A couple of lessons here:
Many "air passes" and other non-standard airfare deals do not grant frequent flyer miles on partner airlines, so it's good to double check the rules in writing before you buy;
and second, airpasses may indeed not always be good value compared to buying fares individually.
Here's one consumer's tale of woe where she feels she was shortchanged both on frequent flyer miles and on value. So read and don't make the same mistake:
My husband and I are American Aadvantage frequent flyers. When we contacted Qantas Vacations last June to book travel to Australia from Boston using Qantas's Aussie Airpass, we asked the travel agent whether we'd be able to earn Aadvantage miles by flying on Qantas for this particular trip. The travel agent said yes and collected our frequent flier numbers when making our booking. We paid $4100 for two Airpasses plus a weeklong rental car. In retrospect, this was NOT a deal and we could have done better on our own, as we usually do (we've planned our own trips to Japan, Scandinavia, the Mediterranean, Peru, and Mexico). Qantas Vacations, however, bills themselves as the "Australia" specialists so we figured they could answer our questions with confidence.
We flew to Australia. We flew around Australia. We flew back. Upon our return, I checked our American Airlines account. We were credited for one half of one flight from Boston to Los Angeles. We did not receive a single mile for our flights to and from and around Australia although the Qantas gate agents cheerfully took note of our frequent flier numbers every time we presented them at check-in.
We called American. American informed us that Qantas does not allow American Aadvantage members to earn miles for "Q-coded" flights, which are the flights we were booked on.
We called customer service at Qantas Vacations and informed them that they told us before we bought our tickets that we would earn miles for our flights. They again told us that they believed we were supposed to earn miles. I told them what American told me. Stumped, the friendly customer service representative told me he would try and fix the situation, since Qantas Vacations were the folks who told us we'd get miles for these flights. I also told him I would not have flown Qantas if I wasn't able to earn miles (I would have flown another airline that would at least let us earn 22,000 miles for that long haul!)
By the way, the customer service representative informed me that Qantas Vacations was not part of Qantas Airlines and that they were two separate companies. I pointed him to the following language on their website that stated we'd earn miles for travel on Qantas.
"
QANTAS AIRWAYS is a global carrier with over 200 aircraft offering service to 143 destinations in 36 countries. Qantas now celebrates 53 years of continuous flying between North America and Australia with more non-stop flights to Australia and New Zealand than any other airline.
Experience makes the difference. Qantas offers up to 43 weekly flights departing from New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Honolulu to Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Auckland. Connections are available from most North American cities. Qantas flies to more than 50 Australian domestic and 5 New Zealand cities.
Only Qantas offers the Business Class Skybed sleeper seat on all non-stop transpacific flights to Australia and New Zealand. Inflight, Qantas offers complimentary bar and meal service as well as your own free personal entertainment system in all classes (including quality kids' programming). Earn mileage on the Qantas Frequent Flyer program, or from one of our partners: Alaska, American, Continental and Mexicana Airlines in addition to Qantas' oneworld alliance partners. So come, let Qantas Airways spoil you. You deserve it."
After I sent that email to the customer service representative, I waited to hear back. A few days later, this was the response I received, from another customer service representative:
We also apologize for the problem with your American Advantage account. American's rules prevent the full mileage to be accumulated and that is their decision to make. However, had we advised you of this fact when you presented your membership numbers, at least you would have been aware of the limitations rather than learning about them upon your return.
As a leading tour operator to the region, we offer a wide range of travel products meant to encourage your continuing business. Occasionally we stumble and in this case you were the worse off for our shortcomings. For this, we sincerely apologize.
Respectfully,
Matt Banegas / Customer Service
_____________________________
Matt Banegas
Customer Service
His apology is great and heartfelt I'm sure, but this doesn't fix the problem they created at all. I'm still out $4100 and no miles. Do I have any rights here? At minimum, I think Qantas Vacations should refund us $400, which is 10% of the price we paid for our Airpass and rental car - which I found out later wasn't really a "deal" at all. It is not our fault they don't know the rules for the flights they book and say anything just to make a sale.
Sorry I'm so longwinded and please feel free to edit as you see fit in case you want to publish this. I'm not sure it is an "airfare" issue. I'm just steaming mad and am not sure what to do. Qantas Vacations made a misrepresentation when they sold us the tickets. Qantas blames American. American blames Qantas. I'm sitting here with no miles.
