Missed flight: No notification of Lord Howe Island flight rebooking/time change

[eastwest101]

...We booked thru helloworld who in turn book thru Oxley Travel who I understand handle LHI bookings so it we didn't use a small unknown TA. I have lost interest in every going to LHI again or trying to go.

Have you contacted Hellowolrd and Oxley Travel about who had control of the booking? Seems possible that with 2 travel agents now involved that they maybe thought the other agent would take care of it? There's only 1 thing worse than having a travel agent booking - and thats the confusion and potential for screw ups by having two travel agents!

Whats the bet that Helloworld booked the QF flights and then got Oxely Travel to book the acommodation? What a little perfect circle-jerk of commisions that would be. Almost as profitable as LDH hotels making existing guests pay the rack rate when overstaying due to weather while keeping the money of people whom were unable to fly into LDH. Thats a really nice little business model right there - one room creates two revenue streams.

 

[RichardMEL]

Happy with the distinction, but are we just talking "ethics", or is this some actual violation of contract terms and consumer law?

I don't know that either is a breach of contract in the sense that in the first instance, which I call a "commercial requirement" the passenger is not inconvenienced in terms of the purchase of transport from point A to point B on a flight within a reasonable time of the schedule. The 2nd isn't a breach if the carrier can prove there were no other options available (eg: you were stuck at LDH because weather forced the inbound to cancel). I also don't know that ethics come into either of these examples, unless you want to argue the case that a a/c sub due to, for example, capacity planning causes someone to be downgraded from a 330 suite product to 737 J I think no there's not an ethical issue there. Now if an equip sub forces a confirmed upgrade to be lost due to lack of seats on the new aircraft, then absolutely compensation is due but I don't see this as an ethical issue.

With this specific situation in mind - let's say the OP had gotten a call at 7pm the night before and told we need to move you to the 0700. I think the customer has the right to say "No, this does not suit us, what is your next option?" and QF would have to come to the party (they probably would have offered the next day's flight, which in hindsight would have been bad given it didn't run). I know the original flight wound up running, but there *must* have been a reasonable reason that this was no longer an option. This is where we just don't know and it's not fair to anyone to draw conclusions or make assumptions I think. On the surface this is a major screw up, and at the very least an involuntary change like this demands for compensation - notification aside this was not the customer's choice.

So QF need to come to the party on that alone, let alone the questions over notifications of the change which become even more murky given the multiple TA's involved. I think QF could suggest they put a SSR into the booking that was agent controlled to notify them, and basically "we told the agent via our usual process and it was their responsibility" - I'm not saying this is fair, but I can see how QF could consider that a notification of change being made. Since they did not"own" the booking, it may well be that their protocol leaves it to the issuing agent.

Seems like a perfect storm here of a (apparently) poor decision made on that Sunday night then somehow this was not communicated to the customer and it seems like it may have been a case of "the other guy would have done that" in play rather than "we'll just call to confirm"

question marks aplenty.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Which is all very nice except the contract is directly between qantas and the passenger. This notion that airlines will only deal via an agent is a bit outdated in 2016... e-tickets (rather than paper tickets) mean airlines have visibility of the fare, fare rules and everything else. What's the justification for only dealing through an agent, especially at the 11th hour?

 

[get me outta here]

Calling DrRalph to the red phone ...

I don't know that either is a breach of contract in the sense that in the first instance, which I call a "commercial requirement" the passenger is not inconvenienced in terms of the purchase of transport from point A to point B on a flight within a reasonable time of the schedule. The 2nd isn't a breach if the carrier can prove there were no other options available (eg: you were stuck at LDH because weather forced the inbound to cancel). I also don't know that ethics come into either of these examples, unless you want to argue the case that a a/c sub due to, for example, capacity planning causes someone to be downgraded from a 330 suite product to 737 J I think no there's not an ethical issue there. Now if an equip sub forces a confirmed upgrade to be lost due to lack of seats on the new aircraft, then absolutely compensation is due but I don't see this as an ethical issue.

With this specific situation in mind - let's say the OP had gotten a call at 7pm the night before and told we need to move you to the 0700. I think the customer has the right to say "No, this does not suit us, what is your next option?" and QF would have to come to the party (they probably would have offered the next day's flight, which in hindsight would have been bad given it didn't run). I know the original flight wound up running, but there *must* have been a reasonable reason that this was no longer an option. This is where we just don't know and it's not fair to anyone to draw conclusions or make assumptions I think. On the surface this is a major screw up, and at the very least an involuntary change like this demands for compensation - notification aside this was not the customer's choice.

