10 ms·

Lufthansa Sues Hidden City Ticketholder for Throwing His Ticket

69 points by mchannon 8y ago

html5web 8y ago
This is so stupid! What if passenger changed his plan that day? Do you sue every single passenger who misses his/her flights? Don't use Lufthansa's services.
- NedIsakoff 8y ago
  He probably booked the other ticket in advance as well.
monksy 8y ago
I hope that Lufthansa loses big for this. Extorting a person to complete the journey is just wrong. This doesn't surprise me one bit from my experience with Lufthansa. They love to blame the customer for everything, especially when they (LH) screw up. EDIT: This is a great example of where a corporation should suffer criminal charges. But given Germany's protection of their flag carrier.. it won't happen.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  No, it's not extortion, it's breach of contract. If he didn't' want to perform the contract, he shouldn't have taken it on. This is not a great example of anything else, despite your hyperbole.
  - jstanley 8y ago
    Not everything needs to be a contract. Why can't we just pay our money, get our ticket, and then decide on our own whether we want to use it or not?
    - EpicEng 8y ago
      >Not everything needs to be a contract... In that case, can the airline decide to simply not run the flight and keep everyone's money? It's a contract because both sides have accepted some number of terms. If it weren't you would forego all sorts of protections. When you (reasonably) want those back... guess what? Disputes are decided on the terms of the (sales) contract. How else would it work?
      - Rizz 8y ago
        That's what they already do, airlines will cancel your flight for any reason whatsoever: overbooking, finding a first class passenger who pays more, choosing not to have enough personnel on duty, etc. Until your plane with you on it is actually airborne, you have no idea whether or not you will be allowed to fly, so there is nothing unfair about not turning up for (what might be) your flight. Maybe if a ticket actually held some sort guarantee for getting a seat on an airplane things would be different...
        EpicEng 8y ago
        >That's what they already do No they don't. They overbook to maximize profits, yes. It sucks and is completely anti-consumer, yes. However, they do not simply send you packing. They re-book you. You also agree to it when you buy the ticket. Again, yes, it's buried in the contract and since every airline does it you really have no choice. It's far from perfect/fair, but that has nothing to do with what I responded to. If "everything doesn't have to be a contract" then you have no legal recourse. Ever. Sales need to be contracts in the eyes of the law, but that doesn't mean everything is perfect.
        ptero 8y ago
        Yes they do. At least in the US they will often cancel flights that end up mostly empty (they will certainly rebook those affected)
  - pkphilip 8y ago
    Not really a problem. If the passenger decided not to fly the last leg, that seat would go empty but the airline won't lose money on that leg.. it has already been paid for. So there is no real loss to them.
  - themaninthedark 8y ago
    So, when the inverse happens and an airline overbooks a flight and someone gets bumps that should also count as a breach of contract and all airlines should have to pay airfare plus compensation right? And this should apply to volunteers as well. Then we should also look at departure times, how often has a flight been delayed? Many people count on getting where they are going on time. That should also count as a breach of contract as well. Edit: To take this to the absurd, you have to pay to make any changes to your ticket at after a certain point in time i.e. name. So when you receive the ticket and it has a gate listed, is that also part of the contract? I am not allowed to change anything printed there without paying, why should they be allowed? Or do we say that things happen and we allow systems to be lenient?
    - detaro 8y ago
      It should count as breach of contract if it's against a provision in the contract. If there's a provision for it in the contract, the next question is if it is valid or not (e.g. compensation for late flights is defined by laws in many places, so airlines can't just not offer it), which is where a law (or a different interpretation of existing law) restricting this would start.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - barrkel 8y ago
    I think you're taking it too far. I agree that technically it's breach of contract. The trouble is that humans who aren't lawyers think of tickets as options instead of futures. They think they're buying the right to board instead of an obligation to board. I can also see the human-positive side effect. The marginal cost of an extra bum in a seat isn't high, so it makes sense to fill up the plane, but the economics only work out if there's enough people who pay more. There are lots of ways to differentiate between these sets of people - service levels, flexibility, calendar patterns. But the internet reduces the price information asymmetry that calendar patterns rely on, and so we've come to this court case: making it a hard constraint rather than hoodwinking the relatively price insensitive business traveller.
- fredley 8y ago
  Anecdotal, but I was flying out of a German airport last week. Luggage, peculiarly, was checked at the gate, there was no separate area for checking hold luggage. The gate was announced about an hour before the gate closure, and by the time we'd got to the gate (~5 minutes) we were informed that the bag drop was closed. We had a brief argument, and they reluctantly took the bags. Insane.
  - matt4077 8y ago
    Berlin Tegel? That airport has no centralized check-ins anywhere. I have no idea how you would spend any amount there without just going to the gate indicated on the screens everywhere. Most people who don’t know it don’t even notice the difference. They just see it saying “A21” and follow he signs to A21. It’s actually a rather well-liked concept because check in, passport control, and security only serve that one flight at a time. It’s faster, and you will never miss your flight because of people in front of you in a queue booked on a later flight. Alas, it requires more personnel, and the airport will close soonish.
    - fredley 8y ago
      I agree it's a different but good design, however the issue was our flights weren't even on the board, and when they were bag drop was already closed!
    - odiroot 8y ago
      Tegel is literally my most favourite airport in the world and one of the few reasons I still bear living in this city.
      - reustle 8y ago
        What are some reasons for wanting to leave?
lawlessone 8y ago
How can they force someone onto an airplane?
- detaro 8y ago
  They can't, and that's not what they're trying to do.
  - monksy 8y ago
    You're right, they're not trying to use physical force, they're trying to extort him to do so.
    - detaro 8y ago
      It's a pretty big gap between "trying to enforce unpopular contractual agreements", which is clearly their right to attempt, even if the court found they didn't do it well enough and it's going to be a PR mess (which I hope it'll be) , to "extortion", which is criminal. The court didn't even find that the clause in the terms of service is invalid.
