FRA and were to catch SQ26 in suites the following morning back to NY.
Upon arrival at the gate, we were informed that SQ26 had mechanical issues and according to the GAs, all passengers were required to rebook to other flights (we later found out that that flight actually did go after a 4+ hour delay). We rebooked onto a LH flight to EWR leaving 6 hours later however they only had 1 seat in F. I was involuntarily downgraded to J with assurance from Singapore that I would be compensated. I didn't need the assurance as they are legally obligated to compensate me under EC261, but nonetheless, I was given that assurance without question.
I am now making my EC261 claim. Singapore has approved the delay portion of the claim but are now telling me that the Frankfurt office has told them that I originally held a ticket in J, I was upgraded out of the goodness of Singapore's heart to F "for no additional charge", and then I was downgraded back to my original class of travel. I sent my original itinerary/receipt showing that I was always in F, and it wasn't until Singapore came into the picture that I ever held a ticket in J and they informed me that they would investigate that and let me know their decision.
I have provided all of the required documentation and have gone through all of the appropriate channels. I am wondering if I should begin pursuing this legally (and if so, any suggestions on that process)? Singapore also requires people to communicate with the head office only via email, which is making me crazy, as I have to wait for a week between each correspondence before receiving a response. When I received the email this morning that "because I was in J originally, they would not be compensating me for the downgrade", my head almost exploded. Trying not to totally rage, and would be greatly appreciative of any advice the smarter and more seasoned travelers here may have to give. Thank you in advance!
Feb 1, 2017, 7:56 am
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 335
Correct - the original itinerary didn't contain an SQ segment. UA issued the original ticket. LH rebooked us on SQ. SQ then had aircraft problems and rebooked us on LH (which is why the delay and downgrade claim is going through SQ).
Feb 1, 2017, 8:12 pm
#5
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Paying a lawyer would be foolish and will cost a lot more than OP could ever hope to claim. EC 261/2004 is fairly clear and it appears that SQ has, in one instance paid more than it need have and in another, less than it must.
The OP is confusing and lengthy, but the operative and relative portion is that he was ticketed as follows:
PRG-FRA LH J
FRA-IAD LH F
IAD-PHL UA F
OP's first segment was cancelled and he was rebooked onto the next day's SQ service to JFK. That was in turn cancelled and OP was rebooked back onto an LH service to EWR.
EC 261/2004 is payable by the operating carrier. In both instances, that is LH. The LH delay xPRG caused a delay of 24+ hours into OP's final ticketed destination of PHL (although he apparently accepted EWR). That entitles OP to EUR 600 in cancellation (delay) compensation.
In addition, OP held an F ticket and LH acommodated him in J. As this was an LH ticket in the first place, SQ has nothing to do with it and what SQ believes about it being a J ticket in the first instance is irrelevant as LH knows from its own records that it was an F ticket. What SQ promised OP is also irrelevant except to the extent that OP wants to fight with SQ. But, that is outside of EC 261/2004 as SQ was not the operating carrier of the downgraded flight.
On the other hand, LH will likely maintain that OP voluntarily accepted the reroute and downgrade in lieu of waiting for an F reroute to IAD and on to PHL as originally booked. That is a factual dispute and cannot be resolved here.
If OP is correct, he is due a refund (not compensation) of 75% of the F fare between FRA-IAD under EC 261/2004.
I cannot imagine why SQ would pay OP anything for the delay/cancellation because that is part of the ongoing delay PRG-PHL, but that is SQ's error and so be it.
Lastly, LH has an obligation to get OP to PHL. Thus, while likely relatively minor in the larger picture, LH should also reimburse OP the cost of his Amtrak or other ground transport from EWR.
EC 261/2004 is not complicated if you keep your eye on the fact that the operating carrier who is responsible and that one ticket measures delay at its final destination, in this case PHL.
