Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Options to change return of a super-cheap BE Int'l fare, after flying outbound leg?

Options to change return of a super-cheap BE Int'l fare, after flying outbound leg?

Old Feb 6, 2019, 9:27 pm
  #1  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Original Poster
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,585
Options to change return of a super-cheap BE Int'l fare, after flying outbound leg?

Last August, a relative bought a crazy Basic Economy Fare of $279 RT France to SFO on LH and UA with perfect connections. No kidding. $127 fare and $151 taxes. Ha!

She just flew to SFO. We are getting her a LH J seat on UA miles for a later return.

We don't mid throwing away half a $279 ticket, but I wonder if United would throw us a bone for canceling rather than no-showing. That way they'd have one more seat to sell. I'm thinking maybe a waived change fee on the J ticket if a better J option becomes available?

Mods, feel free to merge this if there's an existing thread with replies that answer my question.
nsx is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 9:32 pm
  #2  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,110
Originally Posted by nsx
We don't mid throwing away half a $279 ticket, but I wonder if United would throw us a bone for canceling rather than no-showing.
Don't press your luck. The only bone would be not to charge you for violating the CoC.
mahasamatman is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 9:35 pm
  #3  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,291
Originally Posted by nsx
Last August, a relative bought a crazy Basic Economy Fare of $279 RT France to SFO on LH and UA with perfect connections. No kidding. $127 fare and $151 taxes. Ha!

She just flew to SFO. We are getting her a LH J seat on UA miles for a later return.

We don't mid throwing away half a $279 ticket, but I wonder if United would throw us a bone for canceling rather than no-showing. That way they'd have one more seat to sell. I'm thinking maybe a waived change fee on the J ticket if a better J option becomes available?
Hmm. I'm not sure you're asking the right question.

UA doesn't care if you cancel. If you don't check-in, your reservation will be cancelled regardless. You get no props for cancelling in advance. UA assumes some percentage of pax won't show up. That's how flights get oversold, when they estimate wrong.

The right question is whether you're going to get in trouble if UA figures out you're throw-away ticketing. Which you're making pretty easy for them using UA miles in lieu of the discarded return.
Often1 likes this.
Kacee is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 10:04 pm
  #4  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Original Poster
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,585
Originally Posted by Kacee
The right question is whether you're going to get in trouble if UA figures out you're throw-away ticketing. Which you're making pretty easy for them using UA miles in lieu of the discarded return.
I wouldn't call it throw away ticketing when we bought a more expensive replacement ticket, also from UA. We bought it with miles, but it accrues a lot more than $140 revenue on UA's books. For biz seats which were not available last August.

Furthermore, UA knows that many Basic Economy passengers decide to change return dates and buy new tickets. That has never been considered throwaway ticketing as far as I know.
drewguy likes this.
nsx is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 10:12 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,176
Originally Posted by nsx
I wouldn't call it throw away ticketing when we bought a more expensive replacement ticket, also from UA.
You might not, but UA would. You didn't buy a more expensive replacement ticket. The cheapest one-way fare from France to San Francisco is almost certainly more expensive than UA's internal accounting value for 70K MileagePlus miles.

Originally Posted by nsx
Furthermore, UA knows that many Basic Economy passengers decide to change return dates and buy new tickets. That has never been considered throwaway ticketing as far as I know.
There's a difference in intent.

Anyway, long story short, it doesn't matter. The answer to your original question is that UA is not going to waive any fees or do you any other favor due to cancelling the return flight in advance. In fact, the only reason to cancel early would be if the two return flights are on the same day or otherwise impossible to fly -- if UA detects impossible bookings, it reserves the right to cancel one of them. Otherwise, wait and see if you get a lucky; perhaps a schedule change or a delay will allow for a refund.
narvik likes this.
jsloan is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 10:21 pm
  #6  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,110
Originally Posted by nsx
I wouldn't call it throw away ticketing when we bought a more expensive replacement ticket
If you bought a round-trip with no intention to fly the return, it's throwaway ticketing.
chavala likes this.
mahasamatman is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 10:35 pm
  #7  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,291
Originally Posted by nsx
I wouldn't call it throw away ticketing
I would, and so would UA.
Originally Posted by nsx
UA knows that many Basic Economy passengers decide to change return dates and buy new tickets. That has never been considered throwaway ticketing as far as I know.
You're wrong.
Kacee is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 10:55 pm
  #8  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Original Poster
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,585
Originally Posted by mahasamatman
If you bought a round-trip with no intention to fly the return, it's throwaway ticketing.
The intent until she arrived was to fly the return. Then we looked at J award availability and decided to splurge.

Throwaway costs the airline money when you fly only one way and don't pay the one-way fare. If you actually fly both directions the airline has no reasonable expectation that you would have bought two overpriced one-way fares rather a round-trip fare. I believe that if you fly the same airline both ways they have made their normal amount of money from you. (Domestically this would be no issue because round trip fare is the sum of one-way fares. It's only flights beyond the USA that a one-way can cost more than a round trip.)
nsx is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 11:31 pm
  #9  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,291
Originally Posted by nsx
The intent until she arrived was to fly the return. Then we looked at J award availability and decided to splurge.