      - monksy 8y ago
        Explain this to me: A person doesn't get on the flight. The airline can go after him for inaction. The whole transaction is based on purchases of services from LH. The customer elected not to accept all services detailed in the transaction. Should you expect the grocery store to sue you for food waste? Definition of extortion: the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.
        detaro 8y ago
        The analogy is hard to make work, but if the supermarket ran different prices for people that do not waste food and sold it to me under terms that require me to not waste food, then yes, that's something that might happen. You then can get into a legal debate if the terms were clear enough for me to understand in front of a court. Here apparently the court was of the opinion that the price difference between the tickets is well-known enough to accept the terms. By that definition, any instance where someone is sued for money is extortion, that's clearly not how it works.
gberger 8y ago
Would the situation be any different if the man had booked the Frankfurt-Berlin leg with a different airline? Well, for starters, Lufthansa wouldn't have any way to know that the passenger flew to Berlin; for all it knew, he could have just missed his flight to Oslo. But if somehow this came to Lufthansa's knowledge, would they still have a valid case against him?
- detaro 8y ago
  That they included the Berlin leg into their calculation is one of the reasons the court rejected the claim, presumably the other one (no clear basis for how they calculated the price they assumed) would still stand.
addicted 8y ago
With airlines checking in your bags to your final destination, isn't the "hidden city" trick a massive problem for others? What's likely to happen is if the passenger doesn't show up, the flight will be delayed because their bags need to be unloaded.
- DisruptiveDave 8y ago
  Safe to assume someone pulling this "trick" plans accordingly, no? You don't HAVE to check bags.
- exhilaration 8y ago
  You don't check in bags if you're using this method.
  - vinni2 8y ago
    I have asked them not to check in my bag all the way several times. And Lufthansa had complied my request every time.
- tibbon 8y ago
  I think most people doing this are doing carry-on only. I can remember once in the past 5 years checking a bag.
- sct202 8y ago
  You generally avoid checking bags if you try to do a hidden city trick, and also by paying extra for an early boarding group in case of gate checking.
BuildTheRobots 8y ago
If you're in the UK, then this is completely valid on a rail journey. If outbound then you can leave and come back in as long as it's the same day (rail days start at 4am). If it's an open return, then you have the entire month to split up and resume your journey. There's nothing to stop you getting off half way through and not returning. Edit: Apologies, this does depend on ticket type, but should apply to most off-peak and super off peak and open return tickets: "Break of journey is allowed on the outward and return portions of Off-Peak tickets unless otherwise indicated by a restriction shown against the ticket's validity code. You may start, break and resume, or end your journey at any intermediate station along the route of travel on Off-Peak tickets unless the ticket restriction for the journey you are making does not allow it. If you intend to start, break and resume, or end your journey at any intermediate station, please call 03457 48 49 50 to check if it is available on your specific journey." http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590.aspx http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590...
- stewartm 8y ago
  Errr ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11420790 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11420790
  - gsnedders 8y ago
    Right, it actually depends on the terms of the ticket. Advance tickets, which are linked to a specific train (or sequence of trains), don't allow you to break your journey or start/end short.
  - gpvos 8y ago
    Still seems counterproductive. Why would they do that?
  - BuildTheRobots 8y ago
    apologies, this does depend on ticket type: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590.aspx http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590... I've updated my comment above with more information.
zaroth 8y ago
I’ve heard of airlines canceling the return flight if you skip a segment in the outbound leg. And that makes sense if their terms lay that out ahead of time. I’ve also heard of airlines canceling “overlapping” tickets which would not be possible unless you skipped a leg. I’ve been hit by that when trying to book multiple flights for a business trip where I didn’t know exactly when I would be coming back, and the advance fare ticket was a small fraction of the cost of a refundable ticket. Complaining that a customer skips a final segment on the return flight is poor sport. Except for one thing — if they have you in the system because you started your return flight earlier in the day, and now at your connecting flight they are calling final boarding again and again waiting for a passenger that never shows, it holds up the entire plane and is a drag on their resources trying to page you and track you down. I can understand airlines refusing future service to someone who does this to them repeatedly. A 5 year ban or terminating their frequent flier account or something along that lines would seem appropriate. The ban might be hard to enforce however since it’s not like Amazon where they can blacklist your address.
- NedIsakoff 8y ago
  Really? That's an international flight and you put in your passport number.
  - zaroth 8y ago
    Good point! That seems like the best way to handle this. Getting blacklisted from the airline for causing delay by skiplegging is totally fair play IMO.
    - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
      Except it's not if they refuse to listen when you tell them that you won't be taking the last leg.
- netsharc 8y ago
  > I’ve heard of airlines canceling the return flight if you skip a segment in the outbound leg. Yeah they do this, even for a direct return flight (A to B and back to A) if you miss the A to B, they'll not honor the B to A ticket. Happened to a friend who was supposed to go Wednesday and return on Sunday, but had a meeting at work in the origin city and flew on Thursday instead. I think most of the "hidden city" travelers don't check any bags in, because as has been mentioned, it'll be hard to get their bag back/the time needed to unload the bag will massively piss off the airline.
noneeeed 8y ago
Can anyone explain to me why these flights end up being cheaper in the first place? I know that airline pricing can be quite odd, but charging less for two flights than for one just seems to defy logic. What am I missing?
- gsnedders 8y ago
  > I know that airline pricing can be quite odd, but charging less for two flights than for one just seems to defy logic. What am I missing? This is quite common: in this case, Seattle to Frankfurt has a limited number of direct flights (Lufthansa and Condor only), and people are willing to pay a premium for direct flights; Seattle to Oslo has no direct flights, so Lufthansa is in competition with every other airline that has a hub along a reasonable route (at the very least: KLM/Air France, BA, SAS, Icelandair), and as such there's more competition there.