So QF need to come to the party on that alone, let alone the questions over notifications of the change which become even more murky given the multiple TA's involved. I think QF could suggest they put a SSR into the booking that was agent controlled to notify them, and basically "we told the agent via our usual process and it was their responsibility" - I'm not saying this is fair, but I can see how QF could consider that a notification of change being made. Since they did not"own" the booking, it may well be that their protocol leaves it to the issuing agent.

Seems like a perfect storm here of a (apparently) poor decision made on that Sunday night then somehow this was not communicated to the customer and it seems like it may have been a case of "the other guy would have done that" in play rather than "we'll just call to confirm"

question marks aplenty.

Which is all very nice except the contract is directly between qantas and the passenger. This notion that airlines will only deal via an agent is a bit outdated in 2016... e-tickets (rather than paper tickets) mean airlines have visibility of the fare, fare rules and everything else. What's the justification for only dealing through an agent, especially at the 11th hour?

 

[RichardMEL]

I'm not trying to defend QF here. I'm only trying to puzzle out how this situation may have arisen the way it has that's all.

just on the notion of fare visibility etc you'd think so but I'm not so sure it's always so clear cut. I know when I purchase NZ tickets through another OTA, like travel.com.au or whoever, the online booking basically comes up with words to the effect of "This booking was made through an agent...." and has no info. Now I understand that's the website and not looking at the actual PNR, but remember agents work off various deals and comissions and other structures that are probably kept opaque for good reasons (eg: your ticket recept shows your fare was $x when you paid $y).

As I've written a few times already the change at the late hour to an earlier flight, with the original flight still on the books seems bizarre to me and the lack of confirmed human contact with the pax is very odd - and in the end unacceptable because the customer did not know their flight had been changed, or they had been changed to a different flight totally - and even when checking for their confirmed flight number to find it scheduled on time it is absolutely reasonable to be livid in this situation.

this whole change of flight thing is at the core and handled very badly.

 

[ShezMac]

������
agree, very badly handled

 

[JohnK]

Re: Rumour:[Denied by RR] Qantas to ban JQ SYD-MEL pax from F lounges & send to J lou

I'm not trying to defend QF here. I'm only trying to puzzle out how this situation may have arisen the way it has that's all.

I'm also curious as to how someone at Qantas could possibly move a passenger(s) 4+ hours to an earlier flight so close to departure. The only thing I can possibly think of is that it was a mistake and if that's the case they may not own up to the mistake.

I would be stunned if the move was to accommodate some random "VIP" on the later flight.

 

[williamsf1]

I have been out of the retail side of the airline industry for a few years, however the protocol for schedule changes was anything outside 72hrs was a travel agents responsibility and within was the airline. Considering the OP said they had FFN in the PNR, QF should have been in direct contact. There are a lot of strange things going on with this booking reading some of the facts posted so far.

 

[RichardMEL]

I'm also curious as to how someone at Qantas could possibly move a passenger(s) 4+ hours to an earlier flight so close to departure. The only thing I can possibly think of is that it was a mistake and if that's the case they may not own up to the mistake.

I would be stunned if the move was to accommodate some random "VIP" on the later flight.

I would be too. I've never had an occasion like this, and honestly if QF said to me "As a P1 we'll find you space on this flight" I'd only accept if it did not displace confirmed revenue customers.

You know though there's one instance where maybe I did get a seat that displaced someone(but hopefully staff travel). Arrived at SYD early off a SQ inbound, got to dom transfer, was on a 10a SYD-MEL in a 737. Knew the 0930 was a 332 with (at the time new) J suites. EF showed 0's in all. I asked if I could move to a 0900 flight (another 737 but I didn't ask for the 0930 since I figured it was full). Agent said "0900 might be a bit tight, but I can put you on the 0930" .. well i was surprised but thought maybe EF then was wrong somehow, so I said that would be great and I wound up in perfect seat 2K on that flight. Now I wonder if someone was displaced. I'd hate if if somehow that was the case.

very different situations of course.

I have been out of the retail side of the airline industry for a few years, however the protocol for schedule changes was anything outside 72hrs was a travel agents responsibility and within was the airline. Considering the OP said they had FFN in the PNR, QF should have been in direct contact. There are a lot of strange things going on with this booking reading some of the facts posted so far.

