Airlines Set to Crack Down on 'Creative' Ticketing
Jun 30, 2002, 10:18 am
#31
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LAS
Programs: WN:No status in 2015; UA:1K long gone (1995-2003).
Posts: 1,595
erik123: I think you are missing the critical point of the back-to-back rules. It is not whether you are complying with the exact rules of "one ticket" but that the airlines are viewing the combined effect of the two separate tickets.
The conditions of carriage state "the use of two or more tickets issued at round trip fares for the purpose of circumventing applicable tariff rules is not permitted." Ticket #1 is A>B>A on Thursday and Tuesday. Ticket #2 is B>A>B on Friday and Monday. The rules for each ticket require a Saturday night stay.
In the above example, ticket #1 could not have been purchased (at the same fare) if the travel dates were Thursday and Friday. It is the purchase of the second ticket in combination with the first ticket that violates the airlines conditions of carriage. The fact your are complying with the rules of each individual ticket is irrelevant under the conditions of carriage.
However, I find it interesting that the wording does not say "the use of two or more United tickets..." -- the rules do not limit the combination of two or more tickets only to their airline. As worded, if UA discovers ticket #1 above (on UA) and ticket #2 above (on AA), they could invoke their rule. This now raises another legal question, whether UA is improperly interfering with your business relationship with another party (AA). I'm not a lawyer, so I'll let the members of the bar address this question.
[Edited to correct typo.]
[This message has been edited by Nevada1K (edited 06-30-2002).]
The conditions of carriage state "the use of two or more tickets issued at round trip fares for the purpose of circumventing applicable tariff rules is not permitted." Ticket #1 is A>B>A on Thursday and Tuesday. Ticket #2 is B>A>B on Friday and Monday. The rules for each ticket require a Saturday night stay.
In the above example, ticket #1 could not have been purchased (at the same fare) if the travel dates were Thursday and Friday. It is the purchase of the second ticket in combination with the first ticket that violates the airlines conditions of carriage. The fact your are complying with the rules of each individual ticket is irrelevant under the conditions of carriage.
However, I find it interesting that the wording does not say "the use of two or more United tickets..." -- the rules do not limit the combination of two or more tickets only to their airline. As worded, if UA discovers ticket #1 above (on UA) and ticket #2 above (on AA), they could invoke their rule. This now raises another legal question, whether UA is improperly interfering with your business relationship with another party (AA). I'm not a lawyer, so I'll let the members of the bar address this question.
[Edited to correct typo.]
[This message has been edited by Nevada1K (edited 06-30-2002).]
Jun 30, 2002, 1:17 pm
#32
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Clemente, CA
Posts: 376
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Intrepid:
Always Flyin:
Don't recite TA's problems with UA. TAs are a different business entity.</font>
Always Flyin:
Don't recite TA's problems with UA. TAs are a different business entity.</font>
The enforcement of this policy is another example of punitive behavior towards TA's.
Talk about biting the hand that feeds you!
Jun 30, 2002, 2:39 pm
#33
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 88
Note that the article didn't in fact discuss in any of its examples "back-to-back" ticketing, as much as "throw-away" ticketing. In that case, a flyer books two round trips and only uses the first legs of each, throwing away the second legs of each. Arguably they have indeed breached their contract, in much the same way that if you return a rental car to a different location than you initialy said, they can charge you more.
On the other hand, if you use all of the flights on both tickets, exactly as you promised when you paid for the tickets and as the airline promised they'd offer you seats for when they sold them to you, seems like this is a different story. The airlines don't control your life (even though they'd like to!); if you fly from LAX to JFK, then according to this policy, if would be OK to drive a car to Boston and fly back to LAX on another ticket, but it's not OK to fly back from JFK or EWR or wherever else they choose to classify as "their control sphere over your life when you're flown by us". Or is it not OK to take a train, or rent a car, or go to the bathroom, until you fly back on their airline to just where you came from? Seems pretty absurd and hard to enforce in court; if you keep your end of the contract, they are obligeed to keep their end of it.
