eqeqeqx

No. The question on whether TK has improperly denied boarding is not all based on TK's "interpretation" of any law. It is not up to TK to make their own obscure and erroneous interpretation of the Schengen rules. Doing this interpretation is reserved for a select few, and TK is not one of them. At least it would not be if TK IDB'ed somebody with enough money to take them to court so they could get the interpretation of the select few: the judicial judges, who would tell them they have improperly IDB'ed the OP.


As for whatever "current experiences" TK has:
Very possibly the story mentioned by ISTFlyer is the reason for TK's knee jerk reaction, but if TK had cared to ask the OP and allowed him to show his documents, TK should see that the OP's travel plans are not similar to the travel plans of the tourists in ISTFlyer's story. Those tourists did not follow the Schengen rules and were, correctly, denied entry at immigration control. Those tourists would probably also have been denied entry at OSL. The OP would almost certainly not be denied entry, neither in OSL nor in ISTFlyer's story, and it should have been irrelevant to OP whether people who did not follow the rules had in the past, correctly, been denied entry on TK's dime.

The error here is wholly on TK who did not care, and possibly do not even understand, that OP did everything correct according to the Schengen rules. There would be no reason for him to be denied entry at OSL.

Of course, as long as nobody takes TK to court, or TK accidentally ends up IDB'ing some VIP, TK will probably continue to only cast a superficial glanse at anyone's tickets and visa before IDB'ing them, rather than educating their staff on the Schengen rules and spending an extra minute reviewing the few people who have only slightly out of the ordinary travel plans. After all, TK is not the one losing money as they are not refunding any extra costs. Perhaps they even saved a lira or two by not having to carry OP's weight on the plane.

At least I will be very wary of travelling with TK to any destinations for which I require a VISA if understanding that I hold the correct visa will require anything more than a superficial look at my passport from TK's obviously incompetent staff.

BobFF68

Should I also be worried?

Family of 3 CGK-IST-PRG, return is Italy-IST-CGK one PNR, we will spend long weekend in PRG and then reach Italy for the remaining of the holiday with an EasyJet flight.
My daughter and I hold Italian passport, no issue, while my wife is Indonesian with 5 years multiple Schengen visa for EU relatives. Passport and visa will be a new one but we can bring the old one showing that she visited Italy with the same kind of visa every year. We can show for sure our U2 ticket and hotel booking in PRG. Just want to be sure not having the same issue as the OP.

starflyergold

Since you are travelling as family together I would not worry.

Lostlife93

Just try a few times to call there until you get the right Call Agent that wants to help you. They should reactivate youre return ticket since it was not youre fault that you get denied boarding. Just get a little bit angry and ask for supervisor. And try it every day. If i have issues with TK i try it hard like twice a day for a week. And until now i got everything i wanted. Even once i cancled my ticket (Promotion Ticket) they reactivated it for free ( First agent asked me to pay 500 Dollar).

So just try again. Cauz it can get really expensive to buy new ticket from Europe to CGK

ISTFlyer

If your ticket is fully refundable, refund it. You shouldn't have problems in a normal situation, but you may end up with the same problem as the OP has.

BobFF68

The return leg is J fare thus not refundable. I will try to manage, considering that in not Norway and a different situation hopefully no problems.

amitpl

You were wrongly denied boarding.
A schengen visa clearly says:
Valid For: Schengen States
Schengen States might be written differently in Norwegian language, but the idea is the same. There's NO rule which mandates first entry through country of issue.
In fact, when I once applied for a schengen visa at the German embassy (where my main stay was), I submitted flight tickets of Finnair along with the visa application (country of entry is Finland). It was not a problem to get the visa and to actually fly.
And I've done this a few other times.

ISTFlyer

Hi @amitpl and welcome to FlyerTalk!

First I would like to mention that your situation is different than the OP’s. As I and other posters mentioned earlier, the OP was not traveling on a single ticket and the second ticket of his was a low-cost Norwegian ticket from OSL to CDG; and in addition, he was not traveling with an EU airline but an airline of a country where many people try to get a Schengen visa with false declarations. ( One more time: I am not telling that the OP has obtained his visa with a false declaration, he had the correct documentation. ) However, TK is an airline that suffered from many people that were denied because they did not have the visa of the country that they enter the first. An example is the news article that I posted above ( Multiple Turkish tourists flying to MUC to go skiing in Austria with a Spanish visa ). Also, in Turkey, it’s easier to obtain Schengen visas from some embassies compared to others and people use this tactic a lot and they get denied at the Schengen ( EU ) border and the airline needs to pay a fine as they have accepted these passengers onboard. So the point is that TK has denied the OP regarding their past experiences and they did not want to risk a €5000+ fine if he was denied. In this case, TK should have sent him back to SIN for free as he did not have the proper documentation ( ACCORDING TO TK ); however, the OP has decided to purchase a separate ticket to France and abandon the rest of his ticket. Obviously, he didn’t want to cancel his holiday/trip but this is how bureaucracy works.

ahopkins767

A little off topic but I had a Filipina friend (married to an Icelandic) travelling HKG-AMS-Iceland. She had a Schenghen visa for Iceland which was due to come into effect the moment after she landed (she was due to land close to midnight and the visa started after midnight). She has to change her tickets to tge next day. That was KLM.

