Turkish hosed me
Jun 18, 2019, 6:11 am
#16
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio
Programs: DL DM, Former AA EXP now AY Plat, AC 75K, NW Plat, Former CO Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 27,040
Hopefully you have either (1) travel insurance to cover or (2) a recent large purchase with Avianca or Turkish so that you can get your credit card company involved with a charge dispute. (Some may call this a chargeback). If you spend a lot of $$$ with say Amex, they may go to bat in a serious way. Some may insist and argue over which airline is to blame, and insist that you only go after them. IMO, shoot them all, let AMEX sort out who pays the bill. If avianca is facing a chargeback of $1000, 2000, it may motivate them to go after Turkish.
GL
GL
Regardless, AV, not TK where the ones in the wrong. TK was and is bound by law not to transport passengers for compensation between these two points.
Jun 18, 2019, 7:01 am
#17
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Moscow / Aylesbury / Leeds
Programs: BA-GGL, SU-G Agean, G,, Hhonours D, Starwood G, IHG G,
Posts: 1,531
This is why I only ever book flights using Amex P. Over the years I have been screwed up twice, once revenue and once miles and the tax. Both occasions Amex sorted it
Jun 18, 2019, 7:32 am
#18
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: NYC/DC
Programs: AA,SPG, Delta, Amtrak, JB
Posts: 849
Why is it you do not realize that analogy that you used is not even in the same galaxy?
Jun 18, 2019, 7:13 pm
#19
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,257
It's plain obvious to anyone who isn't an apologist for TK that TK honored the sale. They appointed Avianca as their agent, and if the OP lives in Europe, they have broad exposure to the legal system which next to always holds the operating carrier responsible.
Definitely worth a try, if TK doesn't make amends.
Jun 18, 2019, 8:18 pm
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Barcelona, London, on a plane
Programs: BA Silver, TK E+, AA PP, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 13,033
If you bought it from Apple, absolutely.
It's plain obvious to anyone who isn't an apologist for TK that TK honored the sale. They appointed Avianca as their agent, and if the OP lives in Europe, they have broad exposure to the legal system which next to always holds the operating carrier responsible.
Definitely worth a try, if TK doesn't make amends.
It's plain obvious to anyone who isn't an apologist for TK that TK honored the sale. They appointed Avianca as their agent, and if the OP lives in Europe, they have broad exposure to the legal system which next to always holds the operating carrier responsible.
Definitely worth a try, if TK doesn't make amends.
Inventing things such as "honouring the sale", or "I live in Europe so I will sue a Turkish company there based an invalid contract for transport between two non-EU countries" is just a waste of everybody's time.
Jun 18, 2019, 8:24 pm
#21
Join Date: Sep 2007
Programs: UA Premier Exec; AA Platinum; SPG Gold; PC Platinum Ambassador
Posts: 285
I agree- I'd definitely take action against TK, rather than Avianca. The OP had a valid ticket confirmed by the TK call center. He showed up for the flight but was not allowed to board, nor was the ticket endorsed over to another carrier.
Most posts above say that TK is absolved of responsibility because they would be fined if they transported the passenger. Boo hoo! That should motivate them to find an alternative for the original passenger, and endorse the ticket over to another carrier that would get him to his destination. Just telling the OP it's not their problem, even though the passenger has a valid ticket, is not acceptable.
It's like suing Swiss Air when they refused to honor mistake fares that were sold on Expedia. Of course I would sue the carrier.
Most posts above say that TK is absolved of responsibility because they would be fined if they transported the passenger. Boo hoo! That should motivate them to find an alternative for the original passenger, and endorse the ticket over to another carrier that would get him to his destination. Just telling the OP it's not their problem, even though the passenger has a valid ticket, is not acceptable.
It's like suing Swiss Air when they refused to honor mistake fares that were sold on Expedia. Of course I would sue the carrier.
Jun 18, 2019, 9:03 pm
#22
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SEA/ORD/ADB
Programs: TK ELPL (*G), AS 100K (OWE), BA Gold (OWE), Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat
Posts: 7,763
AV did not act as an agent of TK in this case - since the ticket was issued on AV ticket stock, AV was selling the product and pocketing the revenue, and subcontracting the flying of the passenger to TK via their Special Prorate Agreement. AV is responsible for this mistake.
