threeoh

There's still a legitimate question here, which is why was the ticket issued? Whose error was it? And once it was issued, should it have been cancelled?

Generally, once I see an 016xxxxxxx number I assume all the ticketing / availability / routing issues have been resolved and don't expect my ticket will be cancelled absent something extraordinary

SFOdelayed

Often1

Why the OTA cancelled the ticket is irrelevant. OP complained that UA cancelled the ticket. That was avoidably misleading and the thread title ought to be changed.

Indeed it makes sense that the TA cancelled the ticket when it came to learn that it would be the subject of a DM which it could not likely pass on to the passenger. But, that does not change the underlying problem. UA cancelled the ticket at the request of a TA acting on OP's behalf.

OP may well have a claim against the TA under local law for the difference between what the TA offered and he must now pay for a ticket. The fact that the TA, on its website, acknowledges what is apparently a routine problem, e.g. under-pricing tickets, may well work in OP's favor.

But, none of this is a UA issue.

Thus, I come back to the real bottom line. What does it cost to book the ticket OP wants? It may be not particularly much more. If that is the case, I would immediately book the new ticket and then deal with the TA afterwards. Or not pursue at all.

warakorn

An improperly issued ticket shouldn't be the problem of the passenger.
Denied boarding compensation is not limited that something is cancelled on the day of travel.

UA can only win this, if can prove it has properly informed the passenger about the reason why it voided the contract.
UA hasn't done it.
btw: the contract is between passenger and UA.

threeoh

Can you point to a documented case where an airline paid out EC261 compensation because of an improperly-issued ticket that was cancelled weeks before travel?

Often1

It seems clear that UA notified passenger's TA and that the TA elected to cancel the ticket rather than paying the add/collect via ADM (which is what a reasonable TA would do where it made the error).

On the minimal facts we have here from OP, it is more than likely that OP will be able to recover under national (unfair) trading practices statutes.

If there is some precedential decision under EC 261/2004 which suggests that notification to the passenger's chosen agent (that, after all is what the term means), it would be good to have it. But, sending the OP down a path because of a personal need to rely on the EU Regulation rather than national law seems unhelpful in the extreme.

MazdaMP

i bought a few of these for a Europe-US-Europe openjaw on the UA website and it stuck. they just had a flash sale. and AA still has the same fare for sale todayFare Breakdown

• Airfare:
  132.00
  EUR
• Germany Airport Security Charge:
  9 EUR
• Germany Air Transportation Tax:
  41.97 EUR
• Germany Passenger Service Charge:
  31.71 EUR
• U.K. Passenger Service Charge:
  37.74 EUR
• U.S. Customs User Fee:
  4.81 EUR
• U.S. Immigration User Fee:
  5.96 EUR
• U.S. APHIS User Fee:
  3.37 EUR
• U.S. Transportation Tax:
  31.14 EUR
• September 11th Security Fee:
  4.77 EUR
• Switzerland Airport Passenger/Security Charge:
  14.17 EUR
• U.S. Passenger Facility Charge:
  3.83 EUR
• Per Person Total:
  320.47
  EUR
• eTicket Total:
  320.47
  EUR

Form of Payment:MASTERCARDLast Four Digits ***The airfare you paid on this itinerary totals: 132.00 EURThe taxes, fees, and surcharges paid total: 188.47 EURFare Rules:
Additional charges may apply for changes in addition to any fare rules listed.

FARE RESTRICTION MAY APPLY;FRA POS END

docbert

There's no reason they wouldn't have "stuck" - it was a completely legitimate/valid fare.

The OP's problem was that the fare rules state that the overwater segment must be booked on a UA flight number, and his wasn't.

Kacee

You're referring to a claim against the TA, right? As that's the party here which made the mistake (and which is not protected by ADA preemption).

While I agree in theory there may be a claim (the dollar value of which is de minimis), I suspect the chance of collecting from an obviously sketchy Netherlands based OTA is pretty much zero.

Often1

Yes, the TA. My point is simply that the notion that EC 261/2004 IDB applies when notice is properly given to the passenger's agent is notional at best.

Indeed my advice above in this thread is to price the proper ticket with UA and, presuming it can be had for what OP is willing to pay, purchase that ticket and pursue the TA (or not) for the balance later. More likely simply file a complaint with the appropriate authorities.

The TA largely advertises sketchiness, pointing to the fact that its prices may not be honored by the operating carriers.