New type of ticketing problem - same QF response

[MrJetset]

By your own admission, this is a case of denied boarding.

-RooFlyer88

Once again you are wrong and misquote me. You don’t understand the definition of denied boarding.

I’m invoking the ignore function which I have never done on AFF before. You continue to fill post after post with your opinions not grounded in fact, false information and useless threads wasting everyone’s time.

 

[serfty]

I've seen this on my EK-operated, QF-marketed bookings in QF MMB for at least a couple of years now.

Fair enough - I don't believe I have had one of those since maybe 2016 ...

 

[RichardMEL]

I think the post infamous one was Tom Price to Paraburdoo or vv
It was on AFF well before my time I think.

Indeed. Hence the infamous "Don't mention the b*s" mantra...
I remember those days

#old

 

[serfty]

I don’t believe EU261 would apply in that situation? Eu261 is enforceable against the operating carrier. In this case it isn’t their fault the ticket wasn’t issued, and hence lack of reservation? The original schedule change would be subject to EU261, but not the failure of a third party to ticket.

That's correct.

And to be clear regarding necessity for initial ticketing, check the following parts of the document linked herein:

• Article 3, Section 2(a)
• Article 2, Section (g)
• Article 2, Section (f)

In relation to to the cancellation reference in Article 3, Section 2(a) , a departure time more than one hour earlier or a destination arrival time more than three hours later than initially ticketed is considered a cancellation.

Regulation - 261/2004 - EN - Flight Compensation Regulation - EUR-Lex

eur-lex.europa.eu

 

[RichardMEL]

I too don't see how the bus segment (EK700x) couldn't be ticketed. I wonder if the original agent who advised this was in error? As far as QF's system is concerned it's a bookable "flight" so.... it doesn't make sense.

Also I don't see where "denied boarding" comes into it.

1. Not ticketed
2. Not day of departure (and not ticketed, so no flight to be denied boarding from)

just some weird assertions there imo.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I too don't see how the bus segment (EK700x) couldn't be ticketed. I wonder if the original agent who advised this was in error? As far as QF's system is concerned it's a bookable "flight" so.... it doesn't make sense.

Also I don't see where "denied boarding" comes into it.

1. Not ticketed
2. Not day of departure (and not ticketed, so no flight to be denied boarding from)

just some weird assertions there imo.

I think it could probably be ticketed for a revenue ticket, maybe that somehow carried across to the booking engine results for an award? Maybe Hobart could ticket it, but a four-digit codeshare is likely to throw up automatic ticketing problems I guess (usually not allowed).

 

[RichardMEL]

I think it could probably be ticketed for a revenue ticket, maybe that somehow carried across to the booking engine results for an award? Maybe Hobart could ticket it, but a four-digit codeshare is likely to throw up automatic ticketing problems I guess (usually not allowed).

I could see that if it considers EK7xx_ series (for example) as being operated by a partner of the partner (in this case, it probably is, but it also says"EK Bus station" or whatever, so sounds like it's probably owned). I do see how that may be a limitation, but as dodgy as the online booking system is it seems to me that it wouldn't even show the option in the first place.

I mean computers only do what they're told and obey the rules, as they know them, to the letter.

in this case it's clearly a ground transportation option offered by EK for its pax to AUH - not like they are code sharing on EY (lol) or something.


I still reckon the original agent was probably in error, or assumed something.

just imo

 

[Subharpoon]

Once again you are wrong and misquote me. You don’t understand the definition of denied boarding.

I’m invoking the ignore function which I have never done on AFF before. You continue to fill post after post with your opinions not grounded in fact, false information and useless threads wasting everyone’s time.

I did it months ago!

 

[Feech La Manna]

That's correct.

And to be clear regarding necessity for initial ticketing, check the following parts of the document linked herein:

• Article 3, Section 2(a)
• Article 2, Section (g)
• Article 2, Section (f)

In relation to to the cancellation reference in Article 3, Section 2(a) , a departure time more than one hour earlier or a destination arrival time more than three hours later than initially ticketed is considered a cancellation.

Regulation - 261/2004 - EN - Flight Compensation Regulation - EUR-Lex

eur-lex.europa.eu

Those Articles define reservation as :

""reservation" means the fact that the passenger has a ticket, or other proof, which indicates that the reservation has been accepted and registered by the air carrier or tour operator"

"Other proof" could be a itinerary confirmation with booking ref ? Most passengers would accept this as confirmation of their reservation - the intricates of airline ticketing where a ticket number is absolute proof is not generally known (nor should this relic of the industry need to be known by passengers!)

