LUFTHANSA SUES PASSENGER FOR NOT TAKING BOOKED FLIGHT

[Steeleballz 7,550]

 

      

 

  One of the world’s biggest airlines is seeking to sue a passenger who did not take the last leg of their ticketed journey, threatening a widely used hack for cheaper flights. The German national airline, Lufthansa, is pursuing payment from an unnamed traveler who, it believes, deliberately bought a ticket with no intention of flying the last leg.

 

  While an initial court case found in the passenger’s favour, Lufthansa has been given permission to appeal.

 

    https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/lufthansa-passenger-tariff-abuse-cheap-flights-lawsuit-tickets-missing-air-france-british-airways-a8773371.html

 

 

    

  

 

 

       

       

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

 

   I know we have a lot of frequent flyers here, so curious how people feel about this. For all the ways airlines nickle and dime flyers and do whatever they can to avoid helping when things go wrong, this seems like a pathetic move by Lufthansa. No doubt they are trying to scare people, as they have already spent more in court than they will recover by suing the passenger.

[Dashinka 23,235]

Personally, I think it is a pathetic move by Lufthansa.  I have never understood the strategy of pricing a multi-leg itinerary lower than a non-stop, but then trying to understand airline pricing is on par with trying to understand tax law.

[millefleur 5,035]

Hate Lufthansa...  They have some of the worst customer service of any major European airline.

 

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

Lufthansa, is pursuing payment from an unnamed traveler who, it believes, deliberately bought a ticket with no intention of flying the last leg.

How is that even provable in a court of law without spying on someone to gather the evidence? Absurd...

Edited February 12, 2019 by millefleur

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

used to do this all the time when I traveled for work before it became verboten I traveled frequently between Columbus Ohio and Newark NJ, flight was $1200, for the same flight but originating in Phoenix was $200

Edited February 12, 2019 by Randyandyuni

[Steeleballz 7,550]

13 minutes ago, millefleur said:

Hate Lufthansa...  They have some of the worst customer service of any major European airline.

 

How is that even provable in a court of law without spying on someone to gather the evidence? Absurd...

 

  Apparently the traveler booked another flight on Lufthansa to Berlin instead of continuing to Oslo. Probably not the best idea, but still seems petty of them. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Don’t see the airline winning this.  Plans change daily, sometimes hourly.  It would become quite the burden to pursue every person who changed their itinerary, and would likely result in a loss of some customers.

[jg121783 3,907]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

      

 

  One of the world’s biggest airlines is seeking to sue a passenger who did not take the last leg of their ticketed journey, threatening a widely used hack for cheaper flights. The German national airline, Lufthansa, is pursuing payment from an unnamed traveler who, it believes, deliberately bought a ticket with no intention of flying the last leg.

 

  While an initial court case found in the passenger’s favour, Lufthansa has been given permission to appeal.

 

    https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/lufthansa-passenger-tariff-abuse-cheap-flights-lawsuit-tickets-missing-air-france-british-airways-a8773371.html

 

 

    

  

 

 

       

       

 

Seems pretty clear cut to me. You can't win a lawsuit against someone for not using something or part of something they purchased from you. If you could maybe your local resturaunt should sue you when you purchase a steak dinner and don't finish the steak. Maybe they used a loophole to get a lower price but if you accept their money in exchange for the good or service that is on you not them.

 

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

Personally, I think it is a pathetic move by Lufthansa.  I have never understood the strategy of pricing a multi-leg itinerary lower than a non-stop, but then trying to understand airline pricing is on par with trying to understand tax law.

I have never understood how a round trip ticket can be less expensive than a one way ticket for the same exact flight either. I have seen this more than once and actually considered buying the round trip ticket and only using one part of it. I am learning all sorts of strange things about ticket pricing in my search for a good deal on tickets to the Philippines recently.

[millefleur 5,035]

41 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

Apparently the traveler booked another flight on Lufthansa to Berlin instead of continuing to Oslo. Probably not the best idea, but still seems petty of them. 

Right, that is extremely petty. Actually if they were that concerned about it, they could probably create some kind of algorithm/code on the website that would block people with the same name/passport number from booking flights happening at the same time to different destinations if there were already an active reservation in the system....still, even if they did do something like that, it would probably just drive people away from using their service altogether and opt for a low coster or one of the other abundant choices that exist in the European market. I wouldn't be surprised if they did implement something like that in the future if they're willing to sue a passenger over it.

