Mel-lax oct/nov rt from $444 us qantas

[juddles]

The accidental transfer of money into your account is not contractual. The purchase of an airline ticket is. The basic premise is that people should be held to agreements they make.

Sorry but I disagree. Noone in Qantas willingly entered any agreement to sell fares at this price. It was an error.

Just because a company is "big", IMHO does not justify trying to force them to honour an error in pricing that is clearly and incontrovertibly bad for them. I wouldn't do it to a kid selling lemonade, so why would I want to do it to Qantas?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Sorry but I disagree. Noone in Qantas willingly entered any agreement to sell fares at this price. It was an error.

Just because a company is "big", IMHO does not justify trying to force them to honour an error in pricing that is clearly and incontrovertibly bad for them. I wouldn't do it to a kid selling lemonade, so why would I want to do it to Qantas?

There is no suggestion the size of the company makes any difference. The basic premise of the law remains the same... that people should be held to the agreements (ie contracts) they make.

There are all sorts of principles that feed in to and fall out of that... and it really depends which angle QF is looking at here. I can't even find QF ticketing conditions regarding mistake or error fares. There may be something in there that allows them to cancel. Or they they may try to argue mistake. But there rules around mistake are also somewhat complex, and will turn on the facts of the case. It's not as simple as saying 'I made a mistake'.

This is not a case where blogs had big messages telling readers to 'not call the airline'. In fact plenty of people did just that. They questioned the validity of the far on facebook, and Qantas responded saying they wouldn't comment (but didn't pull the fare). At least one other tweeted they had purchased these fares and Qantas responded along the lines of 'great! see you on board'. The thread was on AFF from ~530am.

Is the alleged mistake so obvious that it would be clear to anyone that it was an error? The fare is a couple of hundred dollars lower than UA's past offerings, and slightly less than NZ's offerings. It comes at a time of year when airlines such as Virgin and Jetstar are offering end-of-financial-year sales. VA was offering 35% off. Qantas was advertising the lowering of fuel surcharges, and fuel is (was until recently) at it's lowest level in years.

It's a complex issue, and rarely straight forward. But nothing to do with the size of the company.

 

[moa999]

Did this offer make ozbargain??

May explain why there were 150+ guests viewing the thread yesterday, and still around 40 today

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Did this offer make ozbargain??

May explain why there were 150+ guests viewing the thread yesterday, and still around 40 today

yeah.. it was on there... and there was a reference to AFF (with a link I think).

 

[Steady]

Did this offer make ozbargain??

May explain why there were 150+ guests viewing the thread yesterday, and still around 40 today

I noticed it get up to 254 viewing about an hour before Cool Cat Phil's post - only 40 odd were members

 

[moa999]

Think I found the OzBargain thread.

Shows 8682 click thrus to priceline.com (at the top)
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/200992
- Even if only a 10% booking rate, that is a lot of bookings.

as well as a bunch of other mentions in the comments about other agents.

--
Mashable article which credits hopper with the find (don't know how true this is)
Qantas glitch causes cheap-as-chips flights from Australia to Los Angeles
Breaking Fare Sale from Qantas is Selling Tickets to LA for as Low as AU$577 Return - Hopper

 

[wjohn]

This all happened because of one thing - time difference - on 01JUL AU time, the new fares took over, and the old fares had an expiry of 30JUN. When the new fares were rolled out, US based OTA were all still correcty publicising the fare levels as they were within the booking date range. The issue then comes when booking, the OTA verified the fare (check) and queried the airline for current taxes (check) - though these taxes were indeed post fuel tax being migrated over to the fare component, and hence way way lower. The way i read it they were always screwed for that 14 hour time difference, and should honor the ticketed fares. (Yes i am a TA, and was aware of the fuel fine migration on 01JUL, but also gave them clearly undue credit for what they should have been on top of - and avoided this sh**storm)

Just my 2c.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

This all happened because of one thing - time difference - on 01JUL AU time, the new fares took over, and the old fares had an expiry of 30JUN. When the new fares were rolled out, US based OTA were all still correcty publicising the fare levels as they were within the booking date range. The issue then comes when booking, the OTA verified the fare (check) and queried the airline for current taxes (check) - though these taxes were indeed post fuel tax being migrated over to the fare component, and hence way way lower. The way i read it they were always screwed for that 14 hour time difference, and should honor the ticketed fares. (Yes i am a TA, and was aware of the fuel fine migration on 01JUL, but also gave them clearly undue credit for what they should have been on top of - and avoided this sh**storm)

Just my 2c.

And I think for that reason anyone with one of these fares should file with the DOT in the event they are cancelled. It will then be for the DOT to decide (a) if it will exercise it's jurisdiction in this case and (b) ask for clarification around the mistake element.