  - noneeeed 8y ago
    Aah, right, that makes a lot of sense.
- tibbon 8y ago
  I don't know for certain. However, I recently read about the Freedoms of the Air, which define international airline abilities to move about in various ways; and some of that includes where you can stop temporarily (fuel planes, etc) and pick up passengers. I wonder if some of this has to do with a cost structure that comes out of that? I'm also totally willing to believe that it's not a fully rational system and is more about demand/profit for certain routes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedoms_of_the_air https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedoms_of_the_air
- peeters 8y ago
  Basically because ticket prices have no relation to the airline's cost, only to supply and demand. So when a multi-leg journey happens to serve an underserved route along the way, airlines want to be able to charge that leg according to its own supply and demand, even though it's a component of a route that has higher supply. IMO it should be illegal. A company can't stop you from buying a car for its parts. They shouldn't be able to do this.
jka 8y ago
Not called out in the comments here yet, but as per both the terms of the case provided in the linked article, and as per reality - these trips may involve international border crossings.
- sct202 8y ago
  But the airline isn't responsible if you decide to leave the airport in a country that requires a visa.
- gpvos 8y ago
  Okay, and what would be different depending on whether an international border is involved or not?
  - dgaudet 8y ago
    taxes, airport fees, etc.
- admax88q 8y ago
  What is the significance of that?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
goodells 8y ago
This is anecdotal, but I had an experience where I was flying from LaGuardia to Madison, WI with a layover in Chicago. The last leg of the flight from Chicago to Madison was delayed by several hours, to the point where it would be significantly faster for my boyfriend to drive down from Madison, pick me up at the airport in Chicago, and drive me back. I don't recall which airline I was using at the time, but the gate agent told me that it was their policy to refuse to pull someone's checked luggage if someone didn't "want" to complete the last leg of the journey, but if I told someone that I was not feeling well and wished to end the trip early due to health reasons, that would be the easiest way to do it. So that's what I did - I went up to a different gate of the same airline, told them I was sick and would not be getting on the connecting flight, and the luggage was downstairs in a special area of the baggage claim within 20 minutes. It felt like being in grade school and telling the nurse I was sick to get a day off...
- monksy 8y ago
  That's pretty weird because you had a schedule change. Usually, they're more helpful during those. That should have been marked as an vol pax reroute or the like.
  - jonhohle 8y ago
    Assuming it wasn’t weather related, it sounds like the delay probably made OP eligible for some type of comp as well. The round trip from Chi to Mad is around 4 hours (depending on o’hare or midway). Often airlines will have a policy of comping if the delay results in arrival more than 3 hours after originally scheduled (and in the EU, is the law!).
    - monksy 8y ago
      There's no requirement for comp for delays in the US. (https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/flight-delays-cancellations https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer...) EU261 only applies if you're flying to or from, or within the EU.
DannyBee 8y ago
Assuming they write the contract right, this is pretty standard breach of contract, regardless of the propriety of suing your customers. (Skiplegged.com was thrown out for lack of jurisdiction, because United wasn't suing the people breaching the contract, only the people enabling it. Here, Lufthansa is suing the right people) Hacker news never seems to like contracts that don't let it do whatever they want, but the person paid and agreed to do a thing, and didn't do it. The fact that y'all think that thing is stupid is irrelevant. Don't make contracts you aren't going to keep.
- admax88q 8y ago
  What makes you think that by buying a ticket you're now under contract to board the plane?
  - DanBC 8y ago
    That the contract you've entered into explicitly says this.
  - detaro 8y ago
    You are not under contract to board the plane, but the contract says if you do not board the plane without a good excuse you agree to pay the difference.
  - teraflop 8y ago
    When you buy a ticket on Lufthansa you're required to agree to their conditions of carriage, which include this language: > 5.6. A service charge may be payable by any passenger who: > 5.6.1. fails to arrive for departure at the airport or any other point of departure by the time we have specified (or if no time has actually been specified, with insufficient time to permit completion of official formalities and departure procedures) and, as a consequence, does not use the seat for which a reservation has been made
  - johannes1234321 8y ago
    The terms state that you have to take the flight or might be required to pay compensation. Mind the situation for the airline: the passenger is checked in, which means they have to call them out and wait for them on boarding and probably double check that they don't have stored luggage, which causes delays, thus cost to the airline.
dabeeeenster 8y ago
I missed an outbound leg of a return flight from Sydney to London 15 years ago. When I got to Heathrow to get my flight back, they told me the ticket was void because I hadn't taken the outbound leg, then charged me 3k GBP for a 'standard ticket'. I spent about 4 months arguing with BA about it and eventually got most of the ticket refunded. I still think about that.
linkmotif 8y ago
If he bought the second leg in advance, doesn’t it show that he entered the first contract in bad faith, against their terms of service? Personally I don’t get the whole concept of suing your customers. I would just ban him if I was Lufthansa.
martin_a 8y ago
I don't get the problem here. He paid for the full flight, what's the problem with him not taking the connecting flight to the final destination?
thomaslangston 8y ago
My guess is this might be similar to how company's sue people for trademark violations, even when they are not doing any direct damage to the brand i.e. to protect themselves from future legal liability. If too many customers use the hidden city in a foreign airline flight, they might be found not be in compliance with route agreements. Some background on the subject: https://youtu.be/thqbjA2DC-E https://youtu.be/thqbjA2DC-E
- paulgb 8y ago
  Thanks for posting that video. I feel like every 10 seconds I'm learning something interesting and new about a subject I'd never really given much thought to!
Nasrudith 8y ago
Really there is an easy solution to this - don't have such batshit pricing structures that longer trips taken partway leaving empty seats is cheaper! If it is cheaper for them to head to a third city first instead of directly just have the prices reflect it so it is x to layover and y to destination which is less than z a direct flight - if it is even offered.