Good point. That does ring a bell and makes some sort of sense given the late timing of this change.

 

[Steady]

I was on a MEL-DPO flight a few years ago and a WP I knew who flew the route weekly return had checked in online, had his BP printed and in hand, turned up at the gate and when they scanned his BP was told he was not on the flight (last into DPO that day), I was on board, the first I knew of it was when he had barged his way past everyone and made it on board to where a WP1 / CL / QF or Q-Link Staff (don't know but he had 2 friends, all suits, not engineers) was sitting in his allocated seat. There was a very heated discussion and my mate defiantly stood his ground, the 3 men eventually disembarked after there was a discussion between one of them, the CM and a GS about them getting onto the LST flight instead. They didn't go easily and left in quite a huff.

My high status mate had been offloaded after checking in as he was the last to board.

 

[andyhui01]

Do QF WP P1 get guaranteed seats if full fare is paid more than 24hours before departure? (like Marco Polo Diamond members get). Maybe a P1/WP decided to use that benefit.

 

[bam71]

I don't think the guaranteed seat applies for Dash 8 services.

 

[RichardMEL]

Do QF WP P1 get guaranteed seats if full fare is paid more than 24hours before departure? (like Marco Polo Diamond members get). Maybe a P1/WP decided to use that benefit.

I've never heard of such a thing.

 

[andyhui01]

I've never heard of such a thing.

Maybe not for QF FF's. MPC Diamond gets this benefit only if you are buying Y or J fares though.

 

[RichardMEL]

yes sorry, I knew about the MPC benefit, but meant I had not heard about anything like this in QF land

 

[Happy Trails]

yes sorry, I knew about the MPC benefit, but meant I had not heard about anything like this in QF land

https://www.qantas.com/fflyer/dyn/program/terms

Here it is, I think:

20.7 Priority Economy Class Seat Purchase
20.7.1 Priority Economy Class Seat Purchase is available to Platinum One and Platinum Members under the following conditions:
(a) the Member must hold or purchase a ticket in the nominated fare type for domestic (Fully Flexible fares in Y or B class) or international travel (full Economy in Y class or the highest excursion fares in Y, B or H class) on a Qantas operated service with a Qantas flight number (excluding non-jet QantasLink services);
(b) a maximum of two seats per request is permitted - one of which must be for the use of the Member, and the other for a person travelling with the Member on a paid ticket;
(c) the booking or request must be made no later than midday (local time in the city of departure) on the day prior to the scheduled departure;
(d) E-Tickets, rather than paper tickets, must be purchased for domestic flights and wherever offered internationally;
(e) Qantas Loyalty may occasionally have to restrict this facility without prior notice on some routes or under special circumstances;
(f) normal check-in times and conditions apply; and
(g) this service does not apply to Reward Flights.

 

[RichardMEL]

Well... wow.

still I'd hate if if something like this displaced confirmed revenue customers on a flight.

of course we have zero indication that this is the case in this specific situation.

 

[andyhui01]

Well... wow.

still I'd hate if if something like this displaced confirmed revenue customers on a flight.

of course we have zero indication that this is the case in this specific situation.

I've been both displaced and have displaced someone. If it makes you feel better, the displaced gets taken care of fairly well at CX (Airport dollars + Upgrade on next flight). CX normally offers it randomly to people checking in until someone takes it.

Qantas operated service with a Qantas flight number (excluding non-jet QantasLink services);

This was a Qantaslink service wasn't it?

 

[eastwest101]

Qantas operated service with a Qantas flight number (excluding non-jet QantasLink services);

This was a Qantaslink service wasn't it?

Yes it was a Qantaslink service, so we can exclude the possibility that the OP was involuntarily rebooked due to a WP1 or CL request. I'm personally still leaning towards JohnK's suggestion that this was possibly some sort of human error somewhere.

 

[744]

Moving people to a flight 4 hours earlier should result in an immediate call by QF. I used to work in the area that does this sort of stuff. We would call another internal area to have them organize a callout by res. In those days it would be by HBA MEL OR BNE and I think AKL also used to be roped in if the Oz res rooms were busy. Sadly not all the people doing these callouts would necessarily even think to look in a FF profile for contact details. In the real good old days of TAA and Australian there was a dedicated group of staff in each res room that would only action this type of thing I.e. Calling out delays cancellations etc. It had to be a extremely busy for us to be asked to take calls rather than our regular duties.