For anyone who has purchased reasonable non-refundable expenses (hotels and/or connecting flights), these may be covered, provided they were purchased before the time QF advised these were offered in error.

 

[moa999]

For anyone who has purchased reasonable non-refundable expenses (hotels and/or connecting flights), these may be covered, provided they were purchased before the time QF advised these were offered in error.

And QF has still not directly advised anyone afaik

 

[adelee]

And QF has still not directly advised anyone afaik

Perhaps it's time for Red Roo to provide definitive clarification on the status of these fares? From Qantas's posts regarding these fares on social media (various twitter and facebook posts, as well as what was briefly said here yesterday) it seems like there is / has been confusion within the ranks?

 

[ozpete]

...it seems like there is / has been confusion within the ranks?

I am sure that wont help them when it comes to not at least coughing up any extra costs.

 

[smit0847]

Perhaps it's time for Red Roo to provide definitive clarification on the status of these fares? From Qantas's posts regarding these fares on social media (various twitter and facebook posts, as well as what was briefly said here yesterday) it seems like there is / has been confusion within the ranks?

I'm not sure even QF know exactly what they're doing about it yet. I wouldn't be surprised if AJ is in a meeting discussing this right now. QF won't want to waste anymore time on the decision than necessary but they have to either decide to wear a huge financial loss, or a huge reputational loss. Not an easy decision.

If the original deal made headlines on mainstream blogs/social media, wait until you see what happens if QF suddenly cancel hundreds, if not thousands of fares. I'd be willing to bet that some Average Joes who don't know what mistake fares are have already booked non-refundable holiday things like accomodation but also haven't booked any travel insurance yet. The fallout is going to be huge.

 

[adelee]

I'm not sure even QF know exactly what they're doing about it yet. .

Which makes it all the more interesting that Red Roo came out yesterday on the record to state the fare prices were incorrect, and that 'affected bookings would be followed up'. This, at the same time the Qantas Facebook team were following up queries about these fares with the line "We can't comment on third party fares. Please contact <external travel booking website> directly with any queries".

Very curious indeed.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I'd be willing to bet that some Average Joes who don't know what mistake fares are have already booked non-refundable holiday things like accomodation but also haven't booked any travel insurance yet. The fallout is going to be huge.

This is where DOT protection will really come in handy.

 

[smit0847]

This is where DOT protection will really come in handy.

Not so much anymore! DOT No Longer Requiring Airlines To Honor Mistake Fares - One Mile at a Time

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Not so much anymore! DOT No Longer Requiring Airlines To Honor Mistake Fares - One Mile at a Time

Yes - but there are conditions on that, and both must be satisfied: (a) the airline must prove it was a mistake, and (b) if the airline can satisfy that requirement, the airline must agree to reimburse passengers for any reasonable expenses incurred as a reliance on the 'mistake' tickets.

So any non-refundable hotels or connecting flights which had reasonably been booked before QF notified they thought the fare might be in error, may be able to be covered.

 

[Alanslegal]

Yes - but there are conditions on that, and both must be satisfied: (a) the airline must prove it was a mistake, and (b) if the airline can satisfy that requirement, the airline must agree to reimburse passengers for any reasonable expenses incurred as a reliance on the 'mistake' tickets.

So any non-refundable hotels or connecting flights which had reasonably been booked before QF notified they thought the fare might be in error, may be able to be covered.

And it's also been mooted that if someone books a non refundable suite at a swish hotel for a week, it would be cheaper for the airline to allow the flights than to reimburse a few thousand on a hotel.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

I'd be willing to bet that some Average Joes who don't know what mistake fares are have already booked non-refundable holiday things like accomodation but also haven't booked any travel insurance yet. The fallout is going to be huge.

I doubt any travel insurance company will refund cancellation fees for other non-refundable arrangements made (but no longer required if fare not honoured) just because the airline mistakenly didn't charge a YQ surcharge.

Which makes it all the more interesting that Red Roo came out yesterday on the record to state the fare prices were incorrect, and that 'affected bookings would be followed up'.

This, at the same time the Qantas Facebook team were following up queries about these fares with the line "We can't comment on third party fares. Please contact directly with any queries".

Very curious indeed.

Has anyone actually had any communication with any of the third party sites aka OTA's as to the validity of the booking?

I imagine companies like Priceline etc would be putting a lot of pressure on the airline to honour their bookings otherwise they are going to look bad too.

 

[Princess Fiona]

And QF has still not directly advised anyone afaik

FWIW a P1 on my Facebook group has posted that they have been advised directly by QF that the fare has been cancelled.

 

[smit0847]

FWIW a P1 on my Facebook group has posted that they have been advised directly by QF that the fare has been cancelled.

5, 4, 3, 2, 1.............