Dumped in Joburg

[arrow]

Exactly... And i presume all this mess is caused by the LHR fire which is out of QFs control.

The delay isn’t the issue. It happens, but the real problem is how it’s handled and this seems like a debacle

 

[levelnine]

Exactly... And i presume all this mess is caused by the LHR fire which is out of QFs control.

The handling of IRROPS is 100% within QF's control.

 

[equus]

It’s all very well to say that you can claim off travel insurance but often the excess can be $200-300

Again the Platinum Amex insurance comes up trumps - zero excess on Travel Inconvenience cover

 

[Flyerwin]

Platinum Amex insurance comes up trumps - zero excess on Travel Inconvenience cover

Does anyone know off-hand how that compares to the Qantas Titanium Platinum MasterCard?

 

[equus]

Does anyone know off-hand how that compares to the Qantas Titanium Platinum MasterCard?

LMGTFY Qantas Titanium Travel Insurance After 6 hours delay up to $750 per covered person, but has a $250 per person excess.

 

[djkelly69]

I'm fairly sure most posters here haven't had too much pushback from Qantas when making similar claims in misconnect situations?

Not a misconnect (not sure it matters), but we (3 pax) got delayed for a night in LA in July when QF12 was pushed back ~23 hours. Extended hotel and hire car by a night, plus some meals obviously. Spent ~AU$800 from memory with receipts, QF would only reimburse AU$500 after a number of pushbacks.

 

[Quickstatus]

Again the Platinum Amex insurance comes up trumps - zero excess on Travel Inconvenience cover

But the excess was paid partly through the annual fee?

 

[equus]

the annual fee

The annual fee covers lots of things - depends which you use. It also pays for the Travel credits, the Travel Insurance itself, the various cashback offers like shop small, extra points earn etc. Depends on what you value.

The insurance is very good in some respects, but not so useful in others (certain sport exclusions, pre-existing conditions etc.). Like all things, actually read the PDS and understand what is covered and what is not.

 

[Quickstatus]

Depends on what you value.

That's right. The $1450 covers a lot of things including TI "excess" and it is counting on cardholders to spend less than the annual fee.

 

[equus]

It is counting on some cardholders consuming less of the extras than the annual fee, but it is also counting on those extras driving lots of spending on the card generating fees from the merchants. All the travel insurance basically requires lots of spend to be put on the card - all the overseas airfares in order to activate much of the insurance, all that inconvenience extra hotels etc, all the car hire for the loss coverage.

If the offered benefits drive cardholders to spend tens of thousands of dollars extra on the Amex rather than something else for the benefits and points, even giving 1.125% (minimum) or that spend back in points value, if Amex is still making 0.5% margin on every dollar, it is adding to their bottom line. They won't care if the cost of benefits exceeds the value of the annual fee if the spend is high enough, as they make the money on the spend.

 

[RealtimeY]

It's not just the Platinum card, even their less expensive cards have no excess for travel inconvenience, though with lower limits.

 

[Quickstatus]

It's not just the Platinum card, even their less expensive cards have no excess for travel inconvenience, though with lower limits.

Correct. No excess for travel inconvenience cover for Amex Explorer
The limits are: $500 1st day per person, $1000 for more than one person. Thereafter $350/day/person up to $1400 and $2800 if more than one person.

This would be more than enough in the vast majority of circumstances- considering QF is the 1st insurer of circa $200/day

 

[Blackadder]

Given QF so frequently has IRROPS, you think they'd eventually get a handle on how to accommodate stranded passengers, especially at a port they frequently fly into & out of. Very strange, and disappointing.

No two IRROPS are the same, so not a case of a one size fits all approach.

 

[Quickstatus]

you think they'd eventually get a handle on how to accommodate stranded passengers, especially at a port they frequently fly into

Dumped in CHC
Dumped in DFW

 

[levelnine]

No two IRROPS are the same, so not a case of a one size fits all approach.

Are you saying Qantas adequately handled this situation?

 

[Blackadder]

Are you saying Qantas adequately handled this situation?

Did I say that?
Just because one approach works for one, it may not work for another.

 

[Ansett Nostalgic]

I got a law firm to send a demand letter on my behalf for one of these claims previously. Worked like a charm. Happy to share details if anyone needs such assistance.

 

[levelnine]

Did I say that?
Just because one approach works for one, it may not work for another.

So what's the point of your comment then?

By definition, a well implemented IRROPs system is one able to be employed in a variety of scenarios. It isn't an IRROPs system if it cannot handle irregular operations, which are — surprise, surprise — irregular lol.

Edit: I'll add this is the most predictable of IRROPs — a late incoming aircraft leading to a bunch of missed connections — which any competent airline should know how to handle. This is the bread and butter of IRROPs. It is not as if a meteor hit Sydney airport and Qantas is suddenly without half of its fleet.

 

[Blackadder]

So what's the point of your comment then?

By definition, a well implemented IRROPs system is one able to be employed in a variety of scenarios. It isn't an IRROPs system if it cannot handle irregular operations, which are — surprise, surprise — irregular lol.

Edit: I'll add this is the most predictable of IRROPs — a late incoming aircraft leading to a bunch of missed connections — which any competent airline should know how to handle. This is the bread and butter of IRROPs. It is not as if a meteor hit Sydney airport and Qantas is suddenly without half of its fleet.

So QF are meant to have adequate staff on hand at all airports they serve incase of irrops , and ask other airlines to bump passengers so they can accommodate those who have missed connections.

 

[arrow]

So QF are meant to have adequate staff on hand at all airports they serve incase of irrops , and ask other airlines to bump passengers so they can accommodate those who have missed connections.

I don’t think anyone has suggested that.

QF should have staff (or surge contractors) at ports to manage IRROPS and it’s not a case of bumping other passengers to get theirs on connecting flights but arranging suitable accommodation / transport / meals until those passengers can be rebooked on available connections.