I have travelled frequently with Asians to Europe and I have a folder of visa regulations I carry with my documentation to whip out at check in. And I have whipped it when the check in staff say different to the regulations and I ask why they are different. That usually resolves the issue.

warakorn

Btw -> you can pursue the legal claim in a German court now - at least for the TXL-IST-KUL segments.
You were not a no-show. TK incorrectly has denied you boarding at IST. From a legal point of view the cancellation of TXL-IST-KUL was not allowed, hence, the ticket is still valid from a German legal point of view.
Thus, you can claim EC261/2004 article 7 compensation of EUR 600 plus the costs of a replacement ticket TXL-KUL. This can be enforced through the German court system.

Where did OP abandon the rest of the ticket? TK (falsely) denied him boarding for IST-OSL. TK (not the OP) then cancelled the rest of the ticket (TXL-IST-KUL)

ISTFlyer

First, the OP could not take legal action in a German Court as his ticket his canceled after denied boarding at IST. As TK has denied the OP to board his flight to OSL, the OP had the option to change his ticket to another European destination ( by paying a change fee which could be more expensive than buying a separate IST-Europe ticket ), or ask for a re-route back to SIN. The OP has decided to purchase a separate ticket to France and left Turkey. This means that he had abandoned the second segment of his ticket. When flying TK, all tickets must be used in sequential order so if someone is denied boarding ( the airline has a valid reason in their point of view for this case ), the remaining flights are canceled.

So, his ticket:
SIN-IST -> FLOWN
IST-OSL -> DENIED BOARDING
TXL-IST -> CANCELLED AS IST-OSL NOT FLOWN
IST-KUL -> CANCELLED AS IST-OSL NOT FLOWN

warakorn

Of course, the OP can bring forward legal action in a German court. TK has already confirmed they will deny the OP boarding from TXL. Article 7 + 8 of EC261/2004 is triggered then.


This was illegal and TK broke the transportation contract.


tThis is pure speculation, whether TK offered that.
I assume a ticket change would have been outrageously expensive since all segments had to be repriced.
As TK illegally denied boarding, I would consider it extortion if TK really demanded that.

Same situation. This would have resulted to a very expensive repricing of all segments. -> Extortion!

This was the most cost effective way to minimize the damage that TK has inflicted at the OP.

No! TK denied boarding - illegally!

Well, this of course requires TK to at least allow the OP to use the segments as booked. However, TK did not allow it due to their illegal denied boarding.

Denied boarding is certainly not a "no show".

TK did not have a valid reason to deny boarding. I think we have established in that thread that OP had the right documents to enter Norway. OP could prove that France was the main destination of his trip.
There is no rule in the Schengen Codex that a first time Schengen Visa user has to enter the Schengen area in the country that issued the Schengen Visa.
Moreover, in the most extreme case (if Norwegian immigration authorities would have denied him entry into Norway) the OP could have challenged that decision in Norwegian court.

Anyhow, if this lands into the front of a German court. I can guarantee you the judges can read the Schengen Codex.


Well, technically speaking TK have cancelled the ticket (the remaining segments). However, this unilateral cancellation is a breach of contract.
TK may argue in front of German court that the ticket was cancelled hence article 7/8 EC261/2004 does not apply. However, this line of argumentation wont fly. Airlines are not allowed to circumvent EC261/2004 with some tricks. Any airline would just always cancel tickets unilaterily to escape article 7/8 obligations. A German court would just override that cancellation and declare that cancellation was unlawful and therefore (legally speaking) has never occurred. Hence, the tickets are still valid from a legal point of view. Since the tickets are valid -> article 7/8 kick in; giving the pax the right to receive EUR 600 (article 7) + the cost of the replacement ticket (article 8).

ISTFlyer

As the TK ( contracted ) agents accepted the OP to board SIN-IST, if he decided a return to SIN, he would not need to pay anything extra as in case of denied boarding, the OP has the right to return to his origin.

As also mentioned above in the quoted post by the OP, the OP has chosen not to break his vacation.

TK was wrong that he was denied boarding but this does grant the OP powerful rights as showing up in TXL and trying to board the aircraft, and when being refused to board, ask for compensation.

warakorn

Well, this powerful right is called EC261/2004.
Again, TK unilaterally cancelled the tickets. We all know that OP was not a no-show at IST for IST-OSL.

Says who?

ISTFlyer

After a long claim, the OP could get some compensation but as EC261/2004 is not the main issue here, it won't be that easy. Maybe it's worth a shot opening a claim but probably;
TK would claim that he was DENIED BOARDING in IST which is not associated with EU law.
and the case would drop or be transferred to a superior court if the OP wills to pursue his rights.

In case of any legal action, TK could also state that the ticket was not issued in Germany and his ticket was canceled by the airline before coming to Germany.

As the TK representatives in SIN verified that he had the valid documents but the ones in IST told that he doesn't have valid documents ( Once Again: In TK's Point of View ) and as the OP was a transfer passenger, the OP has the right to be rerouted to his origin.