- everdev 8y ago
  I can't think of another business (outside of promotional activities) that requires you to accept something you don't want to reduce the price. It does seem like a breakdown in their pricing logic rather than anything injurious the passenger did.
  - owie829 8y ago
    Cable. Regular internet is frequently more expensive than the same speed internet + basic cable.
    - everdev 8y ago
      Ah, right! I actually pay more to not have cable, I forgot about that.
      - artursapek 8y ago
        This makes a little more sense though, because presumably the cable companies get some kick back for delivering the ad network to more homes.
  - patch_cable 8y ago
    Comcast Internet in the United States. I technically have a VoIP phone because it made my internet cheaper than if I signed up for internet alone.
    - xiphias2 8y ago
shaki-dora 8y ago
I guess this headline makes one want to grab the pitchfork, but I don’t know if we will end in a better place if carriers are barred from following the pricing strategy at the core of this. LH is simply routing passengers like IP packages, where sometimes it may be more economical to, for example, go the long way around to get to the destination. In those cases, they want to charge you the (lower) price of your trip’s usefulness to you, irregardless of the (longer) route it took you to get there. Barring this practice will just make those flights more expensive, or potentially reduce competition on some rote that a carrier like LH does not service with direct flights. The narrower court case is simply a matter of contract law. Sure, there need to be exceptions for sudden sickness or actual changes of plans, but those are factual questions, not ones of law at issue here. I’m no fan of naive contract fetishism upholding the right to sign away your first-born n &Cs. But this issue here really does not strike me as overtly one-sided.
fanzhang 8y ago
> A Berlin district court dismissed the lawsuit in December, but Lufthansa's spokesperson confirmed to CNN that the company has "already filed the appeal against the decision." So basically this lawsuit has already been dismissed by a lower court, and but Lufthansa is appealing. The entire dynamics here seem like Lufthansa is unlikely to win and even if it does the amount it is claiming ($3K?) is way lower than legal costs, but the publicity of the lawsuit is the entire point they're making. A version of SLAPP, if you will.
- detaro 8y ago
  Note that the court didn't find that asking for money in this case was wrong, but that Lufthansa didn't justify the specific amount properly.
lutoma 8y ago
After reading the German court document linked in the CNN article (not a lawyer), it appears charging customers extra for not taking a leg of their flight is actually legal in the eyes of the court. They also cite a decision of the highest ordinary court in Germany (BGH) to that effect. I find that quite worrying. The lawsuit was only struck down because of a lack of transparency in the pricing, as the customer has no way to check the fare they will end up with if they skip a leg. So if they publish prices for skipped legs, it would be a-ok I guess.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  Legality and ethical correctness are not always the same thing. Just because the court doesn't see any conflict with current law doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. In that case, there should be a change of law.
torpfactory 8y ago
Can someone explain the economic rationale to force passengers to fly more for a cheaper ticket from the airlines perspective? I understand the breach of contract arguments but why sell tickets priced this way in the first place?
- jonhohle 8y ago
  Supply & demand plus transportation logistics, cross promotion, etc. Imagine Las Vegas has an agreement with airlines to subsidize airfair in return for a certain volume of inbound humans. The airline optimizes logistics, and finds that from your city to Vegas wouldn’t result in a full flight, but splitting travelers to higher volume hubs allows them to consolidate for a full flight, maximizing thier subisidy compared to their outlay. They don’t care that the passenger is connecting in this case, they are not what is being optized for. However, if the passenger terminates their trip at the hub, the airline may lose the subsidy making the entire trip a loss for that passenger, despite using less resources on that one particular human. I don’t know if those are the types of arrangmenta that exist, but it would be hard for me to imagine a scenario where cities that rely heavily on tourism aren’t spending money to encourage airlines to bring more people. The other part of that is to the customer/passenger, there is a hidden shadow transaction on their flight with a third party. In other forms of logistics, this is common (last mile delivery by USPS, for example), but I don’t think most people like to think that they are thought of as cargo.
kevindong 8y ago
Airline pricing drives me insane and is what happens when you take price discrimination/revenue optimization to the (often idiotic) extreme. It's very much possible for a one way flight to cost more than a round trip flight that includes the one way flight. For instance, a one way ticket on Delta flight #92 going from JFK to TXL at 8:39pm on May 15, 2019 costs $2,902 [0]. But if you add on a return flight (which includes the original DL 92 flight), the price drops to $957 [1]. [0]: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-05-15.JFKTXL0DL92;c:USD;e:1;a:-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI;sd:1;t:b;tt:o;sp:2.USD.290170 https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-0... [1]: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-05-15.JFKTXL0DL92*/m/0156q./m/02_286.2019-05-22.TXLJFK0DL93;c:USD;e:1;a:-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI*-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI;sd:1;t:b;sp:2.USD.168973*2.USD.95673 https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-0...
- html5web 8y ago
  Are you searching for specific airlines? Here's another option: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-05-15.JFKMAN0MT2853~MANTXL1U21895;c:USD;e:1;a:-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI;sd:1;t:b;tt:o;sp:2.USD.36742 https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-0...
  - kevindong 8y ago
    Yes. I picked that particular flight to illustrate my point. The budget airlines don't play games like the legacy airlines (or rather at least to not as heavy of a degree), which is refreshing.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- marcyb5st 8y ago
  This happens in the opposite way as well! In March a friend of mine is getting married in Panama. The Round-trip from Zurich to Panama was absurdly expensive. For around the same price, I will go to Italy by train, fly from Verona to Spain, hike for 2 weeks along the Camino de Santiago, fly to Panama from Madrid, and back in Zurich.
ashildr 8y ago
If you order the Lufthansa Burger with fries you better finish all the fries - or else you’ll go to bed without desserts in the future AND they sue you...
vinni2 8y ago
I have done this many times (including with Lufthansa) but I would ask them to check in the bag only until where I want to stop the trip. I don’t know if they wasted time waiting for me during those times.

