Disqus - Friends of joaneisenstodt

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:15:45 -0000

Point of fact - Southwest funds actually WERE transferable up until just a few months ago.

Correct me if I am wrong, the way I understood it, the unused amount of non-refundable tickets could be credited back to the payors account. Then the original payor can use the funds to buy another WN ticket for anyone. That changed later to credited back to the passenger's account only.
Refundable tickets were credited back to the original form of payment.

In either case, the money from Mr. Travia's unused ticket would either go back to his SWA account or his credit card since he was both the payor and the passenger. You make it sound like a Southwest ticket was as good as cash. I don't think Southwest tickets are finders keepers. Maybe I'm wrong.

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:24:32 -0000

Sara, the opposite of what you are saying is true for UA and others. One of the major advantages of an e-ticket is that you can't lose it.

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:28:41 -0000

Sara, until June 29, 2011, SouthwestVacations was issuing PAPER documents on WN according to their website. On June 30, they moved to issuing ELECTRONIC documents.

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:22:48 -0000

Why I don't think this is fair.

If a passenger buys a ticket from Southewest, he is allowed credit on the unused portion of his ticket. Depending on the type of fare, the credit can be a refund of money back to the payor's original form of payment (i.e. credit card) or an amount to the passenger's Southwest account that can be later used to buy new tickets.

The problem is that rights of the passenger is different if Southwest issues a ticketless ticket or a paper ticket. Since a passenger cannot lose a ticketless ticket then his rights to a refund or credit is preserved no matter until the ticket is used or expires. A refund could be requested at any time for as long as the ticketless ticket was not expired.

On the other hand, a paper ticket can get lost and the passenger is SOL (according to the most recent Contract of Carriage). In the case of the OP (Mr. Travia), he was asked to wait one year before he could request a refund.

Questions:
Why couldn't Southwest provide a ticketless ticket to anybody who is buying a ticket?
Why did it sell the OP a paper-ticket? Did he specifically ask for a paper ticket?
Southwest had been issuing tickeless ticket since 1995 and has been proud of the fact that they were one of (if not) the first major airlines to do e-ticketing. So why give the OP old style paper tickets?

So what are modern paper tickets anyway?
In the old days, paper tickets were used as traffic documents. It was not only a proof that the passenger paid for the flight listed on the ticket, but it (the coupon) was also lifted by the airline and submitted to the payment settlement company (ARC) so the airline can collect its money. So the physical coupons had value. You needed to return the coupon or file a Lost Ticket Indemnity (LTI) Form to process a refund.
E-ticketing changed all this. While you can still get a paper ticket today (you usually pay extra to get it), the paper ticket itself is really just an image of the Electronic Record. The ticket is not used to exchange documents or collect money from ARC the settlement company. Today, the airline gets the money from ARC about a day after the eticket is issued. In the case of Southwest which sold the ticket directly to the passenger, they got their money immediately since there is no ARC settlement at all. Southwest had the OP's money all the time. There was nothing to settle.

Please note that if you buy a WN ticket online you get a 13 digit e-ticket number starting with Southwest 526 IATA accounting code. So I am going to assume WN issues e-tickets and therefore has an eticket database.

Could the lost paper ticket be used by anyone or by Mr. Travia himself had Southwest given him a refund earlier?

By anyone other than Mr. Travia - NO, because after 9/11, positive ID is required to check in and print a boarding pass. Furthermore, tickets are NON-Transferable.
I don't suppose anyone with his ticket can just show up and use it at anytime especially after the scheduled departure date. Also, why would WN reissue tickets to a different passenger name - that does not make sense.

By Mr. Travia himself - NOT UNLESS WN does not query or check their e-ticket database before checking-in a passenger. Besides, even a paper ticket's coupons have the date, origin, destination, flight numbers and class on them. Probably even has an endorsement VOID for travel BEFORE and AFTER dates.

What I am saying is that Southwest probably had an ELECTRONIC RECORD of his paper ticket and it could have found his records using his name, flight date and numbers, and even his credit card. They could have changed the status of his e-ticket to SUSPEND or something like that so it cannot be used. Note you can only check-in if your e-ticket status is OPEN FOR USE. So why make the passenger wait one year before he can even FILE or REQUEST A REFUND?

The only thing that makes sense to me why this happened was that Southwest ticketing at the airport could not issue e-tickets. If this was true, then Southwest effectively sold two types of tickets - e-tickets online and crappy paper tickets in the airports. If so, then Mr. Travia got a lousy deal because the refund service options associated with his ticket was lousier than that of an e-ticket. Did they disclose this pertinent fact to him before he bought the ticket?

In my opinion, the OP was handed a lousy deal. Legal yes.

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:39:57 -0000

By transferable do you mean REFUND TO PAYOR THEN REISSUE TO DIFFERENT PAX? Or did you mean the BEARER of the ticket could exchange it to any pax?

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:48:55 -0000

maybe their revenue accounting is just slooooow or asleep. Read this...
http://www.airliners.net/av...

