Qantas Club vs. Status Club - should a purchased membership have any status?

[medhead]

Contacted Qantas re obtaining a pro-rata refund based on the above T&C's (thanks to Medhead for pointing out the clause).

I then asked for the reasons on the rejection to be sent by e-mail / post so that I can take it further.

If you do take it further then I would suggest making sure that you match the wording in condition 4.4. The key words being "your intended use" and "significantly deprive". So you need to be repeating that back to them in claiming the refund. Sounds like they also have a problem realising that the changes are taking affect, so you will probably be best referring to the email notice they sent and any website links. I would also detail all the changes that significantly deprive you if you intended use. So that is priority checkin and extra luggage allowance, iirc. When mentioning luggage remember it may not just be weight but also number of bags.

The might try to say that NGCI makes up for priority checkin with the post swipe thing. But it does seem that QC members will have to pay for the bag tags hence IMO effectively removing any priority related to NGCI.

I can't remember if you have lifetime QC but personally if I had Lifetime QC I would be keeping it because it was very good value. I'll leave that to you, but I would advise caution as lifetime no longer exists.

 

[Stafman]

If you do take it further then I would suggest making sure that you match the wording in condition 4.4. The key words being "your intended use" and "significantly deprive". So you need to be repeating that back to them in claiming the refund. Sounds like they also have a problem realising that the changes are taking affect, so you will probably be best referring to the email notice they sent and any website links. I would also detail all the changes that significantly deprive you if you intended use. So that is priority checkin and extra luggage allowance, iirc. When mentioning luggage remember it may not just be weight but also number of bags.

The might try to say that NGCI makes up for priority checkin with the post swipe thing. But it does seem that QC members will have to pay for the bag tags hence IMO effectively removing any priority related to NGCI.

I can't remember if you have lifetime QC but personally if I had Lifetime QC I would be keeping it because it was very good value. I'll leave that to you, but I would advise caution as lifetime no longer exists.

No Not lifetime. Annual membership although 2 years was paid upfront. Still 12 months left.

Over the phone, they said the NGCI makes up for it, but as you say, QC members have to pay for tags.

Have since had another call after I asked for their rejection in writing. They now are asking me to send my card to their office before they will consider offering a refund.

I wanted to clarify that it means they will issue a refund by sending the card to them, and they said no, they will not consider a refund request unless they already have the card.

So card is in the mail to them (i may have used my employers stamp...), with letter stating its on expectation of refund due to clause 4.4 and the deprivation of my intended use.

For some reason, I can see myself getting screwed on this one. No card, no membership and no refund. Lets see where this goes.

 

[flychrisfly]

I haven't received an email detailing the QC changes! I purchased QC Life membership just before it was removed from sale and am currently Gold but expecting this to drop to Silver in April.

I originally purchased Lifetime membership in part for the lounge access but the other perks are a godsend. Bypassing the Y checkin queues at Easter is almost worth the membership fee in itself. Having priority baggage is brilliant too - simply so that you can get out of the airport fast and start or end the trip ASAP.

Having not seen the email I am unsure of the details but from this thread it appears I'm going to be disappointed and annoyed, and will certainly be contacting Qantas to request a refund. Alternatively, LifeTimeGold would keep me happy

 

[Stafman]

I originally purchased Lifetime membership in part for the lounge access but the other perks are a godsend. Bypassing the Y checkin queues at Easter is almost worth the membership fee in itself. Having priority baggage is brilliant too - simply so that you can get out of the airport fast and start or end the trip ASAP.

Having not seen the email I am unsure of the details but from this thread it appears I'm going to be disappointed and annoyed, and will certainly be contacting Qantas to request a refund. Alternatively, LifeTimeGold would keep me happy

I with Medhead re lifetime membership. There is still value in keeping that. Term's & Conditions may change in the future. And lifetime membership is just that. If you live and travel for another 30 years, then definitely retains value. My problem is, that mine expires in 12 months and what i paid for just last year is being taken away from me.

 

[medhead]

For some reason, I can see myself getting screwed on this one. No card, no membership and no refund. Lets see where this goes.

I would have suggested registered post so that you have proof they received it. Might need a contact name to do that - perhaps Alan Joyce if you have no other name

 

[Stafman]

I would have suggested registered post so that you have proof they received it. Might need a contact name to do that - perhaps Alan Joyce if you have no other name

Thought about registered post but decided against for 2 reasons.
1. I beleive you need a physical address for registered post. GPO box isnt sufficient.
2. I fly to Mexico/USA tomorrow and wont have a chance to get to post office this afternoon (flying DL mainly. Only 1 leg on itinery with AA, and they dont have a lounge at the departure point. And the stopover in DFW is only for 1 hour. Can go without lounge access for that time.)

So wanted to get the ball rolling so i can get the refund pro-rata as of today.