If OP had purchased the ticket from a travel agent and the ticket was issued on 235 stock, then I would agree that TK is responsible as they directly received the revenue from the ticket.
If OP had purchased the ticket from a travel agent and the ticket was issued on 235 stock, then I would agree that TK is responsible as they directly received the revenue from the ticket.
Jun 18, 2019, 11:20 pm
#23
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: HEL
Programs: *G, used to be with TK but left due to their corruption and political ties
Posts: 4,404
I agree- I'd definitely take action against TK, rather than Avianca. The OP had a valid ticket confirmed by the TK call center. He showed up for the flight but was not allowed to board, nor was the ticket endorsed over to another carrier.
Most posts above say that TK is absolved of responsibility because they would be fined if they transported the passenger. Boo hoo! That should motivate them to find an alternative for the original passenger, and endorse the ticket over to another carrier that would get him to his destination. Just telling the OP it's not their problem, even though the passenger has a valid ticket, is not acceptable.
It's like suing Swiss Air when they refused to honor mistake fares that were sold on Expedia. Of course I would sue the carrier.
Most posts above say that TK is absolved of responsibility because they would be fined if they transported the passenger. Boo hoo! That should motivate them to find an alternative for the original passenger, and endorse the ticket over to another carrier that would get him to his destination. Just telling the OP it's not their problem, even though the passenger has a valid ticket, is not acceptable.
It's like suing Swiss Air when they refused to honor mistake fares that were sold on Expedia. Of course I would sue the carrier.
As far as we know, TK did not validate the ticket. They just assigned seats, which can be done for unticketed journeys. There was no reason for TK to "validate" the whole pnr when you call in. In fact, I bet most passengers would be annoyed if you were required to wait while the agent validated your ticket whenever you called them for seat assignments or other minor modifications.
I do however agree with you that TK's helpfulness at check-in could have been better. But the blame still lies with AV.
Jun 19, 2019, 1:42 am
#24
Join Date: Jul 2017
Programs: KrisFlyer Gold, Marriott & SPG Plat, Hilton Gold, ShangriLa Jade, Enterprise Plat, Taj Gold
Posts: 3,314
Heh typical FT thread with everyone blaming AV, TK, Amex, ebay, Apple and god knows who else. I'd like to include McD in this mix! 
Unfortunately I don't see AV doing much to right the situation unless legally threatened. Of course OP has disappeared and didn't share what they did at the end and how much it cost. But posting this in the AV forum (he probably already has) would give him a better idea of what AV would do to make things right.
Best case I think AV would refund original miles and bear the cost of the new ticket along with throwing in some miles to try and appease OP. Whether all this is worth a legal fight is really OPs call but his beef should be with AV and not TK.
AV issued a wrong ticket... who else did what else in the background to get the wrong ticket issued is not OPs concern. Would have been nice if TK had informed OP in advance instead of at the airport but let someone else figure out the % of fault with TK. AV issued a ticket that they weren't supposed or allowed to and therefore OP got stuck. It's as simple as that.
Just because AV issued a ticket doesn't mean TK is bound to fly OP by violating several several international laws, agreements and treaties.
Unfortunately I don't see AV doing much to right the situation unless legally threatened. Of course OP has disappeared and didn't share what they did at the end and how much it cost. But posting this in the AV forum (he probably already has) would give him a better idea of what AV would do to make things right.
Best case I think AV would refund original miles and bear the cost of the new ticket along with throwing in some miles to try and appease OP. Whether all this is worth a legal fight is really OPs call but his beef should be with AV and not TK.
AV issued a wrong ticket... who else did what else in the background to get the wrong ticket issued is not OPs concern. Would have been nice if TK had informed OP in advance instead of at the airport but let someone else figure out the % of fault with TK. AV issued a ticket that they weren't supposed or allowed to and therefore OP got stuck. It's as simple as that.
Just because AV issued a ticket doesn't mean TK is bound to fly OP by violating several several international laws, agreements and treaties.
Jun 19, 2019, 9:28 am
#25
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 304
Heh typical FT thread with everyone blaming AV, TK, Amex, ebay, Apple and god knows who else. I'd like to include McD in this mix!
