what to do when airline warned me about numerous throw-away ticketing? ($95 vs $497)
Sep 19, 2014, 9:45 am
#721
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,625
Then in 2013 Southwest stopped awarding any points for hidden flights. They also started zeroing out any unused funds (taxes for the dropped segment) which had formerly been refundable.
Southwest does not yet prohibit hidden city travel but they definitely don't like it. I believe that Southwest's original policy, like some of its other past customer-friendly policies, was simply making a virtue of necessity: Southwest's software did not have the capability to do otherwise.
Sep 19, 2014, 9:48 am
#722
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,625
Sep 19, 2014, 9:52 am
#723
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
It's kind of funny watching people twist, dance and spin in an attempt to justify a rather clear ethical violation. Hidden city tickets are banned. You agreed to that when you bought the ticket. If you do it, at the minimum, you lied.
Sep 19, 2014, 9:53 am
#724
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,575
I honestly never thought about trying to collect the taxes back on the dropped WN segment, nor did I ever attempt to recover unused credit there. (I wasn't even aware it was possible.)
My primary hidden-city example was when MCI-OKC would have a promo fare and I'd buy MCI-DAL-OKC. It was often something like a $59 one-way when the regular Dallas one was $80-90. The flight credit (pre-RR2.0) posted fine.
But thank you for the clarification that the rules have changed a bit: it would be worth assessing now to determine whether a narrow savings it worth it or not.
My primary hidden-city example was when MCI-OKC would have a promo fare and I'd buy MCI-DAL-OKC. It was often something like a $59 one-way when the regular Dallas one was $80-90. The flight credit (pre-RR2.0) posted fine.
But thank you for the clarification that the rules have changed a bit: it would be worth assessing now to determine whether a narrow savings it worth it or not.
Sep 19, 2014, 11:15 pm
#725
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, MM, NR; HH Diamond, Bonvoy LT Gold, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Diamond, others
Posts: 12,159
my last hidden-city itinerary was on US about three years ago: XXX-DCA was over $500 whereas XXX-DCA-YYY was approx $225 and DCA-YYY was also about $225 ... when I checked in and printed BPs at approx T-8 hrs, there were only two of 37 seats open on DCA-YYY; as I was making my way thru the crowds by the shuttle bus doors at DCA I heard the GA soliciting volunteers for that flight
Sep 20, 2014, 7:07 am
#726
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,375
lol, didn't even think about that angle!
the amusing thing is that I could probably have shot to the top of the VDB list since the next flight was in ~6 hrs ... "just give me the VDB, you don't even have to rebook me; it's 3 hrs in a rental car that I'll be returning here anyway"
the amusing thing is that I could probably have shot to the top of the VDB list since the next flight was in ~6 hrs ... "just give me the VDB, you don't even have to rebook me; it's 3 hrs in a rental car that I'll be returning here anyway"
Sep 20, 2014, 7:55 am
#727
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
The malformed puppy was good though! (Just give it to some sad looking kid hanging out near the store!)
Sep 20, 2014, 8:10 am
#728
Join Date: Nov 2010
Programs: Enough
Posts: 961
2. Are all contractual breaches ethical violations? I suspect not. For example, courts encourage 'efficient breaches.' Moreover, for a contract of adhesion, especially one where the consumer has little expectation nor ability to understand the meaning of the contract, there is an obvious limit on any ethical violation.
3. A lie is to purposefully convey point X with the knowledge that point X is false. Ticketing something that you wish to use differently than ticketed is not in itself a lie (especially when the consumer is not expected in a normal circumstance to have read the CoC).
Sep 20, 2014, 9:28 am
#729
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
Exactly. All these defensive comparisons to a volume of goods sold are total non-starters.
It is the purchasing of a cheaper service, but the consumption of a more expensive one. It's much more than a breach of contract.
It is a funny FT phenomenon that the same community which turns handstands to defend its favorite airlines against customers will so nimbly turn around and invent far-fetched rationales to cheat those same airlines.
It is the purchasing of a cheaper service, but the consumption of a more expensive one. It's much more than a breach of contract.
It is a funny FT phenomenon that the same community which turns handstands to defend its favorite airlines against customers will so nimbly turn around and invent far-fetched rationales to cheat those same airlines.
Sep 20, 2014, 9:41 am
#730
Join Date: Nov 2010
Programs: Enough
Posts: 961
Exactly. All these defensive comparisons to a volume of goods sold are total non-starters.
It is the purchasing of a cheaper service, but the consumption of a more expensive one. It's much more than a breach of contract.
It is a funny FT phenomenon that the same community which turns handstands to defend its favorite airlines against customers will so nimbly turn around and invent far-fetched rationales to cheat those same airlines.
It is the purchasing of a cheaper service, but the consumption of a more expensive one. It's much more than a breach of contract.
It is a funny FT phenomenon that the same community which turns handstands to defend its favorite airlines against customers will so nimbly turn around and invent far-fetched rationales to cheat those same airlines.
Indeed, I think there's both a public policy and philosophical rationale to preserve the right of egress.
Sep 20, 2014, 9:57 am
#731
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
It is an arbitrary and irrelevant factor in the physical provision of that service -- transport from point A to point C -- that the device employed therein makes a stop at point B.
Sep 20, 2014, 10:11 am
#732
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,625
One unpremeditated skipped segment will not bother the airline. It's the repeat offenders they are after.
Southwest's approach is interesting. They don't attempt to recover money from the traveler. They merely intercept any points earnings.
Sep 20, 2014, 11:22 am
#733
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Redwood City, CA USA (SFO/SJC)
Programs: 1K 2010, 1P in 2011, Plat for 2012,13,14,15 & 2016. Gold in 17 & 18, Plat since
Posts: 8,826
Fundamentally, I can't see a public policy nor a moral reason why we should constrain the egress of anybody due to contractual reasons here. Yes, they could have paid more, but do we want to have an environment where we prohibit the egress of somebody because doing so ought to have been more costly?
Indeed, I think there's both a public policy and philosophical rationale to preserve the right of egress.
Indeed, I think there's both a public policy and philosophical rationale to preserve the right of egress.
Seriously, there are economic issues at play here. How far do you want to push the idea that egress is some sort of right?
The airlines are free to sell any ticket they wish for whatever price they wish, at terms disclosed in their COC and allowed by the relevant agencies governing purchases and air travel.
Sep 20, 2014, 11:55 am
#734
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
Fundamentally, I can't see a public policy nor a moral reason why we should constrain the egress of anybody due to contractual reasons here. Yes, they could have paid more, but do we want to have an environment where we prohibit the egress of somebody because doing so ought to have been more costly?
Indeed, I think there's both a public policy and philosophical rationale to preserve the right of egress.
Indeed, I think there's both a public policy and philosophical rationale to preserve the right of egress.
Where do you see the airlines or anyone else asserting that a passenger is, or should be, physically prevented from discontinuing his journey at "point B" or not taking a return leg? The issue is one of alleged breach of contract terms which is a civil matter that the airline may pursue if the passenger skips the leg, etc. A gate agent won't handcuff you, and drag you kicking and screaming onto the plane at point B.
Sep 20, 2014, 3:35 pm
#735
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,408
It says it is only an ethical issue and potential breach of contract. Nothing more.
AA has published a letter to that effect on their website.
http://www.aa.com/i18n/agency/Bookin...p&locale=de_DE