Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Throwing Away Coupons To Save Money  
User currently offlineAF022 From France, joined Dec 2003, 2161 posts, RR: 1
Posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2552 times:

How difficult is it to get away with throwing away coupons?

I have a friend in the US who wants to visit me in Paris. For some reason, fares to CDG are really high on AF, but using AF to LHR via CDG the fares are pretty reasonable. If she comes with carry-on only, can she just throw away the LHR coupons and come to Paris? I assume this isn't "legal" and if caught she might have problems, but the differential is like $1000 for the week she wants to visit.

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5240 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2544 times:

XXX-CDG-LHR-CDG-XXX

If she only flies XXX-CDG and skips CDG-LHR it is very likely that the rest of her itenary will be cancelled.

Has she looked at other airlines like BA, LH etc?


User currently offlineSmi0006 From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 1533 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2483 times:

I think I understand what you are asking please correct me if I am wrong, be careful coupons and boarding pass are different things, coupons are tickets, thus if you loose a coupon (unless of course its and e-ticket) doesn't matter to the airline, only means you probably wont travel. If you loose a boarding pass they can be re-printed, but if you are not planning on travelling you have wasted the staffs time when they try and find you, before departure.

I don't know how things work with AF, but if it was with my airline I don't see why when she checks in for the flight she couldn't simply ask to only be checked in only as far as CDG the first sector, not the second on carriage sector. Even with checked luggage, she then simply doesn't check back in at CDG she simply clears customs imigration as normal, only problem she may have is on the return flight, where her ticket states she is originating in LHR but again if that coupon is not used, it may simply appear in the booking as unused and they probably wont care.

I wouldn't recommend checking in right the way through with only carry on as you suggest as on the system is will appear she is travelling to LHR, AF may look for her and may even delay the flight. which is not fair for the AF staff who have to look for her and then offload her and the pax who may be delayed slightly due to this.


User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2460 times:

I don't know if this applies, but a guy at work was headed by train from London to Paris, when 1/2 way on the trip (hadn't left the UK) the train broke down and they were forced to bored another train... well, during this event a major issue back in London came up and he elected to stay on the broken train and head back to london... when he went to the ticket counter and tried to rebook his trip UK Police approached him because it's illegal to file your intent to cross boarders and not do so...

Personally don't know.. but this happened in march...



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineDLPMMM From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3592 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2421 times:



Quoting ANstar (Reply 1):
XXX-CDG-LHR-CDG-XXX

If she only flies XXX-CDG and skips CDG-LHR it is very likely that the rest of her itenary will be cancelled.

This is the part that will get your friend. You cannot miss flights in the middle of your Itinerary without getting the rest of your flights cancelled in most cases.

For the extra $1000, you friend could fly all the way to LHR then take the Eurostrar train back for extra FF miles.


User currently offlineIAD51FL From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 354 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2369 times:

Its called "Hidden City" fares... and the above posters are correct. In most cases her return will be cancelled and she will have to purchase a new one way ticket back home.

Chris



Enjoying the view of KIAH approach end of 27. 29.9758015, -95.2695694
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2179 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2360 times:



Quoting AF022 (Thread starter):
or some reason, fares to CDG are really high on AF

Because it is a non-stop, and this is how airlines make money. Non-stops save time, hence, demand is higher, hence fares are higher...

Perhaps booking to CDG from a city in which AF does not fly but DL does can get you a cheaper fare to Paris on AF? (and connect at ATL/JFK on the AF flights)



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineSkyguyB727 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 4 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2245 times:



Quoting IAD51FL (Reply 5):
Its called "Hidden City" fares

and it's also ticket fraud. Hidden city ticketing is a direct violation of the contract of carriage and will render the ticket null and void. The passenger will be required to purchase a new ticket, at the current fare, for the actual transportation used.


User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 8, posted (6 years 4 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2185 times:



Quoting SkyguyB727 (Reply 7):
The passenger will be required to purchase a new ticket, at the current fare, for the actual transportation used.

That, at least, is the theory.

In practice, this practically never happens - if ever at all.

In reality, the only result that'll come out of it with near absolute certainty is that any further segments will be cancelled, though I've seen cases where not even that happened. And then there's those court decisions, at least here in Germany, that prohibit airllines from doing just that... at least once the courts decisions are final. Will be interesting to see what happens then...



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 4 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2120 times:



Quoting SkyguyB727 (Reply 7):
The passenger will be required to purchase a new ticket, at the current fare, for the actual transportation used.

I don't know of any airline that actually does that. What they will do is cancel the rest of the itinerary, and they will refuse to refund any unused portion of the ticket.


User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5431 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (6 years 4 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2110 times:

Actually this prohibited practice is called "Point Beyond" ticketing. This used to be a huge problem and is probably not so much so anymore. It is still, however, not permitted. (There are not many ways to circumvent airlines' tariff rules that the carriers are not aware of. Most of them are covered quite well in their filed tariff rules.)