Unfortunately I don't see AV doing much to right the situation unless legally threatened. Of course OP has disappeared and didn't share what they did at the end and how much it cost. But posting this in the AV forum (he probably already has) would give him a better idea of what AV would do to make things right.
Best case I think AV would refund original miles and bear the cost of the new ticket along with throwing in some miles to try and appease OP. Whether all this is worth a legal fight is really OPs call but his beef should be with AV and not TK.
AV issued a wrong ticket... who else did what else in the background to get the wrong ticket issued is not OPs concern. Would have been nice if TK had informed OP in advance instead of at the airport but let someone else figure out the % of fault with TK. AV issued a ticket that they weren't supposed or allowed to and therefore OP got stuck. It's as simple as that.
Just because AV issued a ticket doesn't mean TK is bound to fly OP by violating several several international laws, agreements and treaties.
Unfortunately I don't see AV doing much to right the situation unless legally threatened. Of course OP has disappeared and didn't share what they did at the end and how much it cost. But posting this in the AV forum (he probably already has) would give him a better idea of what AV would do to make things right.
Best case I think AV would refund original miles and bear the cost of the new ticket along with throwing in some miles to try and appease OP. Whether all this is worth a legal fight is really OPs call but his beef should be with AV and not TK.
AV issued a wrong ticket... who else did what else in the background to get the wrong ticket issued is not OPs concern. Would have been nice if TK had informed OP in advance instead of at the airport but let someone else figure out the % of fault with TK. AV issued a ticket that they weren't supposed or allowed to and therefore OP got stuck. It's as simple as that.
Just because AV issued a ticket doesn't mean TK is bound to fly OP by violating several several international laws, agreements and treaties.
I understand that I need to figure out who is to blame and press the issue with the responsible party, but I am really peeved at the agent in Male. I understand that it is not her fault that I could not board the flight, but she has no business being in customer service. My wife and I were astonished when she comes out from some office, tells me that we aren't going anywhere with a "its not my problem" attitude. It is not as if we at LGA and couldn't board the hourly to the DCA. We were 9,000 miles from home and one TK's partner just completely dropped the ball leaving us stranded. If she had told us that we couldn't board but even offered to assist us with finding options that at least shows some good will.
I will keep the board posted as to what happens.
Thanks for the input from many of you.
Last edited by Los_Pepes; Jun 19, 2019 at 10:52 am
Jun 19, 2019, 11:19 am
#26
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,257
TK appointed them as their agent. The legality is entirely irrelevant here. Both airlines adhered to relevant laws but the passenger experienced damages.
Inventing? What are you smoking? TK's authorized agent sold the OP a ticket that TK then did not honor. That is pretty simple and straightforward.
TK could have both obeyed the law and honored the sale by endorsing the OP. They didn't, they should bleed for that.
And I used the above wording as EU regulations hold the operating carrier responsible and for good reasons.
Inventing things such as "honouring the sale", or "I live in Europe so I will sue a Turkish company there based an invalid contract for transport between two non-EU countries" is just a waste of everybody's time.
TK could have both obeyed the law and honored the sale by endorsing the OP. They didn't, they should bleed for that.
And I used the above wording as EU regulations hold the operating carrier responsible and for good reasons.
Jun 19, 2019, 11:29 am
#27
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,257
TK absolutely nominated Avianca as their agent otherwise they could not issue tickets. And the OP has evidence of that.
It is possible, perhaps even likely, that Avianca made a mistake here or issued a ticket against TK's rules. TK can then claw damages back from Avianca. But that's not the pax' responsibility.
Jun 19, 2019, 11:48 am
#28
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SEA/ORD/ADB
Programs: TK ELPL (*G), AS 100K (OWE), BA Gold (OWE), Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat
Posts: 7,763
The equivalence of award tickets and revenue tickets for European compensation has been abundantly tested.
TK absolutely nominated Avianca as their agent otherwise they could not issue tickets. And the OP has evidence of that.
It is possible, perhaps even likely, that Avianca made a mistake here or issued a ticket against TK's rules. TK can then claw damages back from Avianca. But that's not the pax' responsibility.
TK absolutely nominated Avianca as their agent otherwise they could not issue tickets. And the OP has evidence of that.
It is possible, perhaps even likely, that Avianca made a mistake here or issued a ticket against TK's rules. TK can then claw damages back from Avianca. But that's not the pax' responsibility.