A few weeks ago, Qantas CARGO pleaded guilty in Canadian criminal courts for price-fixing between 2002 and 2006 with its competitors. Qantas has pleaded guilty but has not returned the overcharge to its customers. If you want to sue Qantas Cargo, contact me at jrnazem@nlslr.com.
I feel constrained to refer you to Puzio's The Godfather where there was a conversation between "Sonny" and "Michael" (two of The Don's sons) and some other leaders in "the Family", where they were telling Michael that the shooting of their father by a rival Family was "just Business" and "don't take it so personal".
Michaels' answer was that the reason for the Don's greatness was because it was ALL personal. If someone did such-and-so, it was personal. If GOD had decided to make it rain on his daughter's wedding day, he would have taken it personally.
And it IS all personal to the extent that these business decisions aren't just things that fall out of the sky - live people make these decisions, and they effect other live people in respect to what they can - and cannot - do.
Chief Justice Black - in the landmark Supreme Court case Loving vs Virginia stated in his comments - if those that make iniquiteous and discriminitary laws are forced to abide by them too - they will be made much less often!
And I am absolutely certain that the people who make these rules at Quantas, (et. al.) are NOT themselves subject to these same rules as there are always exceptions based on "executive privelage".
Another example:
In the April 2009 (Volume 50, number 3) issue of AARP Bulletin, the column The Law on page 34 of that issue talks about mortgages, and mortgage forclosures caused by unfair and deceptive business practices in Massacusetts:
Viz:
"Freemont Investment & Loan, whose home offices are in Anaheim, Calif, originated. . . 14,578 mortgages between January 2004 and April 2007. In some cases borroweres were not required to provide documents proving their ability to pay off the loans. And exploding interest rates consumed more than half of some borrowers' take-home pay. Fremont even imposed a penalty for any borrowers who refinanced their mortgage before the adjustable rates bergan their upward spiral.
After the state attorney general won a series of lower-court decisions, Masachusetts' high court called Fremont's actions unfair and illegal. The courts also castigatged Fremont for its lending practices and standards and ruled that the company had to prove that a loan was fair in the first place before it could move ahead with foreclosure."
You are absolutely right, airline companies - along with other businesses - can be unfair. And you are also right - they do indeed have absolutely "no feelings" when it comes to shafting their customers in the name of increased profits.
What say ye?
Jim
This is EXACTLY what I am referring to when I use terms like "bait-and-switch".
My entire point is this:
YOU may know how to find "booking codes" and what they mean and I may know how to find booking codes and how to discover what they mean - but that does NOT mean that EVERYONE ELSE knows this - or knows what to do with that information when given it.
A "reasonable person" looks at the advertising copy on a company's web-site and naturally assumes that when they say "all", they mean ALL. They don't say "All but fare group 'Q'." or "All but fare groups 'A', 'Z' and 'W'." They don't say "*ALL* fare groups! (unless it's for sale here)"
It is fair and reasonable to expect that a company like Quantas or NWA keeps a sharp eye on the ad copy on their web-site. It is fair and reasonable to expect their advertisements to mean exactly what they say.
This is why Ma. allows the "93c" deceptive trading practices suit to lie. The consumers cannot be expected to be mind-readers, neither can they be expected to be expert travel-agents.
I am sure that Irritated is a fully competent lawyer. I am likewise sure that he/she is quite competent in many other things as well. That does not mean that they should also be expected to be world-class travel agents. (Or Real Estate agents, or stock-brokers, or computer programmers, etc.)
What do *I* want to see from all this? I want to see a Quantas commercial - AFTER they've had their Koala Shaved!
That, unfortunately, is the ONLY way they will take notice that we're not sacrificial ducks waiting to be plucked.
What say ye?
If you ever do come out this way again, I highly recommend Air New Zealand. THEY have great service, and it's very clear on their site what is available for mileage credit and what is not.
Qantas Vacations offered me a $400 voucher - on Qantas Vacations. Not really interested in that.
Australia was OK. Yeah, I'm lucky to travel but I work 90 hours a week at two different jobs and squirrel all my money away.
One follow-up:
You said that we should "realize that the rest of the world is not really into 'service' like one expects in the usa"
Not true.