69 points by mchannon 8y ago

This is so stupid! What if passenger changed his plan that day? Do you sue every single passenger who misses his/her flights? Don't use Lufthansa's services.

NedIsakoff 8y ago
He probably booked the other ticket in advance as well.

monksy 8y ago

I hope that Lufthansa loses big for this. Extorting a person to complete the journey is just wrong. This doesn't surprise me one bit from my experience with Lufthansa. They love to blame the customer for everything, especially when they (LH) screw up. EDIT: This is a great example of where a corporation should suffer criminal charges. But given Germany's protection of their flag carrier.. it won't happen.

DannyBee 8y ago
No, it's not extortion, it's breach of contract. If he didn't' want to perform the contract, he shouldn't have taken it on. This is not a great example of anything else, despite your hyperbole.
- jstanley 8y ago
  Not everything needs to be a contract. Why can't we just pay our money, get our ticket, and then decide on our own whether we want to use it or not?
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    >Not everything needs to be a contract... In that case, can the airline decide to simply not run the flight and keep everyone's money? It's a contract because both sides have accepted some number of terms. If it weren't you would forego all sorts of protections. When you (reasonably) want those back... guess what? Disputes are decided on the terms of the (sales) contract. How else would it work?
    - Rizz 8y ago
      That's what they already do, airlines will cancel your flight for any reason whatsoever: overbooking, finding a first class passenger who pays more, choosing not to have enough personnel on duty, etc. Until your plane with you on it is actually airborne, you have no idea whether or not you will be allowed to fly, so there is nothing unfair about not turning up for (what might be) your flight. Maybe if a ticket actually held some sort guarantee for getting a seat on an airplane things would be different...
      - EpicEng 8y ago
        >That's what they already do No they don't. They overbook to maximize profits, yes. It sucks and is completely anti-consumer, yes. However, they do not simply send you packing. They re-book you. You also agree to it when you buy the ticket. Again, yes, it's buried in the contract and since every airline does it you really have no choice. It's far from perfect/fair, but that has nothing to do with what I responded to. If "everything doesn't have to be a contract" then you have no legal recourse. Ever. Sales need to be contracts in the eyes of the law, but that doesn't mean everything is perfect.
        ptero 8y ago
        Yes they do. At least in the US they will often cancel flights that end up mostly empty (they will certainly rebook those affected)
- pkphilip 8y ago
  Not really a problem. If the passenger decided not to fly the last leg, that seat would go empty but the airline won't lose money on that leg.. it has already been paid for. So there is no real loss to them.
- themaninthedark 8y ago
  So, when the inverse happens and an airline overbooks a flight and someone gets bumps that should also count as a breach of contract and all airlines should have to pay airfare plus compensation right? And this should apply to volunteers as well. Then we should also look at departure times, how often has a flight been delayed? Many people count on getting where they are going on time. That should also count as a breach of contract as well. Edit: To take this to the absurd, you have to pay to make any changes to your ticket at after a certain point in time i.e. name. So when you receive the ticket and it has a gate listed, is that also part of the contract? I am not allowed to change anything printed there without paying, why should they be allowed? Or do we say that things happen and we allow systems to be lenient?
  - detaro 8y ago
    It should count as breach of contract if it's against a provision in the contract. If there's a provision for it in the contract, the next question is if it is valid or not (e.g. compensation for late flights is defined by laws in many places, so airlines can't just not offer it), which is where a law (or a different interpretation of existing law) restricting this would start.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- barrkel 8y ago
  I think you're taking it too far. I agree that technically it's breach of contract. The trouble is that humans who aren't lawyers think of tickets as options instead of futures. They think they're buying the right to board instead of an obligation to board. I can also see the human-positive side effect. The marginal cost of an extra bum in a seat isn't high, so it makes sense to fill up the plane, but the economics only work out if there's enough people who pay more. There are lots of ways to differentiate between these sets of people - service levels, flexibility, calendar patterns. But the internet reduces the price information asymmetry that calendar patterns rely on, and so we've come to this court case: making it a hard constraint rather than hoodwinking the relatively price insensitive business traveller.
fredley 8y ago
Anecdotal, but I was flying out of a German airport last week. Luggage, peculiarly, was checked at the gate, there was no separate area for checking hold luggage. The gate was announced about an hour before the gate closure, and by the time we'd got to the gate (~5 minutes) we were informed that the bag drop was closed. We had a brief argument, and they reluctantly took the bags. Insane.
- matt4077 8y ago
  Berlin Tegel? That airport has no centralized check-ins anywhere. I have no idea how you would spend any amount there without just going to the gate indicated on the screens everywhere. Most people who don’t know it don’t even notice the difference. They just see it saying “A21” and follow he signs to A21. It’s actually a rather well-liked concept because check in, passport control, and security only serve that one flight at a time. It’s faster, and you will never miss your flight because of people in front of you in a queue booked on a later flight. Alas, it requires more personnel, and the airport will close soonish.
  - fredley 8y ago
    I agree it's a different but good design, however the issue was our flights weren't even on the board, and when they were bag drop was already closed!
  - odiroot 8y ago
    Tegel is literally my most favourite airport in the world and one of the few reasons I still bear living in this city.
    - reustle 8y ago
      What are some reasons for wanting to leave?

lawlessone 8y ago

How can they force someone onto an airplane?