On the other hand, if you use all of the flights on both tickets, exactly as you promised when you paid for the tickets and as the airline promised they'd offer you seats for when they sold them to you, seems like this is a different story. The airlines don't control your life (even though they'd like to!); if you fly from LAX to JFK, then according to this policy, if would be OK to drive a car to Boston and fly back to LAX on another ticket, but it's not OK to fly back from JFK or EWR or wherever else they choose to classify as "their control sphere over your life when you're flown by us". Or is it not OK to take a train, or rent a car, or go to the bathroom, until you fly back on their airline to just where you came from? Seems pretty absurd and hard to enforce in court; if you keep your end of the contract, they are obligeed to keep their end of it.
Jun 30, 2002, 2:51 pm
#34
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 88
Note that the article didn't in fact discuss in any of its examples "back-to-back" ticketing, as much as "throw-away" ticketing. In that case, a flyer books two round trips and only uses the first legs of each, throwing away the second legs of each. Arguably they have indeed breached their contract, in much the same way that if you return a rental car to a different location than you initialy said, they can charge you more.
On the other hand, if you use all of the flights on both tickets, exactly as you promised when you paid for the tickets and as the airline promised they'd offer you seats for when they sold them to you, seems like this is a different story. The airlines don't control your life (even though they'd like to!); if you fly from LAX to JFK, then according to this policy, if would be OK to drive a car to Boston and fly back to LAX on another ticket, but it's not OK to fly back from JFK or EWR or wherever else they choose to classify as "their control sphere over your life when you're flown by us". Or is it not OK to take a train, or rent a car, or go to the bathroom, until you fly back on their airline to just where you came from? Seems pretty absurd and hard to enforce in court; if you keep your end of the contract, they are obligeed to keep their end of it.
On the other hand, if you use all of the flights on both tickets, exactly as you promised when you paid for the tickets and as the airline promised they'd offer you seats for when they sold them to you, seems like this is a different story. The airlines don't control your life (even though they'd like to!); if you fly from LAX to JFK, then according to this policy, if would be OK to drive a car to Boston and fly back to LAX on another ticket, but it's not OK to fly back from JFK or EWR or wherever else they choose to classify as "their control sphere over your life when you're flown by us". Or is it not OK to take a train, or rent a car, or go to the bathroom, until you fly back on their airline to just where you came from? Seems pretty absurd and hard to enforce in court; if you keep your end of the contract, they are obligeed to keep their end of it.
Jun 30, 2002, 5:27 pm
#35
Join Date: Sep 2001
Programs: Alaska Tanzanite 100K
Posts: 3,858
If anyone is flying on back-to-back tickets and it's discovered in advance, I can ASSURE you that UA will confront you about it, regardless of how you booked it. Right now the only way UA can track B2B tickets is using UA for all the trips and putting in your FF #.
One way to avoid this: don't put your FF# in the 2nd ticket until you check in @ the counter.
-nate
One way to avoid this: don't put your FF# in the 2nd ticket until you check in @ the counter.
-nate
Jun 30, 2002, 5:30 pm
#36
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ORD, MBS
Programs: UA Plat., 1.52 MM
Posts: 2,053
Well, I can't avoid citing myself. I am copying and pasting a thought that ocurred to me earlier today and I posted it in another currently active running thread:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/012905.html
Between this "charge-it-back-to-the-customer for our pricing errors" story, and the crackdown-on-the-customer on 'back-to-back' creative ticketing, it seems that UA is exuding a real HATE PERIOD onto its customers.
Assuming basic psychoanalytic principles apply to groups and organizations as they applly to individuals, I interpret those UA anti-customer moves to reflect internal corporate conflicts associated with feelings of anger among upper management teams and between them and the unions.
So the outlet UA finds is in projecting all these painful unresolved conflicts on the customers.
The only unrepresented group on the board of directors are the customers....
[This message has been edited by Intrepid (edited 06-30-2002).]
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/012905.html
Between this "charge-it-back-to-the-customer for our pricing errors" story, and the crackdown-on-the-customer on 'back-to-back' creative ticketing, it seems that UA is exuding a real HATE PERIOD onto its customers.
Assuming basic psychoanalytic principles apply to groups and organizations as they applly to individuals, I interpret those UA anti-customer moves to reflect internal corporate conflicts associated with feelings of anger among upper management teams and between them and the unions.
So the outlet UA finds is in projecting all these painful unresolved conflicts on the customers.
The only unrepresented group on the board of directors are the customers....
[This message has been edited by Intrepid (edited 06-30-2002).]