I just returned from a trip to Moscow Russia, and businesses there could be divided into two broad categories:
(a) Those who treat their customers like customers.
(b) Those that are going out of business.
In the Dominican Republic - same thing. The really successful businesses treat their bread-and-butter - the cash carrying customer - like kings. The wannabees are slowly washing into the ocean.
Mexico: Ditto, ditto, ditto.
France: Same story.
England: Same thing. (and DON'T even start me on why I refuse to even set the weight of my BREATH on Heathrow Airport again!)
Singapore is a popular place to go. Why? The whole darn island treats you like they've known you their entire lives. A more polite and friendly place you may never see.
Saying that the rest of the world is "not service oriented" is a lame excuse. And even if that WERE true, that still does not excuse a company the size of Quantas. With all the international experience they claim to have, you'd have thought they'd have learned a little decency, honesty, and integrity in the process.
What say ye?
You are correct and please let me clarify where my statement was coming from. I used to live in Oz and never flew Quantas (except once) mainly travelling with Singapore (the BEST!) or Virgin Blue..... Quantas is quite well known for its poor service and lack of customer service..... In fact, in the 5 years that I lived there, I found the holiday business in Oz to be of poor quality and poor value. Very sad statement but true. We tended to travel up into Asia (thailand, malaysia, vietnam, singapore, hong kong, etc) where it was great value for money and you were treated like royalty. I also lived in Africa where the same can be said about the treatment received. Again, excellent value and royal treatment.
I do actually wish the original poster (?) much luck with pursuing Quantas and their misrepresentation..... i suspect it will continue to fall on deaf ears because honestly, they don't really care. They continue to have tourists going there in droves so 'no worries mate!'.
My best advice (and I assume yours as well) is to go to the places you mentioned and I mentioned. Excellent value, service, and amazing cultural experiences can be found in many many other places.
Happy travelling!!!
ps... I still stand by the original statement about the lawsuits though. Enough already!
Oz? You gotta be kidding! (Resist. . . . temptation. . . . to make. . . .bad pun. . . . ennnngh!!!) :-)
I will agree with both parts of your statement.
(a) Enjoy the ride!
(b) Lawyers are WAYYYY over-funded.
My one exception is when a business deliberately stiffs me. As my wife loves to say: "I have this serious medical problem - a severe allergy to B.S.!!!"
Businesses on the "Quantas" level have batteries of lawyers to work with - and if two businesses want to go at it tooth-and-nail, I'll get tickets, a huge bowl of pop-corn, a soda and watch the fur fly!!
Where I get wound up is when a company like that decides to use one of us munchkins (sorry!) as a snack - the company is fighting WAY BELOW its weight.
Example: I used to be a huge Monty Python fan. Went to all their movies, watched 'em on TV, etc. UNTIL they decided to make fun of the Special Olympics in one of their skits. Make fun of the President? OK. Make fun of the Prime Minister or the Queen? OK - these guys can fight back. But making fun of the Special Olympics, and having a "suicide" event as the final event, I considered to be absolutely beneath the pale - Monty Python was fighting way, WAY outside his weight-class against an opponent that isn't as capable of fighting back.
I walked out of the movie theater right then and there - and I have never seen, listened to, bought, or otherwise patronized Monty Python since.
In this case, I believe that Quantas is fighting way outside their weight class by trying to stiff one of us schmucks down here - confident that we're so whipped-dog beaten that we won't fight back.
And to that I say NUTS!!
We have to make sure we let these businesses know that we are NOT going to just lay here in whipped-dog fashion and beg to be beaten again and again.
I also darn-sure won't fly Quantas if I have anything to say about it. I absolutely despise horrid customer service.
I want this lady and her husband to tear Quantas a new "Koala"!!!
What say ye?
I totally agree with your basic sentiment - Enjoy the trip!
However I do disagree with your idea that the airlines should be free to ream us anyway they please, just to make a little extra money.
This is the TRUE meaning of a "Free market economy" - the consumer has the right to take his business wherever he darn well pleases.
If I ever go back to the Pacific Rim any time soon, you can (virtually) bet that I'll be on Singapore Airlines - not because they're cheap, but because they treat each and every customer like ROYALTY! And I'm willing to pay a bit extra to be treated like a person, and not a sardine.