However, AV did not function as the agent of TK. AV filed the fare, issued the ticket on its own ticket stock, and collected payment. That is not an agent relationship.
Jun 19, 2019, 12:38 pm
#29
Join Date: Jul 2017
Programs: KrisFlyer Gold, Marriott & SPG Plat, Hilton Gold, ShangriLa Jade, Enterprise Plat, Taj Gold
Posts: 3,314
I sympathise with you OP.
This is one of the rare occasions where OP wasn’t in the wrong and there was surprisingly there was zero OP bashing. Thats a first.
I think you should get feedback from the AV forums where you’d find people more experienced in dealing with AV maybe will suggest a better course of action.
All the best OP... I’m sure you’ll be tearing out your hair soon. Hope you get some kind of favourable response from AV higher ups!
And of course I strongly disagree with almost everything weero said because of the following:
1. EU Compensation and other EU laws - Not sure why they matter in this case at all. It’s a MLE - CMB flight on TK by OP of indeterminate origin but around 9000 miles from home. Not sure what I missed but very unclear why what EU thinks about operating carrier responsibilities matters here.
2. AV was acting as agent of TK - Ummm how? As PVDtoDEL said... they’re most certainly not
3. Both airlines adhered to relevant laws - if the fare rules dictated otherwise how could AV have adhered to fare rules and therefore relevant laws? Also if both airlines obeyed all the rules and laws OP would have had an uneventful trip from MLE to CMB.
4. TK should have obeyed the law and honoured the ticket - Since TK did not “authorise” AV to sell that particular ticket in the first place they had no requirement by EU or any other law to honour OP’s ticket. It’s like AV issuing a one way ticket from MLE to the Moon and then requiring TK to honour that. That logic doesn’t hold water. AV was not authorised to sell tickets on that route - they very wrongly did that - why would TK want to bear the consequences and financial burden of that mistake?
TK should have definitely treated OP better. They should have been more sympathetic with OP instead of being rude/blunt/nasty. But I would imagine TK would think “Not my problem” and while they aren’t wrong then can conduct themselves much better - outstation contract staff or not.
This is one of the rare occasions where OP wasn’t in the wrong and there was surprisingly there was zero OP bashing. Thats a first.
I think you should get feedback from the AV forums where you’d find people more experienced in dealing with AV maybe will suggest a better course of action.
All the best OP... I’m sure you’ll be tearing out your hair soon. Hope you get some kind of favourable response from AV higher ups!
And of course I strongly disagree with almost everything weero said because of the following:
1. EU Compensation and other EU laws - Not sure why they matter in this case at all. It’s a MLE - CMB flight on TK by OP of indeterminate origin but around 9000 miles from home. Not sure what I missed but very unclear why what EU thinks about operating carrier responsibilities matters here.
2. AV was acting as agent of TK - Ummm how? As PVDtoDEL said... they’re most certainly not
3. Both airlines adhered to relevant laws - if the fare rules dictated otherwise how could AV have adhered to fare rules and therefore relevant laws? Also if both airlines obeyed all the rules and laws OP would have had an uneventful trip from MLE to CMB.
4. TK should have obeyed the law and honoured the ticket - Since TK did not “authorise” AV to sell that particular ticket in the first place they had no requirement by EU or any other law to honour OP’s ticket. It’s like AV issuing a one way ticket from MLE to the Moon and then requiring TK to honour that. That logic doesn’t hold water. AV was not authorised to sell tickets on that route - they very wrongly did that - why would TK want to bear the consequences and financial burden of that mistake?
TK should have definitely treated OP better. They should have been more sympathetic with OP instead of being rude/blunt/nasty. But I would imagine TK would think “Not my problem” and while they aren’t wrong then can conduct themselves much better - outstation contract staff or not.
Last edited by PiperAtGatesofDawn; Jun 19, 2019 at 12:57 pm
Jun 19, 2019, 7:11 pm
#30
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Barcelona, London, on a plane
Programs: BA Silver, TK E+, AA PP, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 13,033
Turkey (TK) is not a member of the EU. Colombia (AV) is not a member of the EU. The Maldives is not a member of the EU, nor is Sri Lanka.
Perhaps your belief is that EU regulations apply because the aircraft might have been an Airbus?