The OP is confusing and lengthy, but the operative and relative portion is that he was ticketed as follows:
PRG-FRA LH J
FRA-IAD LH F
IAD-PHL UA F
OP's first segment was cancelled and he was rebooked onto the next day's SQ service to JFK. That was in turn cancelled and OP was rebooked back onto an LH service to EWR.
EC 261/2004 is payable by the operating carrier. In both instances, that is LH. The LH delay xPRG caused a delay of 24+ hours into OP's final ticketed destination of PHL (although he apparently accepted EWR). That entitles OP to EUR 600 in cancellation (delay) compensation.
In addition, OP held an F ticket and LH acommodated him in J. As this was an LH ticket in the first place, SQ has nothing to do with it and what SQ believes about it being a J ticket in the first instance is irrelevant as LH knows from its own records that it was an F ticket. What SQ promised OP is also irrelevant except to the extent that OP wants to fight with SQ. But, that is outside of EC 261/2004 as SQ was not the operating carrier of the downgraded flight.
On the other hand, LH will likely maintain that OP voluntarily accepted the reroute and downgrade in lieu of waiting for an F reroute to IAD and on to PHL as originally booked. That is a factual dispute and cannot be resolved here.
If OP is correct, he is due a refund (not compensation) of 75% of the F fare between FRA-IAD under EC 261/2004.
I cannot imagine why SQ would pay OP anything for the delay/cancellation because that is part of the ongoing delay PRG-PHL, but that is SQ's error and so be it.
Lastly, LH has an obligation to get OP to PHL. Thus, while likely relatively minor in the larger picture, LH should also reimburse OP the cost of his Amtrak or other ground transport from EWR.
EC 261/2004 is not complicated if you keep your eye on the fact that the operating carrier who is responsible and that one ticket measures delay at its final destination, in this case PHL.
Feb 1, 2017, 10:17 pm
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 335
EC 261/2004 is payable by the operating carrier. In both instances, that is LH. The LH delay xPRG caused a delay of 24+ hours into OP's final ticketed destination of PHL (although he apparently accepted EWR). That entitles OP to EUR 600 in cancellation (delay) compensation.
In addition, OP held an F ticket and LH acommodated him in J. As this was an LH ticket in the first place, SQ has nothing to do with it and what SQ believes about it being a J ticket in the first instance is irrelevant as LH knows from its own records that it was an F ticket. What SQ promised OP is also irrelevant except to the extent that OP wants to fight with SQ. But, that is outside of EC 261/2004 as SQ was not the operating carrier of the downgraded flight.
Lastly, LH has an obligation to get OP to PHL. Thus, while likely relatively minor in the larger picture, LH should also reimburse OP the cost of his Amtrak or other ground transport from EWR.
Anyhow, while Im not getting my hopes up, I received communication from SQ head office today that seemed to suggest things were maybe moving in the right direction. Will post the outcome when I have it!
Apr 17, 2017, 2:59 am
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 335
Just to update this thread on the final outcome:
We received 625USD per person from Singapore and 80% of the cost of the flight in mileage (which was how it was paid) from United for downgrade compensation. Singapore worked with United on that - I did not have to deal with them at all. Don't know what sort of deal was made between the two airlines to accomplish that. United, in typical United fashion, initially tried to simply refund the difference between first and business, but Singapore was reminded of their legal obligations (at which point they worked it out with United).
I know another poster had mentioned that it is the operating carrier that is responsible for payment (in this case, LH - the carrier that ultimately ended up transporting us to our final destination due to Singapore's faulty aircraft) but I don't interpret the law to mean that. It was definitely SQ's responsibility to pay (which is further supported by the fact that they did).
Somewhat unrelated to this EU claim, I also finally received all of my insurance claim money from Chase after months (for the missed, non-refundable hotel reservation, hotel in the airport, airport dinner, etc.). Additionally, due to Lufthansa leaving all of our luggage in Frankfurt (and not delivering it for over a week), they reimbursed me for the new luggage I had to quickly purchase in order to accommodate another trip shortly after this one ended.
While I wish it all hadn't taken so long, I'm definitely satisfied with the outcome.