Midwest Airlines is my preferred domestic airline for the same reason - they treat their customers like customers, not cargo.
Both of these airlines hand-pick the people who man the security checkpoints at their gates - and GOD HELP the security worker who doesn't give you top-notch service, courteous, and a smile, because there's an airline rep there with them - all the time - watching them like a hawk - making sure the customers are not hassled any more than necessary.
What Quantas did here is a classic bait-and-switch. We promise you this-and-that - and when the time comes to make use of it, you get the little gray Chevy with 3 flats instead of the Mercedes you though you bought. Quantas made promises and representations to get this couple's business. They failed to deliver on their promises. QED: They should get hammered into the ground for it.
It's like any criminal. You let 'em get away with robbing banks, and banks become prime targets. You put them on notice that robbing banks is the fast track to hell - and they think three our four times about sticking one up.
That's the entire point of my posts saying that they should nail Quantas' [donkey] to the Cross with a 93c misrepresentation action. And that's why MA's 93c action provides for TREBLE damages - to make companies think three or four times about screwing over their next customer.
What say ye?
I believe that there is more to this than just the miles though - the "damage" incurred by relying on Quantas' mis-representation cost them both extra money - AND their missing miles - since it is obvious that they would not have flown Quantas absent the miles, AND the "airpass" was actually more expensive than their having booked their travel separately.
If I were a lawyer representing them, I'd expect them to get (at this point - due to the incredible inconvenience) at least 2x the miles they would have earned, credited to their American account, and the difference in price between what they bought (based on the representations), and what they would have bought otherwise.
IMHO, getting "Quantas" miles in exchange for their flub-up is not worth it as frequent flier mileage perks increase logarithmically (or so it seems) after certain levels of flight are met. Those 40 or so thousand miles/points would most certainly be more valuable in their American account - where all their other miles are - than sitting all alone in an orphaned Quantas account where they might be worth two "Gen-yew-ine Quantas Embossed Ashtrays". (or a free beer on their next flight...)
I find that if the restitution doesn't cost the company anything, it has little (if any) real deterrent value. Getting the American miles (at 2x), will cost them. Refunding the money you were ripped off on the air-passes will cost them money. Getting them to throw you a couple of air-travel vouchers (along with everything else), will cost them money. This will show up on that division's "executive dashboard" when the Big Cheeses look at where the money is going - and people are going to have to answer some really interesting questions.
Same exact thing happening to me, but I have not been as pro-active. Want to class action Quantas or American? This is ridiculous!
-Emma
Its cra. . . , cra. . ., cra. . ., (ahem!), "stuff" like this that's going to get the airlines re-regulated again. And (IMHO) it can't happen too soon to suit me!
Stuff like this - apparently "Irritated" is not the only victim - or Delta et-al re-selling a discounted seat for more money and canceling a booked passenger off their flight, etc., is just what the airlines want - they make money, we get (hozed).
I'd go for the 93c action and cost them some REAL money!!
Here's a possible alternative that you might be able to get from Quantas and would possibly make things right: get Quantas points in their program, instead. Q fares are valid for earning on Quantas, at 1 point per mile, minimum 1000 points per flight. You can then use those miles to get a ticket on American, assuming you have enough, and/or can continue to earn miles in the Quantas program when you fly American (subject to the rules, which I didn't check). Here's a link to the redemption table on Quantas: http://www.qantas.com.au/fflyer/dyn/program/usingPoints/pointsTables
Anyway, the general idea is that Quantas has to make this good for you. I'd suggest that you ask for 25000 points each for the trouble, in the Quantas program, as reasonable compensation for the hassles caused by their error. Points don't actually "cost" them anything, so they might be willing to do that. Or, at least it gives you a place to negotiate from.
Get a lawyer. If you are MA residents, and were in MA when the flight was booked, you have a classic "93c" misrepresentation case against them - they've as much as admitted it.
The beauty of a 93c claim (I hope I have the citation right), is that it provides TRIPLE damages in a case where a product or service was misrepresented and you were damaged (economically) do to your reliance on their mis-representation. I believe 93c also allows recovery of legal fees and court costs.
If they start getting 93c demand letters from a lawyer - or even yourselves - I suspect they'll get REAL REASONABLE, real quickly.