SQ error fare closed by FC

[Hvr]

Christmas has arrived early for hundreds of travellers after Singapore Airlines business-class tickets were mistakenly sold for flights to destinations in Europe for as much as half their actual price.


The mistake has led to a dispute between the airline and travel agents around the country over who should foot the bill for the error.

<snip>

The airline was finally alerted to the error by Flight Centre.


However, Singapore Airlines has since told travel agents who sold the cheap tickets that they will have to seek the difference between the actual price and what they should have sold for from their customers, or foot the bill themselves.


A spokesman for Flight Centre said it became aware of the issue on Saturday and notified Singapore Airlines of the problem, which appeared to have been fixed on Monday.

Read more: Travellers snap up half-price business tickets on Singapore Airlines after computer error
​

​

It will be interesting to see how this is resolved and how aggressive SQ and the TAs are regarding resolution.

Wonder if there will be cancellation fees involved?

 

[smit0847]

How did we not know about this?! No travel agent with half a brain is going to sell a mistake fare. FC would have policies about this.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

How did we not know about this?! No travel agent with half a brain is going to sell a mistake fare. FC would have policies about this.

the fare was approx $3500, apart from a mention in the fare rules its economy it otherwise appeared as a valid business class fare, its not an obvious mistake really considering VN currently has a $3000 fare plus taxes loaded to London ex Australia.

 

[smit0847]

Any travel agent that thinks SQ will sell return J fares to Europe for $3500 is in the wrong industry.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

Any travel agent that thinks SQ will sell return J fares to Europe for $3500 is in the wrong industry.

SQ need to just cop this on the chin regardless of whether you think the agent should have KNOWN it was wrong.

 

[bam71]

I have a mate who bought one of these. He actually is a travel agent. He got one for himself to Europe for around $3700.00 return. He called me about it as it is in "U" class with fare basis Y something something. Their online booking engine had been going ballistic and they couldn't figure out why until a few hours later when they realised it was all SQ J fares. Since then he's been worried that it may not be honoured, but my advice was that in the US they have their YUPP/KUPP fares, or it could have been tactical fare to go against TG, MH or even GA.

Wonder how it will pan out. Seems if SQ incorrectly coded the fare, and it's been sold in good faith that they should just cop it.

Discuss....

 

[under the radar]

SQ need to just cop this on the chin regardless of whether you think the agent should have KNOWN it was wrong.

EXACTLY...on the occassion that QF has published a 'fare faux pas', everybody on here says 'so sad...too bad' to QF....why should SQ be treated any differently

 

[moa999]

IF the T&Cs say Y, then I suspect SQ may have a bigger case for dishonouring, or at least stating to PAX that they have booked a Y fare but may mistakenly believe it is J, and offer a free refund if people want to cancel.

[flamesuit on]

 

[moa999]

Also from the linked SMH article:

Singapore Airlines said it had advised travel agents of various options, including paying the difference to its lowest business class fare, travelling in economy class on the booked ticket, refunding the difference between the fare charged and its lead in economy-class fares or offering a full refund.

 

[bam71]

But what about the pax who booked directly on the SQ website? If SQ called me and said " sorry - we loaded it wrong", I'd be saying "that's your fault!"
I asked for a J seat, You offered me a J seat for $3500.00 I bought a J seat. End of story.

 

[eosphoros]

SQ need to just cop this on the chin regardless of whether you think the agent should have KNOWN it was wrong.

I completely disagree. Yes, SQ were negligent and for that reason they should foot part of the bill. That doesn't change the fact that agents selling the tickets also knew or should have known there was a mistake. If I, acting as agent for SQ, know that they have made a mistake where they may lose a lot of money, it would be completely subversive to the relationship of agent-principal if I were allowed nevertheless and with impunity to go ahead and continue to cause SQ loss. If bam71's account is right in that it was clear that the fare basis was Y, then any agent selling those tickets must have known that there was a mistake. In the case of FC, they clearly knew there was a mistake: they were the ones who reported it. To know about it and then to continue selling the tickets to SQ's loss would completely subvert the nature of being an agent.

 

[eosphoros]

But what about the pax who booked directly on the SQ website? If SQ called me and said " sorry - we loaded it wrong", I'd be saying "that's your fault!"
I asked for a J seat, You offered me a J seat for $3500.00 I bought a J seat. End of story.