I'm not sure if this has ever been tested though? And in the OPs case, it doesnt seem reasonable that the operating carrier (who is liable under EU261) should be on the hook for a ticketing failure by the agent (QF in this case).

But the strict reading of the legislation doesnt explicitly state that a ticketed reservation is required?

 

[serfty]

But the strict reading of the legislation doesnt explicitly state that a ticketed reservation is required?

I understand, but section 2(f) makes that a rather high bar.

"ticket" means a valid document giving entitlement to transport, or something equivalent in paperless form, including electronic form, issued or authorised by the air carrier or its authorised agent;

 

[CaptJCool]

Here’s an example of a seamless connection that actually works as expected

Trip connections with Landline − Travel information − American Airlines

www.aa.com

 

[Feech La Manna]

I understand, but section 2(f) makes that a rather high bar.

Yes true, as far as "ticket" goes but "or other proof" makes it a somewhat lower bar.

I'm surprised this hasnt come up much previously.

 

[RichardMEL]

Here’s an example of a seamless connection that actually works as expected

Trip connections with Landline − Travel information − American Airlines

www.aa.com

I don't think the issue is that the connection at DXB wouldn't work, it's just booking it from QF (and possibly as a reward ticket)

but yes, the AA bus service is (ahem) taking off in those smaller markets where alternates are close in and ground transportation makes sense.

Same with LH and Deutche Bahn in Germany. Pretty sure that's been a thing for quite some time. AF I think has SNCF too?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Yes true, as far as "ticket" goes but "or other proof" makes it a somewhat lower bar.

I'm surprised this hasnt come up much previously.

I guess the fact it hasn’t come up probably indicates it isn’t an issue. Some airlines don’t issue tickets, like Jetstar, and i think they include most low cost carriers such as Easyjet, Ryanair and possibly Wizz Air in Europe.

It might be that an airline has failed to issue a ticket or other evidence of a contract, but the passenger wou,d then be able to show the booking *and* money having gone out of their account to pay for it. In the OP’s case no money went out.

 

[serfty]

I guess the fact it hasn’t come up probably indicates it isn’t an issue. Some airlines don’t issue tickets, like Jetstar, and i think they include most low cost carriers such as Easyjet, Ryanair and possibly Wizz Air in Europe.

With Jetstar you get a confirmation email, With Qantas you get an email confirming an e-ticket.

With either you do not have a confirmed reservation until such is sent by the airline.

 

[Princess Fiona]

With Jetstar you get a confirmation email, With Qantas you get an email confirming an e-ticket.

With either you do not have a confirmed reservation until such is sent by the airline.

Doesn’t the email from QF always have a PDF with the e-ticket number on it ?

I had delays last week with both Award and revenue bookings.
No emails received until eventually ticketed

 

[serfty]

Doesn’t the email from QF always have a PDF with the e-ticket number on it ?

Yes - since the introduction of Qantas e-ticketing* the 081- number is gospel.

Until that e-ticket number is generated there is no confirmed reservation with Qantas,

*In the early days after making a booking online you would receive a letter by post containing your e-ticket number.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

With Jetstar you get a confirmation email, With Qantas you get an email confirming an e-ticket.

With either you do not have a confirmed reservation until such is sent by the airline.

I think in principle that’s right, assuming both are instant.

But in a case where an airline fails to ticket on their own metal/flight I’d say the valid reservation is created as soon as you have the PNR and you have paid, regardless of whether or not the airline sends something. It has to work that way otherwise no one would book an airline if it could put a ticket in a queue, then claim you didn’t have a reservation.

 

[Happy Dude]

So this new ticket escalation service is quite the hero, even if QF shouldn't need it.

Within a day, and on a Saturday no less, I received a ticket (not a reservation or travel document or whatever) confirming our original date and time. Happy with that outcome however we now have to make our own way between DXB and AUH. Not the end of the world but we did like the idea of the surface segment being included, one less thing to pay for and worry about.

It remains a mystery as to why it offered the destination and then couldn't be ticketed. It could be removed from/changed in the system as quickly as it takes to say "Taiwan is not separate country".

Anyway, great recovery but still need to fix the reasons for getting into the mess in the first place. Also glad we don't have to worry about EU261, if applicable. I'm sure @kangarooflyer88 could set up a decent side hustle acting for affected pax

 

[serfty]

It has to work that way otherwise no one would book an airline if it could put a ticket in a queue, then claim you didn’t have a reservation

I suspect common sense would prevail. Generally an e-ticket is issued.

It would be interesting what ticketing processes would be established by Qantas if they were subject to 261/2004 type regulation within Oz.