Lufthansa sues no-show passengers [Hidden City Ticketed]

[MEL_Traveller]

don't be silly, an agent can't be held responsible for what a passenger does.

The airline can issue a debit memo to the agent that sold the ticket seeking the balance for the new fare.

 

[p--and--t]

Advertised today is a 241 deal to China with trip-a-deal and in the fine print is the following...

On purchasing this Travel Offer you are bound by the General Terms and Conditions, in addition to the specific terms and conditions outlined in this Important Information. ​

Full Service Airline(s) Used
China Southern or China Eastern Airlines plus any codeshare partners (subject to availability).
Please note: One way flights can not be accommodated. Travellers must take all included flights within the package, and any flights intentionally forfeited will result in later flights being subject to cancellation.
​

I wonder by what method they could determine without doubt "intentionally forfeited"

 

[SOPOOR]

Advertised today is a 241 deal to China with trip-a-deal and in the fine print is the following...

On purchasing this Travel Offer you are bound by the General Terms and Conditions, in addition to the specific terms and conditions outlined in this Important Information. ​

Full Service Airline(s) Used
China Southern or China Eastern Airlines plus any codeshare partners (subject to availability).
Please note: One way flights can not be accommodated. Travellers must take all included flights within the package, and any flights intentionally forfeited will result in later flights being subject to cancellation.
​

I wonder by what method they could determine without doubt "intentionally forfeited"

Cant you just say, you had family issues and didnt intentionally cancel?

How could they prove otherwise

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Advertised today is a 241 deal to China with trip-a-deal and in the fine print is the following...

On purchasing this Travel Offer you are bound by the General Terms and Conditions, in addition to the specific terms and conditions outlined in this Important Information. ​

Full Service Airline(s) Used
China Southern or China Eastern Airlines plus any codeshare partners (subject to availability).
Please note: One way flights can not be accommodated. Travellers must take all included flights within the package, and any flights intentionally forfeited will result in later flights being subject to cancellation.
​

I wonder by what method they could determine without doubt "intentionally forfeited"

This would probably be up to the passenger to satisfy.

But as a general principle I guess if travel insurance would cover you for it, then you'd be within the terms and conditions. In which case it would be a moot point as you'd be covered anyway.

(Although perhaps, since it's in the same para as the 'one way flights are not accommodated'... maybe it's suggesting if you just don't turn up for the return you'll have your one way flight? There doesn't seem to be any penalty for not turning up, only an offer of assistance if you can't make the flight for reasons beyond your control.)

 

[muppet]

Advertised today is a 241 deal to China with trip-a-deal and in the fine print is the following...

On purchasing this Travel Offer you are bound by the General Terms and Conditions, in addition to the specific terms and conditions outlined in this Important Information. ​

Full Service Airline(s) Used
China Southern or China Eastern Airlines plus any codeshare partners (subject to availability).
Please note: One way flights can not be accommodated. Travellers must take all included flights within the package, and any flights intentionally forfeited will result in later flights being subject to cancellation.
​

I wonder by what method they could determine without doubt "intentionally forfeited"

Isn't this just being more upfront in stating what is already common practice? Miss a flight and the rest of the ticket cancels.

All airlines do it (even those where fares are priced one-way), seems this is one of the few travel agents that make it clear upfront.

 

[Danger]

Advertised today is a 241 deal to China with trip-a-deal and in the fine print is the following...

On purchasing this Travel Offer you are bound by the General Terms and Conditions, in addition to the specific terms and conditions outlined in this Important Information. ​

Full Service Airline(s) Used
China Southern or China Eastern Airlines plus any codeshare partners (subject to availability).
Please note: One way flights can not be accommodated. Travellers must take all included flights within the package, and any flights intentionally forfeited will result in later flights being subject to cancellation.
​

I wonder by what method they could determine without doubt "intentionally forfeited"

I'm with muppet.

I don't think this clause is targeting throwaway ticketing. ". . . later flights" seems to suggest it's referring to skipping a flight in the middle of the ticket. For example, A-B-C-D where you don't take B-C but still plan to take C-D. That's all pretty standard T&Cs, I think.

 

[Mattg]

This case has now had a resolution in the German courts. Lufthansa lost, with the judge ruling that airlines in Germany don't have a right to chase customers for extra cash if they exploit hidden-city ticketing.

 

[SOPOOR]

This case has now had a resolution in the German courts. Lufthansa lost, with the judge ruling that airlines in Germany don't have a right to chase customers for extra cash if they exploit hidden-city ticketing.

Awesome!
You cant have your cake and eat it

 

[ozfflyer]

The airline can issue a debit memo to the agent that sold the ticket seeking the balance for the new fare.

doesn't mean the agent will pay it !!!

