On Thu, 17 May 2007 14:59:20 +0100, "Mortimer"
privacy.net> wrote:
>"Mike Ross"
corestore.org> wrote in message
>news:pcmo43de79nhkfa3gr245o1ugbcjisl43l@4ax.com...>> On Thu, 17 May 2007 14:04:10 +0100, rodger (and out)
privacy.net>
>> wrote:
>>>>>If you buy a ticket for a scheduled flight (and return) and then give
>>>notice a couple of weeks before departure that you are not going to
>>>use it are you entitled to your payment back (probably less a sensible
>>>admin charge). Are there any laws/industry rules which cover this?
>>
>> It would depend entirely on the ticket you bought; full-fare tickets
>> are generally fully flexible and fully refundable. Special offers and
>> cheap fares generally aren't. Call them and ask.
>
>This is the problem with air travel and air ticketing: the tickets
>usually/always have your name on them and so cannot be given/sold to someone
>else if you find that you can't use them.
>
>I'd say that keeping your money and failing to provide the corresponding
>service (no matter whose fault it is) is fraud.
You would say wrong.
If it is their fault that they fail to provide the service, then yes.
But if it is your fault, then absolutely not.
> I'd like to see a change in
>the law which says that any unused ticket should be transferrable or
>refundable, otherwise the provider is able to sell the same seat twice. No
>one minds paying a reasonable admin charge of a few pounds, but to retain
>the whole ticket price is not acceptible. It's symptomatic of modern society
>which seems to be imposing more and more restrictions on punters and
>requiring them more and more to plan ahead and then commit to keeping those
>plans, instead of allowing spontenaity and flexibility of travel.
You can have as much spontaneity and flexibility as you like. Provided
you pay the full fare for a scheduled flight.
Discounted fares are always subject to restrictions. If you ant the
discount, then accept the restriction.
>
>I heard of a case a month or so after the restrictions on taking liquids
>into an aeroplane cabin, after all the panic had quietened down. A family
>was travelling on an internal flight (I think it was Bristol to Glasgow) and
>when they got to the airport they found that because of the heightened
>security they were required to show a passport as ID even for an internal
>flight. The airline had never informed them of this. It was too late for
>them to make the round trip back home to get their passports and the airline
>wouldn't even refund the cost of the tickets. They lost a lot of money and
>had to travel by car, arriving late for their appointment.
>
The requirement for an internal flight (after the initial panic) is
not for a passport, but for some form of acceptable photo ID. A
driving licence should have been acceptable.
But it isn't up to the airline to tell you what the airport may
require, and all the tickets and booking screens I have seen recently
have told you to check the airport website for restrictions.
Having said which, the Bristol Airport website does not specifically
mention what is required in the way of documentation for internal
flights.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
All programers are optimists.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