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 23:00:38 -0000

Chris, are you sure the OP actually received a paper ticket - meaning all the flight coupons are on ATB documents? Or the OP got his eticket receipt ONLY printed on ATB stock. It is hard to believe a paper ticket was issued in 2008. Maybe he just got confused because if you bought a ticket in the airport counter, the receipt could be printed on the same ATB stock used for paper tickets. Maybe he lost his e-ticket receipt, then called Southwest and misinformed the agent saying he had paper tickets. So the agent told him he had to wait till the paper tickets expired.

I can't figure out why anyone would be issued a paper ticket unless you asked for one. Issuing an eticket is cheaper and easier. I haven't seen a paper ticket in ages. Am I missing something?

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 23:08:25 -0000

Actually the current Southwest COCs says for LOST paper tickets NO REFUNDS, period. That said, I can't find a reason why anyone would want WN paper tickets.

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 08:27:40 -0000

The paper tickets you are referring to are MANUAL . They are written on Four-Flight Passenger Ticket stock. I am not sure who still uses these manual documents nowadays.

They were mostly replaced with 2 kinds of AUTOMATED documents - TAT and ATB stocks. The ATB stock are still in use since they also function as a Boarding Pass .

Because these documents are used "physically" by the airlines to settle payments then surrender of the actual document is necessary for refunds. The potential for fraud is really very high.

By mid 2008, all International airline members of IATA were mandated to be 100% e-ticketing. The US DOT did not support this and allowed US carriers to continue to use paper tickets.

Southwest (WN) is one the pioneers of e-ticketing in the USA. They had e-ticketing since 1995. WN calls e-tickets - Ticketless Travel Tickets . Remember that since WN does not interline with other carriers, their ticketing and revenue accounting processes are much more simplified compared to airlines that do interlining.

I went to flyertalk last night and read that many posters were shocked that Southwest only sold paper tickets on airport counters. I thought I was dreaming. But a little reading in Tnooz led me to a recent article about Southwest's Achilles heel - their Reservation System.
http://crankyflier.com/2010...
Apparently WN uses a system called SAAS that was salvaged from the Braniff days. Now I understand why they still use paper ticketing at the airport counters. Pretty much a relic from the Flintstones.

Majority of the post here regarding "funds transferability" are referring to Ticketless Travel Tickets . Since unused portions of the e-ticket were simply swapped to e-certs then they were transferable until the end of 2010. That not true for paper tickets. They are completely separate and different from Unused Ticketless Travel Tickets and Ticketless Travel Funds (excess from partially used ticketless tickets). Paper Tickets were nontransferable. The passenger needs to surrender the paper ticket to get a refund to the original form of payment.

Bottom line is this - if you buy a Southwest ticket at the counter make sure you know the limitations of a paper ticket. It ain't like the ticketless tickets we're familiar with from the Southwest website. Sorry for the OP's loss but at least now we know. Use the website!

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:02:36 -0000

Teresa, you are talking about ticketless funds .
The OP had paper tickets . The refund from paper tickets cannot be moved to ticketless funds. They are in separate planets as far as Southwest is concerned.

The trading shenanigans you describe as seen on ebay, craigslist, etc., is done ONLINE with ticketless funds.
They are also done on RR awards.

For paper ticket exchanges/refunds it is a different ball game. Whoever has the ticket needs to go to a ticket counter and exchange the unused portion of the ticket. But as far as I *read* (from flyertalk) the actual passenger must come in an do the exchange. In fact, some of the posts complain about kids not able to use (exchange) their parent's (same family name) unused PAPER tickets.

For refunds of LOST paper tickets, you need to send in the paper ticket and wait one year from the date of issue. (This is exactly the predicament of the OP.)

Finally - The question is whether LOST AND FOUND PAPER TICKETS is as good as CASH? From what I can see the answer is NO. Why? Because the correct passenger needs to comes in (airport counter) with the ticket.

So am I missing something here?

Re: Don’t wait too long to ask Southwest Airlines for a refund

TonyA_says — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:09:21 -0000

Yes (apples and oranges) Legacy vs Southwest is not the same since Legacies INTERLINE. In other words, they are TRUE E-TICKETING that need links between carriers.

My question is the PAPER TIX of Southwest and at what point did they stop being transferable. I see posts since 2004 in flyertalk saying it wasn't transferable then. So if the OP bought paper tix in 2008, and they were not transferable then why wait 1 year for refunds?

The reason (answering my own question) is the OP himself could re-use his so-called paper ticket if he found it. That was the problem.

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 09:14:26 -0000

I am all for rules that require a consumer is informed the real and full cost s/he would have to pay for service before a purchase. That said, should an airline not provide free baggage, boarding pass printing, water, or other items or services which a passenger could reasonably need or have been historically receiving, then the charges for such service and items should be displayed to the customer before s/he purchases a ticket. There is a huge difference between requiring transparency and a slippery slide back to airline re-regulation. But I believe the government except for genuine safety reasons should butt out of telling airlines how they need to run their business, since the government itself is too undisciplined to run its own. [Sen. Landrieu- remember hurricane Katrina and the BP Deepwater Horizon oil disaster the Gulf?]

I also find the fines that airlines are required to pay (i.e. tarmac delay) very dis-ingeniousness because they do not go to the victims . The government should change that to mandatory compensation to passengers. They are the ones who suffered, not the government.