It might mean agent stops booking LH though. In these economic times, airlines should be sucking up to agents, who they really need now.

 

[GermanLawyer]

LH sent out a newsletter to their TAs one day before the oral hearing which included 4-6 different topics. One of them was coupon-sequence and recalculation of fares. What a coincidence.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

doesn't mean the agent will pay it !!!

It might mean agent stops booking LH though. In these economic times, airlines should be sucking up to agents, who they really need now.

And equally the agent needs to sell Lufthansa because they need the commission. An agent won’t turn away customers by refusing to book a particular airline.

The relationship between the airline and its agent is governed by contract law. Of course the agent will pay if it receives a correctly issued debit.

 

[UP4014]

And equally the agent needs to sell Lufthansa because they need the commission. An agent won’t turn away customers by refusing to book a particular airline.

The relationship between the airline and its agent is governed by contract law. Of course the agent will pay if it receives a correctly issued debit.

The agent only needs to sell LH if the customer insists. As far as I know there is no city where LH is the only option. Otherwise you go to agent for them to assist with fares, route and times.

Although after this LH may need to increase its commission to retain business via agents.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The agent only needs to sell LH if the customer insists. As far as I know there is no city where LH is the only option. Otherwise you go to agent for them to assist with fares, route and times.

Although after this LH may need to increase its commission to retain business via agents.

But realistically, LH is going to be no different to say Qantas. Passengers will go into an agent in Frankfurt and ask to fly to new york... they aren’t going to accept just anything the agent tells them. ‘X’ number of pax, for whatever reason, will want to fly LH rather then UA or AC.

And if comparing first or business class, the choices may be even more limited.

An agent the size as Fright Centre isn’t going to stop selling LH simply because they’ve been issued a debit memo. Especially if they have corporate clients.

 

[UP4014]

But realistically, LH is going to be no different to say Qantas. Passengers will go into an agent in Frankfurt and ask to fly to new york... they aren’t going to accept just anything the agent tells them. ‘X’ number of pax, for whatever reason, will want to fly LH rather then UA or AC.

And if comparing first or business class, the choices may be even more limited.

An agent the size as Fright Centre isn’t going to stop selling LH simply because they’ve been issued a debit memo. Especially if they have corporate clients.

So as I suggested, if the customer insists.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

So as I suggested, if the customer insists.

No. ‘Insist’ means to ‘demand forcefully’ and ‘not accept refusal’.

A passenger who’s part of a big corporate account saying ‘i’d like the LH400 to new york tomorrow in business class’ is stating a preference, not insisting.

 

[Melburnian1]

LH sent out a newsletter to their TAs one day before the oral hearing which included 4-6 different topics. One of them was coupon-sequence and recalculation of fares. What a coincidence.

Given the excellent German rail network, why didn't your client just catch a train from Frankfurt to Berlin? That would have avoided probelms with seemingly nasty LH.

 

[blaz]

Why do airlines like Lufthansa care? They got their money for the service offered and the client got what he paid for. If the airlines think that the system is being used, then don't offer this ridiculous fare discrepancy. If it makes economic sense to offer this discounted fare in the first place then it still must make them a profit even if somebody is using THEIR system.

 

[AFF Editor]

For anyone who'd like to learn a bit more about this case, @GermanLawyer was a guest on this fortnight's episode of the AFF podcast - Podcast Episode 22: "Hidden City" Court Case

 

[AFF Editor]

I see that the same lawyer from this case has had another win in the German courts against Lufthansa. This time, the case was about the airline charging a fare difference when customers redeem credits issued rebook cancelled flights for new travel dates, for travel on the same route & class of travel as originally booked.

Court: Airlines Can't Charge More to Rebook Cancelled Flights

If you've had a flight cancelled due to COVID-19, there's a good chance you may have ended up with a credit voucher to use towards a future trip.

www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

Congratulations @GermanLawyer!

 

[justin23]

This time, the case was about the airline charging a fare difference when customers redeem credits issued for cancelled flights, for travel on the same route & class of travel as originally booked.

While I agree this is something airlines do that is dodgy and really needs to be fixed. We will see hpw this all pans out with the plethora of flight credits handed out by airlines. I think they are going to have to play ball a bit and be somewhat nice about it, but we won't know til we can all start flyingagain.

However the whole idea of finding a cheaper ticket by dumping legs will just ultimately cost the consumer more money, if airlines can't clamp down on it. Although Lufthansa got way too greedy in the court case trying to get more money. If they had of sued for the ticketed cost of the routing the person actually took, they most likely would have been successful. Also courts are very differnet in every country, its why for example the movie studios have not sued Australians for pirating content, they can only sue for the cost of a physical copy of the movie plus charges ie. ~$100.