Downgraded from Business Class.

[mannej]

Red Roo​, a first class fail. Fail to correct this problem and fail to correct the root cause.

Matt

Oh good, let the witch hunt start again...

 

[UP4014]

Oh good, let the witch hunt start again...

I don't think there needs to be any hunt, it's right there in front of us.

 

[Reggie]

I think as pax become more aware of this, there is less chance of people accepting the downgrade.

Funny thing is, if they had waited and travelled the next day QF would have had to pay for accom, meals transfers in LAX etc for the pax which was s true cost, but the pax flew and QF has made more money

 

[farstar]

I think as pax become more aware of this, there is less chance of people accepting the downgrade. Funny thing is, if they had waited and travelled the next day QF would have had to pay for accom, meals transfers in LAX etc for the pax which was s true cost, but the pax flew and QF has made more money

Would QANTAS also pay for prepaid accommodation etc that is lost due to arriving the next day, I wonder if travel insurance would pay if they find out you could have flown but refused? Also people don't always have a chance to allow extra days in trips, if you have five stopovers in a trip do you allows 5 days doing nothing? QANTAS need to think about this but instead we get told overselling is needed to increase profits.

 

[777]

Personally I think it's great that Qantas now value an upgrade from economy to business on this flight at $1250.

Where do I pay?

 

[BD1959]

Personally I think it's great that Qantas now value an upgrade from economy to business on this flight at $1250.

Where do I pay?

The issue is you'd have to pay full economy in the first place. You know: that fare that no-one in their right mind purchases, but which QF seem to think is the correct refund point.

After 123 pages, I still fail to understand why QF chose SGs to target. Were they *really* the lowest status J pax commencing in LAX?

Regards,

BD

 

[Princess Fiona]

The issue is you'd have to pay full economy in the first place. You know: that fare that no-one in their right mind purchases, but which QF seem to think is the correct refund point.

After 123 pages, I still fail to understand why QF chose SGs to target. Were they *really* the lowest status J pax commencing in LAX?

Regards,

BD

No, I doubt they were and I don't think their status was correctly considered in the algorithm for downgrading them.
I'd guess it takes into consideration multiple factors including Fare Class ( they were on I), checked in online, ticket purchased via QF or a TA. I think it's rather intriguing that the only publicly available refund table refers to TA's.

 

[drron]

Well I for one find the compensation woefully inadequate for a problem that was caused by QF not the passenger.
This should be corrected.QF isn't going to do it.
So I have emailed Federal Politicians re having a legislated compensation.I urge others to also do so.

 

[Baysider]

Well I for one find the compensation woefully inadequate for a problem that was caused by QF not the passenger.
This should be corrected.QF isn't going to do it.
So I have emailed Federal Politicians re having a legislated compensation.I urge others to also do so.

It seems that you are dead right. Perhaps a petition on change.org ?

 

[markis10]

No, I doubt they were and I don't think their status was correctly considered in the algorithm for downgrading them.
I'd guess it takes into consideration multiple factors including Fare Class ( they were on I), checked in online, ticket purchased via QF or a TA. I think it's rather intriguing that the only publicly available refund table refers to TA's.

IIRC status is generally not considered, the sequence number is the magical number.

 

[Pushka]

IIRC status is generally not considered, the sequence number is the magical number.

And sequence number is checkin number? <Dashes off to put into calendar to the minute, when checkin opens in two weeks>

 

[Princess Fiona]

IIRC status is generally not considered, the sequence number is the magical number.

It is according to the Whingepool thread linked by MEL_Traveller way back hundreds of posts ago.

 

[whatmeworry]

So this is how QF is getting back into the black?
Pocketing money on downgrades and fuel fines?

 

[Princess Fiona]

So this is how QF is getting back into the black?
Pocketing money on downgrades and fuel fines?

No, not really

 

[markis10]

It is according to the Whingepool thread linked by MEL_Traveller way back hundreds of posts ago.

The one where it was posted by AFF members who have not worked for Qantas??? I would take it with a grain of salt, as this case proves, status might help to some extent but when you check in is a major factor, as its the case for most airlines.

 

[Baysider]

No, not really

Well they're trying very hard to give everyone that impression. The PR department must have been enhanced and simplified !

 

[amaroo]

After 123 pages, I still fail to understand why QF chose SGs to target. Were they *really* the lowest status J pax commencing in LAX?

Regards,

BD

Fit the profile for obedience and conformity ... turned out to be a poor guess

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Well I for one find the compensation woefully inadequate for a problem that was caused by QF not the passenger.
This should be corrected.QF isn't going to do it.
So I have emailed Federal Politicians re having a legislated compensation.I urge others to also do so.

It seems that you are dead right. Perhaps a petition on change.org ?

it never hurts to write to the appropriate people , but something like this would always benefit from a solid strategy.

what is the problem? how will change benefit both the consumer AND any of the political parties willing to take this on (they're gonna want a reason to get involved... like votes!)

any petition for change would need to be carefully worded... otherwise the airlines would simply go the the government and say 'oh yeah, we already have a customer charter covering everything', and that could be the end of it.

there might only be 'one chance' to get the momentum behind this. examples would have to clearly knock each of the customer charter principles out of the water if it needs to... showing how they are often (in effect) nothing more than window dressing: they don't actually provide real protection for passengers when things go wrong that are totally in the control of the airline.

perhaps the question is not so much one of 'do we need better protection?' but 'why should australians expect or accept any less than our counterparts in the EU?'.

 

[medhead]

The issue is you'd have to pay full economy in the first place. You know: that fare that no-one in their right mind purchases, but which QF seem to think is the correct refund point.

After 123 pages, I still fail to understand why QF chose SGs to target. Were they *really* the lowest status J pax commencing in LAX?

Regards,

BD

No you wouldn't really have to buy full Y. As with the refund the fare that is available when you purchase isn't considered relevant. On the day of travel downgrades are deemed to be full Y. So if business seats are available on the day of travel the fair and simple method means you should then be deemed to be full Y for upgrade purposes.

 

[roncritch]

On the day of travel downgrades are deemed to be full Y.

So if I find myself in the position of being offered a downgrade, and I check that there are lower class fares available, am I able to say, please downgrade me further from Y to say M class????