In respect of those pax, then I agree that SQ should honour the ticket. Those pax would ordinarily have no idea of there being mistake

 

[jman1234]

I saw the prices on Saturday - they were available via online travel agents. I didn't purchase any tickets. As far as I could see, they were not available on the singapore airlines website. Their website had the correct price that was at least double the price the OTAs were offering.

 

[Pushka]

My post on the other thread seems to have not been put into this one.

FC notified SQ on the Saturday so they knew there was an issue. SQ didn't fix it until Monday. So FC sold fares knowing they were incorrect, and SQ were advised there was an issue but didnt correct it in a timely fashion. I'd say there was a case for them to be equally culpable.

 

[Danger]

I was surprised to read the article too. It seems it wasn't even noticed on FlyerTalk.

SQ need to just cop this on the chin regardless of whether you think the agent should have KNOWN it was wrong.

Having bought more than a dozen of the ex-RGN fares across the three rounds (beginning almost 2.5 years ago), several of which were issued on SQ stock (and that I and my family flew), I'll be very interested to see how this plays out. One of the examples saw three of us fly from Yangon to Singapore to Zurich and return in SQ/MI (SilkAir) J for under AUD700. SQ didn't bat an eyelid and were loudly applauded for it across FlyerTalk, unlike some other carriers.

 

[basso]

FC notified SQ on the Saturday so they knew there was an issue. SQ didn't fix it until Monday. So FC sold fares knowing they were incorrect, and SQ were advised there was an issue but didnt correct it in a timely fashion. I'd say there was a case for them to be equally culpable.

How do you know FC continued to sell them after notifying SQ? There are other agents besides FC....

 

[Pushka]

How do you know FC continued to sell them after notifying SQ? There are other agents besides FC....

Yes. Sorry. I don't know if they did that but they did say they were working with clients who were affected so I put two and two together.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

I completely disagree. Yes, SQ were negligent and for that reason they should foot part of the bill. That doesn't change the fact that agents selling the tickets also knew or should have known there was a mistake. If I, acting as agent for SQ, know that they have made a mistake where they may lose a lot of money, it would be completely subversive to the relationship of agent-principal if I were allowed nevertheless and with impunity to go ahead and continue to cause SQ loss. If bam71's account is right in that it was clear that the fare basis was Y, then any agent selling those tickets must have known that there was a mistake. In the case of FC, they clearly knew there was a mistake: they were the ones who reported it. To know about it and then to continue selling the tickets to SQ's loss would completely subvert the nature of being an agent.

Why should they have known? Should they be mind readers and know what SQ intends to do? Just because a fare basis starts with letter Y does not necessarily mean its economy, have you ever heard of a YUP/KUP or any other UP fare offered by AA ? Books into first class but fare basis starts with ANY OTHER LETTER they feel like. This was not an obvious mistake fare (like a $100 base fare RGN-YUL in FIRST CLASS). This fare is close to what some other s.e asian airlines are offering right now in business class.

SQ stuffed up - it is their fault completely.

 

[eosphoros]

Just because a fare basis starts with letter Y does not necessarily mean its economy, have you ever heard of a YUP/KUP or any other UP fare offered by AA ?

I have heard of YUP/KUP fares offered by AA. I have also not heard of any other airline offering analogous fares.

 

[RooFlyer]

I completely disagree. Yes, SQ were negligent and for that reason they should foot part of the bill. That doesn't change the fact that agents selling the tickets also knew or should have known there was a mistake. If I, acting as agent for SQ, know that they have made a mistake where they may lose a lot of money, it would be completely subversive to the relationship of agent-principal if I were allowed nevertheless and with impunity to go ahead and continue to cause SQ loss. If bam71's account is right in that it was clear that the fare basis was Y, then any agent selling those tickets must have known that there was a mistake. In the case of FC, they clearly knew there was a mistake: they were the ones who reported it. To know about it and then to continue selling the tickets to SQ's loss would completely subvert the nature of being an agent.

Sorry, I think that's bollocks. For the TA not book the fare for me if I were to request it would completely subvert the relationship between MY travel agent and me. How are they supposed to know it was a mistake? I recently had my TA book me in J SYD to SCL for half the usual J price ... a better deal than the SQ mistake.

Me: I want to fly SQ in J to LHR, [date] please. Best price you can get.

My regular TA: OK .. OH! there's some really good prices in here ... Wow, these look really good. $X,xx_.

Me: Ok, book it for me please. Credit card #...

My regular TA: Gee, it looks like SQ may have made a mistake. I won't book it for you.

Me: You're fired.