See, unless I need it medically, or maybe I happen to be at the end of my physical tether, or maybe I have a lot of carry-on and forgot to bring my pack mule, I'd feel a bit weird requesting a buggy. Being built rather on the side of plump, check-in would probably rebuff me by saying that their refusal would be doing me a favour for my health.
Point is, if a buggy is offered, fine, but do it consistently. If one isn't offered, also fine. Just do one or the other; all said and done, if one isn't offered as per standard operating procedure, then actually having to request one would be only for a purpose that anyone of any class of service would be entitled to.
I was thinking there was a good reason for this complaint. The fact that one didn't want to spend 15 minutes walking about a kilometre (and a bit less if the moving walkways were used) was not what I had in mind. Needless to say, I don't have much cordial to say about the complainant.
One commenter remarked, "He paid for a First Class ticket. So he should expect better service, as that is what you get when you buy First Class." Interesting comment.
Some of the other problems he had were legitimate complaints, but the thing which caused him to cancel was rather silly in my opinion.
I have some doubt that he is disabled or even crippled for any reason (e.g. sprained ankle, pulled an all-nighter and feeling legless). Packing too much for your carry-on which makes it arduous to pull along isn't really an excuse. I certainly have schlepped some considerable weight with me around HKG; transport would have been nice, but I'm not that precious.
One might believe that if requesting a buggy for a medical condition is not much to ask for, then surely just asking for one as a First Class passenger should not be much less, or even no different, a bother.
We don't know how or what was written in his complaint to TG. Sometimes airlines don't actually read what is written properly and just dish out to suppress any further disagreement. Asian airlines seem particularly ready to oblige without the kind of "resistance" you get in some other Western society based airlines.
We also don't know for sure whether he specifically requested a refund of the flight in question; in fact, it is not entirely clear if he asked for anything at all. The comment about "not so much a compensation but more a refund of unused flight" seems contradictory and post facto.
But let's relate this back to LM in general (and a mod can copy and split / edit this post as necessary). Again, I come from the point of view that TG F is acceptable, and usually worth the cost of redemption given that similar options at the same time with the same conditions are rarely available nor necessarily more desirable. Is it a
fantastic First Class product? In my opinion, no. If you've never flown First Class before, I can confidently say that you'll be in for a treat. If I had to recommend a First Class product to a friend who had seen and done some before, I might not recommend TG first and foremost. But TG F is quite readily available and usually easily booked online (thankfully)... well, for me not having to originate from Australia, it seems alright, but from Australia may be different.
Note though that other *A search engines will suggest there is usually more award seating (in both TG Business and First) than what would be suggested online by LM; in fact, it's quite common to have:
- Nil availability on TG J/F on a given day according to LM, but availability according to another Star Alliance airline's search engine.
- Nil availability on TG flight unless searched as part of a combination or lack thereof, e.g. availability on TG F LHR-BKK and then another search shows BKK-NRT also available, but trying to search LHR-NRT (via BKK) shows nothing. Here, screenshot method is required, or bite the bullet and book two awards at a higher cost.
One thing also notable is a hunch only, which is that searching for seats, selecting that seat and proceeding to the next page where you can vary the cost in miles and cash (and see the applicable taxes) actually temporarily holds that seat for you. If I execute a search like this, then go back to the beginning and run the exact same search again, the seat which I had selected before interrupting the process appears to not show up (in the case where there may be only one such seat left to start with, the next search would show nothing available). Wait a little while, and if no one else has jumped on the seat, it will come back.