All you need to do is check the airlines' web-site to see what you're getting in to. For example, at
http://www.nwa.com/plan/comm10.html

"Northwest's Point Beyond Policies follow:

Point Beyond Policy

Fares apply for travel only between the points for which they are published. Tickets may not be issued at fares published to and/or from a more distant point than the points being traveled. When a passenger enplanes at an intermediate point the Northwest agent can verify that the passenger actually flew on the previous flight. If Northwest finds that the passenger did not travel on the previous flight, Northwest reserves the right to deny transportation to the passenger unless the difference between the fare paid and the applicable fare for the actual itinerary is collected."


And from Delta's Ticketing Rules:
http://www.delta.com/planning_reserv...ns/fares_ticketing_rules/index.jsp

"Prohibited Ticketing Practices
Our fares apply only to the specific itineraries for which they are quoted and the restrictions that apply to our discounted fares are an essential part of our contract with you. These restrictions make it possible for us to offer these discounted fares.

Failure to comply with applicable fare restrictions, circumventing those restrictions, or misrepresenting your intended itinerary are all violations of our Contract of Carriage.

While not an exclusive list, the following ticketing practices are prohibited:

Back-to-back ticketing---combining multiple overlapping round-trip tickets to circumvent Saturday or other overnight stay requirements.
Throw-away ticketing---use of discounted round-trip excursion fares for one-way travel.
Point-beyond ticketing---use of a fare published for travel to a point beyond your actual intended destination or from a point before your actual intended origin.
In such cases where there is a violation of our Contract of Carriage, we reserve the right to:


Cancel the remainder of the itinerary and confiscate any unused flight coupons.
Refuse to board the passenger or check baggage.
Charge the passenger for the difference between the fare paid and the fare for the passenger's traveled itinerary. "


Carriers -- as declared in the last sentence above -- have been known to CHARGE passengers for the actual route travelled (as differentiated from the TICKETED route.) I remember reading about cases of this happening many years ago when I was a working travel agent. It was rather rare but it DID happen.

For a r/t ticket such as you are suggesting (LAX-CDG-LHR-CDG-LAX) you could pretty much be guaranteed that ALL legs of the journey beyond the one that the passenger NO-SHOWED (CDG-LHR) would be cancelled. One-way tickets are therefore "easier" to try to get away with this sort of thing but usually the fare differences are not as great; and it is STILL prohibited.

For US domestic travel, this caused inconvenience at the least. With international travel, it is much more complicated as you have passport control, as well as potential security issues, to deal with. You are actually changing from "transit" passenger status (in your case, at CDG) to a "local" passenger (arriving at the airport, deplaning, and leaving the airport) possibly without the correct paper-work or authorization! (Obviously in the case of Paris and London, there probably would not be major problems but imagine trying it under a very high security alert or at some other airports...) When you show up to return home, you can find yourself in large-time trouble (since you technically never arrived there!)

My recommendation to anyone considering trying this: please DON'T!

bb


User currently offlineBrianDromey From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3920 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (6 years 4 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2053 times:

Must your fried fly direct from her city of origin to Paris? If not she might try connecting via an intermediate city. If she is a skyteam frequent flyer it should be possible to fly via AMS on KL/NW or via LHR on DL/AF/NW or CO.

BA would have a multitude of options via LHR as would AA or UA. VS might also be an option. EI via dub or AF via SNN (on DL codeshare) might also be options.

If you know wha city she wants to fly from it would be a lot easier to come up with options for her.

Brian.



Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Are US Carriers Avoiding Canada To Save Money? posted Fri Dec 5 2003 16:53:23 by DCAYOW
How Are Easyjets New Airbuses Going To Save Money? posted Tue Oct 15 2002 23:23:52 by 777kicksass
DL Eliminating Ticket Jackets To Save Costs posted Fri May 2 2008 12:27:53 by Super80
New Idea For Startup Airlines To Make Money posted Thu Apr 10 2008 16:57:13 by Qantas787
Washington Post: Officials Plead To Save IAD Rail posted Thu Jan 24 2008 09:58:07 by DCA-ROCguy
JetBlue To Lose Money In '08? posted Sat Dec 29 2007 21:09:12 by JetBlueAUS
Italy Scrambles To Save Alitalia Auction posted Tue Jul 17 2007 16:55:44 by DeltaDAWG
Musharraf Orders Goverment To Save PIA posted Thu Dec 7 2006 18:50:41 by Jimyvr
Airline Food - Way To Make Money? posted Tue Dec 5 2006 20:05:29 by Jelle
Virgin Atlantic Plan To Save Fuel. posted Tue Dec 5 2006 07:48:53 by Mig21UMD