detaro 8y ago
They can't, and that's not what they're trying to do.
- monksy 8y ago
  You're right, they're not trying to use physical force, they're trying to extort him to do so.
  - detaro 8y ago
    It's a pretty big gap between "trying to enforce unpopular contractual agreements", which is clearly their right to attempt, even if the court found they didn't do it well enough and it's going to be a PR mess (which I hope it'll be) , to "extortion", which is criminal. The court didn't even find that the clause in the terms of service is invalid.
    - monksy 8y ago
      Explain this to me: A person doesn't get on the flight. The airline can go after him for inaction. The whole transaction is based on purchases of services from LH. The customer elected not to accept all services detailed in the transaction. Should you expect the grocery store to sue you for food waste? Definition of extortion: the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.
      - detaro 8y ago
        The analogy is hard to make work, but if the supermarket ran different prices for people that do not waste food and sold it to me under terms that require me to not waste food, then yes, that's something that might happen. You then can get into a legal debate if the terms were clear enough for me to understand in front of a court. Here apparently the court was of the opinion that the price difference between the tickets is well-known enough to accept the terms. By that definition, any instance where someone is sued for money is extortion, that's clearly not how it works.

gberger 8y ago

Would the situation be any different if the man had booked the Frankfurt-Berlin leg with a different airline? Well, for starters, Lufthansa wouldn't have any way to know that the passenger flew to Berlin; for all it knew, he could have just missed his flight to Oslo. But if somehow this came to Lufthansa's knowledge, would they still have a valid case against him?

detaro 8y ago
That they included the Berlin leg into their calculation is one of the reasons the court rejected the claim, presumably the other one (no clear basis for how they calculated the price they assumed) would still stand.

addicted 8y ago

With airlines checking in your bags to your final destination, isn't the "hidden city" trick a massive problem for others? What's likely to happen is if the passenger doesn't show up, the flight will be delayed because their bags need to be unloaded.

DisruptiveDave 8y ago
Safe to assume someone pulling this "trick" plans accordingly, no? You don't HAVE to check bags.
exhilaration 8y ago
You don't check in bags if you're using this method.
- vinni2 8y ago
  I have asked them not to check in my bag all the way several times. And Lufthansa had complied my request every time.
tibbon 8y ago
I think most people doing this are doing carry-on only. I can remember once in the past 5 years checking a bag.
sct202 8y ago
You generally avoid checking bags if you try to do a hidden city trick, and also by paying extra for an early boarding group in case of gate checking.

BuildTheRobots 8y ago

If you're in the UK, then this is completely valid on a rail journey. If outbound then you can leave and come back in as long as it's the same day (rail days start at 4am). If it's an open return, then you have the entire month to split up and resume your journey. There's nothing to stop you getting off half way through and not returning. Edit: Apologies, this does depend on ticket type, but should apply to most off-peak and super off peak and open return tickets: "Break of journey is allowed on the outward and return portions of Off-Peak tickets unless otherwise indicated by a restriction shown against the ticket's validity code. You may start, break and resume, or end your journey at any intermediate station along the route of travel on Off-Peak tickets unless the ticket restriction for the journey you are making does not allow it. If you intend to start, break and resume, or end your journey at any intermediate station, please call 03457 48 49 50 to check if it is available on your specific journey." http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590.aspx http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590...

stewartm 8y ago
Errr ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11420790 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11420790
- gsnedders 8y ago
  Right, it actually depends on the terms of the ticket. Advance tickets, which are linked to a specific train (or sequence of trains), don't allow you to break your journey or start/end short.
- gpvos 8y ago
  Still seems counterproductive. Why would they do that?
- BuildTheRobots 8y ago
  apologies, this does depend on ticket type: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590.aspx http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/46590... I've updated my comment above with more information.

zaroth 8y ago

I’ve heard of airlines canceling the return flight if you skip a segment in the outbound leg. And that makes sense if their terms lay that out ahead of time. I’ve also heard of airlines canceling “overlapping” tickets which would not be possible unless you skipped a leg. I’ve been hit by that when trying to book multiple flights for a business trip where I didn’t know exactly when I would be coming back, and the advance fare ticket was a small fraction of the cost of a refundable ticket. Complaining that a customer skips a final segment on the return flight is poor sport. Except for one thing — if they have you in the system because you started your return flight earlier in the day, and now at your connecting flight they are calling final boarding again and again waiting for a passenger that never shows, it holds up the entire plane and is a drag on their resources trying to page you and track you down. I can understand airlines refusing future service to someone who does this to them repeatedly. A 5 year ban or terminating their frequent flier account or something along that lines would seem appropriate. The ban might be hard to enforce however since it’s not like Amazon where they can blacklist your address.

NedIsakoff 8y ago
Really? That's an international flight and you put in your passport number.
- zaroth 8y ago
  Good point! That seems like the best way to handle this. Getting blacklisted from the airline for causing delay by skiplegging is totally fair play IMO.
  - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 8y ago
    Except it's not if they refuse to listen when you tell them that you won't be taking the last leg.
netsharc 8y ago
> I’ve heard of airlines canceling the return flight if you skip a segment in the outbound leg. Yeah they do this, even for a direct return flight (A to B and back to A) if you miss the A to B, they'll not honor the B to A ticket. Happened to a friend who was supposed to go Wednesday and return on Sunday, but had a meeting at work in the origin city and flew on Thursday instead. I think most of the "hidden city" travelers don't check any bags in, because as has been mentioned, it'll be hard to get their bag back/the time needed to unload the bag will massively piss off the airline.

noneeeed 8y ago

Can anyone explain to me why these flights end up being cheaper in the first place? I know that airline pricing can be quite odd, but charging less for two flights than for one just seems to defy logic. What am I missing?