[millefleur 5,035]

1 minute ago, jg121783 said:

I have never understood how a round trip ticket can be less expensive than a one way ticket for the same exact flight either. I have seen this more than once and actually considered buying the round trip ticket and only using one part of it. I am learning all sorts of strange things about ticket pricing in my search for a good deal on tickets to the Philippines recently.

I bought a round trip and used it as a one way when my husband and I moved here. I even told the guy over the phone (Air France) that I specifically booked it because it was cheaper than a one way and had no real intention to use the return ticket, the guy didn't care at all and even told me to try to get my taxes back for it if I wasn't planning to use the ticket, lol. And that's why I love Air France! 🇫🇷

[Steeleballz 7,550]

18 minutes ago, millefleur said:

Right, that is extremely petty. Actually if they were that concerned about it, they could probably create some kind of algorithm/code on the website that would block people with the same name/passport number from booking flights happening at the same time to different destinations if there were already an active reservation in the system....still, even if they did do something like that, it would probably just drive people away from using their service altogether and opt for a low coster or one of the other abundant choices that exist in the European market. I wouldn't be surprised if they did implement something like that in the future if they're willing to sue a passenger over it.

 

   Indeed. The customer seems to have a good argument that they sold him a second contract of carriage so he should be able to use it instead of continuing the first flight.  

[Steeleballz 7,550]

20 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Seems pretty clear cut to me. You can't win a lawsuit against someone for not using something or part of something they purchased from you. If you could maybe your local resturaunt should sue you when you purchase a steak dinner and don't finish the steak. Maybe they used a loophole to get a lower price but if you accept their money in exchange for the good or service that is on you not them.

 

 

  Depends if the contract of carriage holds up in court or not. Luthansa's says if you intentionally miss any leg of a flight itinerary, they may bill you the listed price for the ones you used. It's standard in a lot of carriage contracts, but I'm not sure it's ever been enforced by anyone.

 

  There is no similar situation at a restaurant since there is no contract agreed to ahead of time. On the other hand, we saw some people leave before their meal arrived recently when we were out to eat. It was busy and I think they couldn't wait any longer. Made me wonder if people order at a restaurant and leave before the meal arrives, would the restaurant have a legal case against them in court to pay for the meal. The argument for the customer would be don't let so many people in if you cant serve the meal in a reasonable time. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

11 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Depends if the contract of carriage holds up in court or not. Luthansa's says if you intentionally miss any leg of a flight itinerary, they may bill you the listed price for the ones you used. It's standard in a lot of carriage contracts, but I'm not sure it's ever been enforced by anyone.

 

  There is no similar situation at a restaurant since there is no contract agreed to ahead of time. On the other hand, we saw some people leave before their meal arrived recently when we were out to eat. It was busy and I think they couldn't wait any longer. Made me wonder if people order at a restaurant and leave before the meal arrives, would the restaurant have a legal case against them in court to pay for the meal. The argument for the customer would be don't let so many people in if you cant serve the meal in a reasonable time. 

The contract of carriage is not designed to work that way.  You pay for what you book, and if you don’t fly what you booked, the worst they will do is not refund your purchase price.  Or perhaps allow you to take the unflown segment at a later date, typically up to one year.  But I have never seen an airline try to change the price of a ticket AFTER part of a flight has been flown.

 

Imagine your local car dealership calling you a week after you drove your brand new car off the lot, and they were trying to charge you an additional $3000 for it.  

Edited February 12, 2019 by ALFKAD

[Steeleballz 7,550]

10 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

The contract of carriage is not designed to work that way.  You pay for what you book, and if you don’t fly what you booked, the worst they will do is not refund your purchase price.  Or perhaps allow you to take the unflown segment at a later date, typically up to one year.  But I have never seen an airline try to change the price of a ticket AFTER part of a flight has been flown.

 

Imagine your local car dealership calling you a week after you drove your brand new car off the lot, and they were trying to charge you an additional $3000 for it.  

 

  Correct, but the wording is there and is the basis for the lawsuit. Hopefully the court will rule that the contract is unenforceable and put an end to it.

[TBoneTX 43,045]

Twenty-five (25) posts have been removed for derailing the thread.

Philippine-specific stuff is to be by PM or in the Philippines forum, unless it's a CE or HST.

This is not the first such notice.

In this thread, focus on the original topic, please.

Edited February 13, 2019 by TBoneTX