The concept of forcing airlines to provide reasonable care for passenger is excellent. IMO charging for baggage is a pricing issue. Losing, breaking, pilfering, and delaying my checked luggage is a care issue. By forcing an airline to pay compensation to passengers if they do not deliver their part of the bargain, then the deal is more even handed and just.

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 11:51:32 -0000

Maybe Sen. Landrieu should change her bill to protect American jobs by requiring US carriers to have only call centers in the USA. I'd vote for that. If I want to travel to India then I will call an Indian Travel Center. Otherwise let's keep it local.

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 12:04:36 -0000

That's a clear example of a government that can't fix its own problems. So, how can it fix other people's problems? A lot of people bad mouth Spirit Airlines on how it nickle and dimes travelers yet that airline is alive and well. Why? because people really vote with their pocketbooks. If you don't like the service of an airline don't fly it. But people must ALWAYS get what they paid for.

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 15:09:38 -0000

MeanMosh, I don't know why Southwest can do it. My family can get 2 bags free and pay essentially the same or lower fares from NYC to most US cities we go to. When we need to change our dates, we call Southwest and always get what sounds like a call center agent in the USA (I assume a Southwest employee). They don't charge a penalty fee.

I checked the wage rates of SWA and they are one of the best in the industry. So if Southwest can offer 2 bags free, low fares, no change penalty and US bases call centers, why can't others?

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:55:46 -0000

Their pilots are with SWAPA , and their attendants with TWU 556, correct? And they are paid in the upper scale of the industry. So this whole whole outsourcing justification by other airlines is plain BS.

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 20:11:41 -0000

People cannot afford any more fare increases. The airlines know that. 99.99% of calls to our office starts with "What is the cheapest fare from X to Y"? People have the option to fly Southwest with 2 bags, and JetBlue with 1 bag free. What's the point of forcing the others to be nice?

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 20:13:51 -0000

It's like forcing 5 guys to include fries with the burgers for free.

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 20:23:10 -0000

Rebecca, it's really not so much where the call center people are from but it's that the airlines do not train their foreign outsourced workers as much as they do their own. I also wouldn't be surprised if they pay low wages in India or wherever. If they only select and train those people better and empower them to solve problems without needing a supervisor all the time then I could not care less what accent they have.

Re: Do travelers need new federal protections?

TonyA_says — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 23:21:30 -0000

The point I'm trying to make is that most people don't have the money to shop by any other factor except price. So anything the government will do that will result to fare increases won't be welcomed.

Re: A Sandals Caribbean honeymoon that makes her wish she’d eloped

TonyA_says — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:23:13 -0000

I still owe my wife that grand honeymoon. We spent all our money to make that 10% down payment on our first home. I bet the OP spent a fortune in one of these over-hyped resorts. Hope she get something back for her misery. I hope there is a lesson learned here.

Re: A Sandals Caribbean honeymoon that makes her wish she’d eloped

TonyA_says — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:56:17 -0000

If you can afford it then why not rent a whole tropical island surrounded by a coral-reef and have food prepared by a Swiss chef. They are taking reservations here
http://ariaraisland.com/ind...

Re: A Sandals Caribbean honeymoon that makes her wish she’d eloped

TonyA_says — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 15:06:25 -0000

May we know why you kept on coming back (3 times)?

Re: A Sandals Caribbean honeymoon that makes her wish she’d eloped

TonyA_says — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:57:01 -0000

Agree. I don't why it is that hard to fix a plumbing issue or why they
just didn't move the couple to another room. But I have to believe that
some hotels really don't care and will try to pull a fast one. Last
Christmas we were in Granada (Spain) and my kid's room did not have hot
water. After I complained I found out that the hotel management knew the
problem for quite a while but they did not fix it due to the "economic
downturns besetting Europe". Yup, that's what they told me. I explained
to them that we're Americans and we also have our own share of economic problems but hot water is not one of them. They quickly moved my kids to another room.

Re: My hotel promised a refund, but my travel agency refused

TonyA_says — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:54:40 -0000

From their About Us page:
Otel dot com is an operating company of Met Global and is a member of ASTA.

They are also an exhibitor in ASTA's International Destination Expo
Met Global LLC
Booth Number: C24
Metglobal.com is one of the major global wholesalers of hotels and
travel services and we use our vast inventory of travel products to
supply travel agencies, tour operators and other travel businesses and
also to power B2C & B2B websites.

Looks like they are a Turkish owned company with a large "English-speaking" call center in the Philippines. Probably has a token office in the fashion district in Manhattan and registered as a Delaware corporation through an agent.

According to its own website MetGlobal has many other operating company brands:
HotelsProDHR dotcomOtel dotcomTatil dotcomAllStarHotels dotcomHotelStore dotcomMetGlobal Tech

HotelsPro has logos of ASTA, CLIA, IATA, ETOA prominently displayed on its website.

My conclusion - when they sell direct to the traveler then they acting as a travel agency (on behalf of the hotel). When they sell to other travel agencies then they are a travel supplier.

Does ASTA have a required minimum standard of honor for its members?