We received 625USD per person from Singapore and 80% of the cost of the flight in mileage (which was how it was paid) from United for downgrade compensation. Singapore worked with United on that - I did not have to deal with them at all. Don't know what sort of deal was made between the two airlines to accomplish that. United, in typical United fashion, initially tried to simply refund the difference between first and business, but Singapore was reminded of their legal obligations (at which point they worked it out with United).
I know another poster had mentioned that it is the operating carrier that is responsible for payment (in this case, LH - the carrier that ultimately ended up transporting us to our final destination due to Singapore's faulty aircraft) but I don't interpret the law to mean that. It was definitely SQ's responsibility to pay (which is further supported by the fact that they did).
Somewhat unrelated to this EU claim, I also finally received all of my insurance claim money from Chase after months (for the missed, non-refundable hotel reservation, hotel in the airport, airport dinner, etc.). Additionally, due to Lufthansa leaving all of our luggage in Frankfurt (and not delivering it for over a week), they reimbursed me for the new luggage I had to quickly purchase in order to accommodate another trip shortly after this one ended.
While I wish it all hadn't taken so long, I'm definitely satisfied with the outcome.
Apr 17, 2017, 3:21 am
#8
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,368
Shouldn't LH have paid for the hotel and meals in FRA since problems with their flight to FRA caused the overnight stay? There's a duty of care even if you don't get EC261 compensation for the delay.
Apr 18, 2017, 3:19 am
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denmark
Programs: TK Elite
Posts: 11,750
It was definitely SQ that had the obligation to pay EC 261/04 comp. The OP had confirmed F seats on SQ26, but SQ had to cancel/delay this flight and rebook to LH with only 1 F seat available and the OP got a J seat, i.e. SQ downgraded the OP.
The downgrade is not an LH or UA issue. Yes, LH was liable for the initial cancellation of the LH flight ex PRG but apparently this was caused by adverse weather exempting LH from paying EC 261/04 comp. However, LH was still under a duty of care, i.e. to arrange for hotel and meals at FRA, i.e. the OP should have sought reimbursement of the these costs from LH. Once rebooked with SQ in F on SQ26, the subsequent events was no longer the responsibility of LH.
I assume that SQ somehow compensated UA for the miles that UA returned to the OP. Despite being the ticketing carrier UA has nothing to do with issues that occured with the operating carriers.
The OP should be very happy with this outcome. If SQ wanted to play this by the book, the OP could have been rebooked to SQ26 in F the following day (or any other flight with F when ever such seat was available) to avoid the downgrade issue, i.e. exposing SQ only to comp. for delay - but apparently this was never considered/an option to SQ - or SQ could have argued that the OP voluntarily accepted the downgrade to J for the LH EWR flight to minimise the delay/to avoid yet another night at FRA, i.e. no downgrade issue.
The downgrade is not an LH or UA issue. Yes, LH was liable for the initial cancellation of the LH flight ex PRG but apparently this was caused by adverse weather exempting LH from paying EC 261/04 comp. However, LH was still under a duty of care, i.e. to arrange for hotel and meals at FRA, i.e. the OP should have sought reimbursement of the these costs from LH. Once rebooked with SQ in F on SQ26, the subsequent events was no longer the responsibility of LH.
I assume that SQ somehow compensated UA for the miles that UA returned to the OP. Despite being the ticketing carrier UA has nothing to do with issues that occured with the operating carriers.
The OP should be very happy with this outcome. If SQ wanted to play this by the book, the OP could have been rebooked to SQ26 in F the following day (or any other flight with F when ever such seat was available) to avoid the downgrade issue, i.e. exposing SQ only to comp. for delay - but apparently this was never considered/an option to SQ - or SQ could have argued that the OP voluntarily accepted the downgrade to J for the LH EWR flight to minimise the delay/to avoid yet another night at FRA, i.e. no downgrade issue.
Last edited by SK AAR; Apr 18, 2017 at 3:30 am