 

[oz_mark]

Maybe Qantas should have offered Priority Check In as a service you could buy:shock:

 

[Stafman]

Maybe Qantas should have offered Priority Check In as a service you could buy:shock:

They did. it was called Qantas Club. For some of us, purchasing the priority service came with complimentary lounge access.

 

[oz_mark]

They did. it was called Qantas Club. For some of us, purchasing the priority service came with complimentary lounge access.

I wonder, though, if Qantas realised people were buying memberships for the primary purpose of getting the priority service? I guess they are finding out now!

 

[medhead]

I wonder, though, if Qantas realised people were buying memberships for the primary purpose of getting the priority service? I guess they are finding out now!

That's a very good question, I guess the response that Stafman initially had suggests they didn't see priority service as important to people especially with the removal. The call back might also suggest that the higher up that would have written the reply has had a lightbulb moment. As the words in the T&C refer to "intended" use then whoever wrote that condition probably thought it was a possibility that people would get the membership for priority service.

 

[reductionist]

They did. it was called Qantas Club. For some of us, purchasing the priority service came with complimentary lounge access.

Exactly this.

I'm compiling a sternly worded email to QF about this. I don't intend on renewing my QC membership due to these changes.

Seriously, the QP lounge isn't that good.

 

[coco50]

I disagree with the proposition put forward by the OP. When Ansett died I was on the top tier of the Golden Wing Lounge by virtue of work travel and had never flown Qantas. I then joined QFF and by March 2002 (ie 6 months after I joined the QFF program I had risen to SG. A couple of months later I had become a WP - a status I held until just after I retired in 2007. As my status slipped because of flying less frequently I decided to join the QP on a 4 year membership which hurt for a superannuee - but indicates that I prize my membership of the QP and adhere to the rules of the club - probably far more than many who got there just by status - because work paid for the travel. Many "freeloaedrs do not realise what a benefit they have been given - just because of status. I recognise that there are many QP members who are there because of status gains and do appreciate their membership - but many don't. So don't tell me that just because I pay for membership now that I should be inferior to a "freebie" and don't just give me the glib reply: "you should fly more" - what an insult!!!:evil:

 

[munitalP]

For what started as a very tongue in cheek open statement to perk up an otherwise dull conversation day, this thread has turned into a real conversation piece. What is apparent and is now very obvious, the number of paid QC memberships and the value placed upon them.

What is also very apparent, is 1/3 of the readers of this thread agree with the original statement.

For the benefit of a few, there is no malice mention or intended with the original post, so there's no need to get angry or offended.

Me and thewinchester are now off to smoke some ragwort...

Joke

 

[medhead]

The most interesting point was being reminded that munitalP is Platinum in reverse. I recall that being mentioned a while ago.

I've been going along thinking it was an IT term - a munita IP, and wondering what type of IP address was munita? Of course, I've also been slipping in an extra 'l' and pronouncing it as munital IP, which sounds better but still I clearly wasn't giving it much thought.

 

[mannej]

This has been a good thread. Although I may not agree with Mr! I think it provides food for thought in regards to the direction the QFFP may be heading.

I called QF asking about QP members and the baggage tags, which I was told it would be included in the membership kit. Nice Surprise I got when the membership kit stated that I would have to purchase them. Thought I'd pop a certain QF staff member a PM, (although holidays may be the cause here), I've yet to get a response. Very frustrating.:evil:

 

[tuapekastar]

For what started as a very tongue in cheek open statement to perk up an otherwise dull conversation day, this thread has turned into a real conversation piece. What is apparent and is now very obvious, the number of paid QC memberships and the value placed upon them.

What is also very apparent, is 1/3 of the readers of this thread agree with the original statement.

For the benefit of a few, there is no malice mention or intended with the original post, so there's no need to get angry or offended.

Me and thewinchester are now off to smoke some ragwort...

Joke

I suspected a mischievous bit of pot-stirring when I read the OP (but thought I would reply anyway).

I will dispute your maths however. Going on the poll results it's 1/4 in agreement.

 

[oz_mark]

I will dispute your maths however. Going on the poll results it's 1/4 in agreement.

That's why engineers have their work checked

 

[serfty]

...
What is also very apparent, is 1/3 of the readers of this thread agree with the original statement. ...

... I will dispute your maths however. Going on the poll results it's 1/4 in agreement.

That's why engineers have their work checked

Hmmmm ....

I don't know if munitalP has been to CBR lately but certainly a case of advertorial/political "SPIN" is apparent with that statement.

Of course 25% is one third of 75% ...

 

[munitalP]

Hmmmm ....

I don't know if munitalP has been to CBR lately but certainly a case of advertorial/political "SPIN" is apparent with that statement.

Of course 25% is one third of 75% ...

yes, and we all know that 86.734% of all statistics are made up on the spot

 

[UP4014]

I suspected a mischievous bit of pot-stirring when I read the OP (but thought I would reply anyway).

I will dispute your maths however. Going on the poll results it's 1/4 in agreement.

Yes, meaning 3/4 disagree.