gsnedders 8y ago
> I know that airline pricing can be quite odd, but charging less for two flights than for one just seems to defy logic. What am I missing? This is quite common: in this case, Seattle to Frankfurt has a limited number of direct flights (Lufthansa and Condor only), and people are willing to pay a premium for direct flights; Seattle to Oslo has no direct flights, so Lufthansa is in competition with every other airline that has a hub along a reasonable route (at the very least: KLM/Air France, BA, SAS, Icelandair), and as such there's more competition there.
- noneeeed 8y ago
  Aah, right, that makes a lot of sense.
tibbon 8y ago
I don't know for certain. However, I recently read about the Freedoms of the Air, which define international airline abilities to move about in various ways; and some of that includes where you can stop temporarily (fuel planes, etc) and pick up passengers. I wonder if some of this has to do with a cost structure that comes out of that? I'm also totally willing to believe that it's not a fully rational system and is more about demand/profit for certain routes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedoms_of_the_air https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedoms_of_the_air
peeters 8y ago
Basically because ticket prices have no relation to the airline's cost, only to supply and demand. So when a multi-leg journey happens to serve an underserved route along the way, airlines want to be able to charge that leg according to its own supply and demand, even though it's a component of a route that has higher supply. IMO it should be illegal. A company can't stop you from buying a car for its parts. They shouldn't be able to do this.

jka 8y ago

Not called out in the comments here yet, but as per both the terms of the case provided in the linked article, and as per reality - these trips may involve international border crossings.

sct202 8y ago
But the airline isn't responsible if you decide to leave the airport in a country that requires a visa.
gpvos 8y ago
Okay, and what would be different depending on whether an international border is involved or not?
- dgaudet 8y ago
  taxes, airport fees, etc.
admax88q 8y ago
What is the significance of that?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

goodells 8y ago

This is anecdotal, but I had an experience where I was flying from LaGuardia to Madison, WI with a layover in Chicago. The last leg of the flight from Chicago to Madison was delayed by several hours, to the point where it would be significantly faster for my boyfriend to drive down from Madison, pick me up at the airport in Chicago, and drive me back. I don't recall which airline I was using at the time, but the gate agent told me that it was their policy to refuse to pull someone's checked luggage if someone didn't "want" to complete the last leg of the journey, but if I told someone that I was not feeling well and wished to end the trip early due to health reasons, that would be the easiest way to do it. So that's what I did - I went up to a different gate of the same airline, told them I was sick and would not be getting on the connecting flight, and the luggage was downstairs in a special area of the baggage claim within 20 minutes. It felt like being in grade school and telling the nurse I was sick to get a day off...

monksy 8y ago
That's pretty weird because you had a schedule change. Usually, they're more helpful during those. That should have been marked as an vol pax reroute or the like.
- jonhohle 8y ago
  Assuming it wasn’t weather related, it sounds like the delay probably made OP eligible for some type of comp as well. The round trip from Chi to Mad is around 4 hours (depending on o’hare or midway). Often airlines will have a policy of comping if the delay results in arrival more than 3 hours after originally scheduled (and in the EU, is the law!).
  - monksy 8y ago
    There's no requirement for comp for delays in the US. (https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/flight-delays-cancellations https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer...) EU261 only applies if you're flying to or from, or within the EU.

DannyBee 8y ago

Assuming they write the contract right, this is pretty standard breach of contract, regardless of the propriety of suing your customers. (Skiplegged.com was thrown out for lack of jurisdiction, because United wasn't suing the people breaching the contract, only the people enabling it. Here, Lufthansa is suing the right people) Hacker news never seems to like contracts that don't let it do whatever they want, but the person paid and agreed to do a thing, and didn't do it. The fact that y'all think that thing is stupid is irrelevant. Don't make contracts you aren't going to keep.

admax88q 8y ago
What makes you think that by buying a ticket you're now under contract to board the plane?
- DanBC 8y ago
  That the contract you've entered into explicitly says this.
- detaro 8y ago
  You are not under contract to board the plane, but the contract says if you do not board the plane without a good excuse you agree to pay the difference.
- teraflop 8y ago
  When you buy a ticket on Lufthansa you're required to agree to their conditions of carriage, which include this language: > 5.6. A service charge may be payable by any passenger who: > 5.6.1. fails to arrive for departure at the airport or any other point of departure by the time we have specified (or if no time has actually been specified, with insufficient time to permit completion of official formalities and departure procedures) and, as a consequence, does not use the seat for which a reservation has been made
- johannes1234321 8y ago
  The terms state that you have to take the flight or might be required to pay compensation. Mind the situation for the airline: the passenger is checked in, which means they have to call them out and wait for them on boarding and probably double check that they don't have stored luggage, which causes delays, thus cost to the airline.

dabeeeenster 8y ago

I missed an outbound leg of a return flight from Sydney to London 15 years ago. When I got to Heathrow to get my flight back, they told me the ticket was void because I hadn't taken the outbound leg, then charged me 3k GBP for a 'standard ticket'. I spent about 4 months arguing with BA about it and eventually got most of the ticket refunded. I still think about that.

linkmotif 8y ago

If he bought the second leg in advance, doesn’t it show that he entered the first contract in bad faith, against their terms of service? Personally I don’t get the whole concept of suing your customers. I would just ban him if I was Lufthansa.

martin_a 8y ago

I don't get the problem here. He paid for the full flight, what's the problem with him not taking the connecting flight to the final destination?

thomaslangston 8y ago

My guess is this might be similar to how company's sue people for trademark violations, even when they are not doing any direct damage to the brand i.e. to protect themselves from future legal liability. If too many customers use the hidden city in a foreign airline flight, they might be found not be in compliance with route agreements. Some background on the subject: https://youtu.be/thqbjA2DC-E https://youtu.be/thqbjA2DC-E

paulgb 8y ago
Thanks for posting that video. I feel like every 10 seconds I'm learning something interesting and new about a subject I'd never really given much thought to!