Throwaway costs the airline money when you fly only one way and don't pay the one-way fare. If you actually fly both directions the airline has no reasonable expectation that you would have bought two overpriced one-way fares rather a round-trip fare. I believe that if you fly the same airline both ways they have made their normal amount of money from you. (Domestically this would be no issue because round trip fare is the sum of one-way fares. It's only flights beyond the USA that a one-way can cost more than a round trip.)
She's throwing away half of a $279 RT TATL ticket, in circumstances where the OW would have cost over $3000. This is exactly what the throw-away ticketing rules intend to prohibit.

It's not a moral issue. But it's a very clear violation of the CoC. All attempts at rationalization notwithstanding.
emcampbe and chavala like this.
Kacee is offline  
Old Feb 6, 2019, 11:54 pm
  #10  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Original Poster
Hyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,585
Originally Posted by Kacee
She's throwing away half of a $279 RT TATL ticket, in circumstances where the OW would have cost over $3000. This is exactly what the throw-away ticketing rules intend to prohibit.
The Basic Economy fare rules prohibit changes, period. It's use it or lose it. The airline can't impose that restriction and then demand payment of a penalty for not using the nonchangeable ticket and returning another way.

I'm disappointed but not surprised that United doesn't give us any reason other than courtesy to cancel a Basic Economy trip we won't use: If United gave any incentive someone would figure out how game it.
nsx is offline  
Old Feb 7, 2019, 8:44 am
  #11  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,291
Originally Posted by nsx
I'm disappointed but not surprised that United doesn't give us any reason other than courtesy to cancel a Basic Economy trip we won't use: If United gave any incentive someone would figure out how game it.
It doesn't matter to UA if she cancels in advance. Their algorithm has already factored in no-shows in setting inventory and selling seats. Further, there will be a standby waitlist expressly in anticipation of no-shows, which she will become when she fails to meet the check-in cut-off. UA benefits not at all from an advance cancel, and needs provide no incentive. And the notion that you should receive some sort of free perk for violating the CoC is just plain bizarre.
malgudi and MCIUnitedGuy like this.
Kacee is offline  
Old Feb 7, 2019, 9:01 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 2,530
I don't see how it's a violation of the CoC to:

(1) buy a discounted round-trip ticket
(2) after arriving at your destination, decide to change your travel plans
(3) attempt to change your ticket, but find that it's not changeable
(4) purchase a one-way business class ticket home on the same carrier

Maybe OP owes UA the fare differential between what they bought (r/t) and what they flew (o/w). Maybe. But I don't see how OP violated the CoC unless they are lying here and always intended to throw away the return. I have no reason to believe OP is lying, since changing one's travel plans is something that happens frequently.

You cannot hold that buying a no-changes ticket legally requires you to board that flight. If it's "use it or lose it", there has to be a (legal) way to "lose it".

I agree 100% the OP has little to gain from contacting UA and should probably just no-show for the flight (or hope it gets cancelled/delayed). But I don't understand all of this "you're violating the CoC by changing your plans!" nonsense.
threeoh is offline  
Old Feb 7, 2019, 9:27 am
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,176
Originally Posted by threeoh
You cannot hold that buying a no-changes ticket legally requires you to board that flight. If it's "use it or lose it", there has to be a (legal) way to "lose it".
I do agree with this part. In fact, it's a violation of the fare rules even to go back and re-fare it as a one-way -- "no changes," after all. Something tells me that UA would waive that rule in a heartbeat though.

So, yes, I think UA has backed themselves into a bit of a corner here. With a regular penalty fare, it's easy to make the argument that it's a CoC violation to throw away the return if plans change -- UA's expectation is that you pay the change fee and any necessary fare difference. But on a fare that disallows changes, I'm not sure what somebody is supposed to do. I think UA would have a difficult time enforcing throwaway ticketing rules on BE tickets, unless they could show that the passenger never intended to fly as ticketed. (For example, if a passenger purchased LAX-LHR-LAX at 3 PM, and then purchased a separate LHR-LAX reservation at 3:30 PM, UA probably has a case).

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Feb 7, 2019 at 10:43 am Reason: split post
jsloan is offline  
Old Feb 7, 2019, 9:31 am
  #14  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,291
Originally Posted by jsloan
I think UA would have a difficult time enforcing throwaway ticketing rules on BE tickets, unless they could show that the passenger never intended to fly as ticketed. (For example, if a passenger purchased LAX-LHR-LAX at 3 PM, and then purchased a separate LHR-LAX reservation at 3:30 PM, UA probably has a case).
And I think this is the genesis of the oft-repeated advice that if you do this sort of thing once in a while, you're not likely to get in trouble for it. A pattern, however, shows intent.

I'm fairly confident that UA would take the position it's a CoC violation regardless. Whether they would take action is a different question.

Mods may want to move this discussion, as I'm afraid we've hijacked the thread.
Often1 likes this.
Kacee is offline  
Old Feb 7, 2019, 10:12 am
  #15  
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: UA Plat/2MM [23-yr. 1K, now emeritus] clawing way back to WN-A List; MR LT Titanium; HY Whateverist.
Posts: 12,390
Moderator note

These posts were originally in our 2019, "Ask a Simple Question..." Thread. The protocol of that thread is that one or two answers to a basic question should suffice. Occasionally, a more complex question arises, such as this one started by nsx, which deserves the robust and extended discussion it's received. Hence, we've moved this to its separate thread so that the discussion can continue. Thanks, Ocn Vw 1K, Co-Moderator.
jsloan likes this.
Ocn Vw 1K is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.