cbourl

Yes but I received also 1000 Euros from Lufthansa

garykung

athome is actually correct this time.

For IDB, Article 7 of EC261/2004 states "shall receive compensation". However, for downgrade, Article 10 states "reimburse".

I won't say it is attempted fraud. But the word "reimburse" actually excludes the possibility that the GPU can be returned, as OP's refund should be based on a F class ticket. In other word, the refund absorbed the GPU.

But I do think that the €1000 is not enough in this case.

cbourl

Which is why I am not following up the GPU return.

jsloan

That's a really, really poorly worded law. I imagine that you'd need relevant case law in order to interpret it, but I wasn't able to find any. Given the existing court interpretations -- e.g., that a long delay and cancellation have the same passenger effect, so they should be treated the same -- I'd imagine that a court would rule in favor of the passenger (i.e. refund plus penalty), but you're right; that's not the way it's written.

Having said that, the regulation, as written, is ridiculous. There are plenty of flights where the discount coach fare is much more than a 30/50/75% discount from, say, full fare first/business -- and that's even without trying to define what the fare for a particular flight segment is in a world of round-trip, connecting fares. So, suppose somebody purchases a €2,000 F fare for a Type 2 flight. If the going rate for Y was €200, the clear incentive for the carrier is to oversell F, offer a €1,000 refund, and pocket €800 profit.

(To be fair, I suppose it's better than comparing the price paid to full Y -- or J, for F->J downgrades -- and then billing the customer for the downgrade instead. )

Kacee

At least they have one

garykung

Right. Because the negative impact from the downgrade is only a matter of inconvenience. So it is unlikely that any courts will extend the same reading of delay/cancellation to downgrade.

It is not a perfect world...

+1

cfischer

how long since you contacted them? If more than 2 weeks I would reply to that Email and ask for an update. This should be a no-brainer to get the GPU back.

cbourl

Now I just need points credited FRA-JFK D Class x2 EQM Who books into I class for C except for a redemption I paid D class C

sannmann

Yes, but the GPU is not actually the "property" of the OP. Recall that per MileagePlus rules, the miles and instruments are actually the property of MileagePlus. That the OP received a check for €1000 is irrelevant. His MP account should get the instrument back.

garykung

Let me direct you to the relevant language of Article 10:

It is unknown if a paid upgrade (in any forms) is considered a purchase. However, for OP to be entitled for downgrade reimbursement (Note: not compensation) under EC261/2004, OP's ticket must be "purchased" in F. In that case, OP's UA GPU must be "used" for F upgrade.

While UA's policy is to return the instrument used for the upgrade , OP was reimbursed, despite inadequate, in accordance to EC261/2004.
The reimbursement effectively absorbed the GPU.

sannmann

Thank you for “directing” me. However, if the OP follows up with UA and provides his C class boarding passes, he should get the GPU back in his MP account. The GPU is not considered currency or property of the MP member.

garykung

The problem is once the GPU has been returned, LH is no longer bound by the EC261/2004. The GPU is the nexus.

Keep in mind - while it is a UA policy to return instrument as a portion of downgrade compensation, LH is not bound by UA policy but EU law. As OP is "reimbrused" as a downgraded F>J customer, GPU is considered consumed. In other word, the reimbursement is in lieu of the GPU.

(Note - I am not sure OP's approach in this case. Is OP going to ask for more money or GPU back? If I was OP, I would ask for more money instead of GPU return.)

cbourl

Im considering the GPU consumed by the orginal upgrade to F Still had use of First lounges and First Terminal and Cayenne ride to 747-400, so Euro 1K is enough compensation for me