Nasrudith 8y ago

Really there is an easy solution to this - don't have such batshit pricing structures that longer trips taken partway leaving empty seats is cheaper! If it is cheaper for them to head to a third city first instead of directly just have the prices reflect it so it is x to layover and y to destination which is less than z a direct flight - if it is even offered.

everdev 8y ago
I can't think of another business (outside of promotional activities) that requires you to accept something you don't want to reduce the price. It does seem like a breakdown in their pricing logic rather than anything injurious the passenger did.
- owie829 8y ago
  Cable. Regular internet is frequently more expensive than the same speed internet + basic cable.
  - everdev 8y ago
    Ah, right! I actually pay more to not have cable, I forgot about that.
    - artursapek 8y ago
      This makes a little more sense though, because presumably the cable companies get some kick back for delivering the ad network to more homes.
- patch_cable 8y ago
  Comcast Internet in the United States. I technically have a VoIP phone because it made my internet cheaper than if I signed up for internet alone.
  - xiphias2 8y ago

shaki-dora 8y ago

I guess this headline makes one want to grab the pitchfork, but I don’t know if we will end in a better place if carriers are barred from following the pricing strategy at the core of this. LH is simply routing passengers like IP packages, where sometimes it may be more economical to, for example, go the long way around to get to the destination. In those cases, they want to charge you the (lower) price of your trip’s usefulness to you, irregardless of the (longer) route it took you to get there. Barring this practice will just make those flights more expensive, or potentially reduce competition on some rote that a carrier like LH does not service with direct flights. The narrower court case is simply a matter of contract law. Sure, there need to be exceptions for sudden sickness or actual changes of plans, but those are factual questions, not ones of law at issue here. I’m no fan of naive contract fetishism upholding the right to sign away your first-born n &Cs. But this issue here really does not strike me as overtly one-sided.

fanzhang 8y ago

> A Berlin district court dismissed the lawsuit in December, but Lufthansa's spokesperson confirmed to CNN that the company has "already filed the appeal against the decision." So basically this lawsuit has already been dismissed by a lower court, and but Lufthansa is appealing. The entire dynamics here seem like Lufthansa is unlikely to win and even if it does the amount it is claiming ($3K?) is way lower than legal costs, but the publicity of the lawsuit is the entire point they're making. A version of SLAPP, if you will.

detaro 8y ago
Note that the court didn't find that asking for money in this case was wrong, but that Lufthansa didn't justify the specific amount properly.

lutoma 8y ago

After reading the German court document linked in the CNN article (not a lawyer), it appears charging customers extra for not taking a leg of their flight is actually legal in the eyes of the court. They also cite a decision of the highest ordinary court in Germany (BGH) to that effect. I find that quite worrying. The lawsuit was only struck down because of a lack of transparency in the pricing, as the customer has no way to check the fare they will end up with if they skip a leg. So if they publish prices for skipped legs, it would be a-ok I guess.

craftyguy 8y ago
Legality and ethical correctness are not always the same thing. Just because the court doesn't see any conflict with current law doesn't mean it is the right thing to do. In that case, there should be a change of law.

torpfactory 8y ago

Can someone explain the economic rationale to force passengers to fly more for a cheaper ticket from the airlines perspective? I understand the breach of contract arguments but why sell tickets priced this way in the first place?

jonhohle 8y ago
Supply & demand plus transportation logistics, cross promotion, etc. Imagine Las Vegas has an agreement with airlines to subsidize airfair in return for a certain volume of inbound humans. The airline optimizes logistics, and finds that from your city to Vegas wouldn’t result in a full flight, but splitting travelers to higher volume hubs allows them to consolidate for a full flight, maximizing thier subisidy compared to their outlay. They don’t care that the passenger is connecting in this case, they are not what is being optized for. However, if the passenger terminates their trip at the hub, the airline may lose the subsidy making the entire trip a loss for that passenger, despite using less resources on that one particular human. I don’t know if those are the types of arrangmenta that exist, but it would be hard for me to imagine a scenario where cities that rely heavily on tourism aren’t spending money to encourage airlines to bring more people. The other part of that is to the customer/passenger, there is a hidden shadow transaction on their flight with a third party. In other forms of logistics, this is common (last mile delivery by USPS, for example), but I don’t think most people like to think that they are thought of as cargo.

kevindong 8y ago

Airline pricing drives me insane and is what happens when you take price discrimination/revenue optimization to the (often idiotic) extreme. It's very much possible for a one way flight to cost more than a round trip flight that includes the one way flight. For instance, a one way ticket on Delta flight #92 going from JFK to TXL at 8:39pm on May 15, 2019 costs $2,902 [0]. But if you add on a return flight (which includes the original DL 92 flight), the price drops to $957 [1]. [0]: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-05-15.JFKTXL0DL92;c:USD;e:1;a:-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI;sd:1;t:b;tt:o;sp:2.USD.290170 https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-0... [1]: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-05-15.JFKTXL0DL92*/m/0156q./m/02_286.2019-05-22.TXLJFK0DL93;c:USD;e:1;a:-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI*-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI;sd:1;t:b;sp:2.USD.168973*2.USD.95673 https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-0...

html5web 8y ago
Are you searching for specific airlines? Here's another option: https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-05-15.JFKMAN0MT2853~MANTXL1U21895;c:USD;e:1;a:-WW,-DY,-D8,-DI;sd:1;t:b;tt:o;sp:2.USD.36742 https://www.google.com/flights#flt=/m/02_286./m/0156q.2019-0...
- kevindong 8y ago
  Yes. I picked that particular flight to illustrate my point. The budget airlines don't play games like the legacy airlines (or rather at least to not as heavy of a degree), which is refreshing.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
marcyb5st 8y ago
This happens in the opposite way as well! In March a friend of mine is getting married in Panama. The Round-trip from Zurich to Panama was absurdly expensive. For around the same price, I will go to Italy by train, fly from Verona to Spain, hike for 2 weeks along the Camino de Santiago, fly to Panama from Madrid, and back in Zurich.

ashildr 8y ago

If you order the Lufthansa Burger with fries you better finish all the fries - or else you’ll go to bed without desserts in the future AND they sue you...

vinni2 8y ago

I have done this many times (including with Lufthansa) but I would ask them to check in the bag only until where I want to stop the trip. I don’t know if they wasted time waiting for me during those times.