Airline won't refund ticket after passenger dies

Q: I recently bought a pair of tickets through Expedia for my husband and myself. We planned to visit Germany this fall as part of a retirement trip. Shortly after that, my husband passed away very suddenly.

I contacted Expedia about a refund, but was advised to get in touch with our airline, Lufthansa, directly. Lufthansa told me my husband's ticket was nonrefundable. I asked if they would resell his seat, since he couldn't make the flight, and they admitted they would. When I said that it appeared that Lufthansa would profit from the death of my husband, they admitted that that was the case. This really offended me. I tried to send an email to Lufthansa's president, but they have turned me down. What would you advise? -- Ursula Maul, Wynnewood, Pa.

A: My condolences on your loss. Most airlines refund tickets -- even nonrefundable ones -- when a passenger dies. What's more, it's highly unusual for a representative to "admit" that the airline will profit from the death of a passenger. Maybe the representative you reached was having a bad day. I certainly hope so.

I'm concerned about your online travel agency's role in this debacle. Why did Expedia hand you off to Lufthansa in your hour of need? One of the reasons you do business with an online travel agency is that they are trusted intermediaries in case something goes wrong with your flight. If they simply sent you to the airline when you needed help, then why not book a ticket directly with Lufthansa the next time, cutting out the middleman?

I might have started the refund process by sending a brief, polite email to Expedia, explaining that you wanted a refund for your husband's ticket. It may have still referred you to the airline, but at least you would have given it a chance to do what it promises it will do, which is to take care of you.

I would have stayed off the phone, too. These days, the odds of you getting put through to an outsourced, overseas call center, where someone is just trying to process your complaint quickly, is too high. Your case required special attention, which neither your agency nor your airline seemed willing to give you.

You had the right idea with the email to Lufthansa's president. I might have started a little lower on the corporate food chain. I list the names of the managers on my customer-service wiki, On Your Side at (http://onyoursi.de/). If Expedia was unable to help you, then a polite email with your husband's death certificate should have worked.

I contacted Lufthansa on your behalf. It apologized for the "inaccurate" response to your request and agreed to refund your husband's ticket.

Christopher Elliott is the author of "Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals" (Wiley). He's also the ombudsman for National Geographic Traveler magazine and the co-founder of the Consumer Travel Alliance, a nonprofit organization that advocates for travelers. Read more tips on his blog, elliott.org or e-mail him at chris@elliott.org. Christopher Elliott receives a great deal of reader mail, and though he answers them as quickly as possible, your story may not be published for several months because of a backlog of cases.

View the original article here

Ban on use of e-cigarettes by airline passengers?

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration on Wednesday proposed banning the use of electronic cigarettes on airline flights, saying there is concern the smokeless cigarettes may be harmful.

"Airline passengers have rights, and this new rule would enhance passenger comfort and reduce any confusion surrounding the use of electronic cigarettes in flight," Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement.

The ban would clarify an existing Transportation Department rule prohibiting smoking cigarettes or similar products on airline flights.

The proposal would apply to all domestic airline flights, as well as scheduled flights of U.S. and foreign carriers to and from the U.S. The department is also considering whether to extend the ban to charter flights.

E-cigarettes, as they are popularly called, are designed to deliver nicotine or other substances to the smoker in the form of a vapor. They are powered by small lithium ion-batteries. Industry officials say there is no possible harm to the public from their use.

"Everybody knows that when you are smoking on an airplane that's an absolutely a no-no. But this is not smoking. This is vaping," said Ray Story, CEO of the Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association.

The Transportation Department is "asking for something that makes zero sense because this product emits nothing," Story said. "I don't think the masses have been educated enough to know this isn't smoking."

The department said there is a lack of scientific data and knowledge of the ingredients in e-cigarettes. The Air Force surgeon general issued a memorandum last year warning that one sample tested by the Food and Drug Administration contained diethylene glycol, a toxic chemical used in antifreeze, and other samples contained cancer-causing agents. The surgeon general also cautioned commanders that e-cigarette cartridges are replaceable and could be used to deliver substances other than nicotine.

Several states have taken steps to ban either the sale or use of electronic cigarettes. Amtrak has banned the use of electronic smoking devices on trains and in any area where smoking is prohibited. The U.S. Navy has banned electronic cigarettes below decks in submarines.

The e-cigarette association, which represents 25 manufacturers and distributors, says on its website that there are only five ingredients in the devices: nicotine, water, coriander, citric acid and fragrant orchid element.

E-cigarettes have been marketed as a way to address both the nicotine addiction and the behavioral aspects of smoking — the holding of the cigarette, the puffing, seeing the smoke come out and the hand motion — without the thousands of chemicals found in cigarettes.

Nearly 46 million Americans smoke cigarettes. About 40 percent try to quit each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Unlike nicotine patches or gums, e-smokes have operated in a legal gray area.

First marketed overseas in 2002, e-cigarettes didn't become easily available in the U.S. until late 2006. The FDA lost a court case last year after trying to treat e-cigarettes as drug-delivery devices.

___

Online:

Transportation Department www.dot.gov

Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association http://www.tveca.com/contacts.php

___

Follow Joan Lowy on Twitter: http://twitter.com/AP_Joan_Lowy

View the original article here

Green Day singer says he's latest airline passenger to be tossed for too-low trousers

By Associated Press

7:28 p.m. CDT, September 2, 2011

OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — Green Day front man Billie Joe Armstrong says his sagging pants cost him a seat on a Southwest Airlines flight.

The singer-guitarist for the San Francisco Bay area band sent a message to his Twitter followers on Thursday expressing his indignation at being tossed from an Oakland-to-Burbank flight for wearing his trousers too low.

"Just got kicked off a southwest flight because my pants sagged too low! What the f(asterisk)(asterisk)(asterisk)? No joke!" he wrote.

An ABC7 news producer who was on the same flight told the station that a flight attendant approached Armstrong as the plane was getting ready to take off and asked him to hike his pants higher. The producer, Cindy Qiu, says Armstrong initially responded by asking the attendant if there weren't "better things to do than worry about that?"

But the attendant persisted and told Armstrong he could be ejected for his refusal to comply. When Armstrong insisted he was just trying to get to his seat, he and a traveling companion were taken off the plane.

Southwest spokesman Brad Hawkins released a statement saying Armstrong was allowed onto the next flight to Burbank and had told a customer relations agent who contacted him he had no further complaints.

"As soon as we became aware of what had happened, we reached out to apologize for this Customer's experience," the statement read. "He elected to take the next flight. We followed up with this Customer and involved Employees to get more details and, in our latest conversations, understand from the Customer the situation was resolved to his satisfaction."

A University of New Mexico football player was arrested at San Francisco International Airport in June when he allegedly refused a U.S. Airways attendant request for him to pull up his low-riding pants and, later, the captain's order to leave the plane.

The player, Deshon Marman, was held on suspicion of trespassing, battery of a police officer and obstruction of a police investigation when he allegedly resisted the officer who escorted him from the plane. But the San Mateo County district attorney refused to bring charges.

The incident sparked allegations of racial profiling after a photo surfaced of a man who flew aboard a US Airways flight wearing skimpy women's panties and mid-thigh stockings days before Marman's arrest. That man was white. Marman is African-American.

View the original article here

If an airline downgrades your ticket, you have recourse

Question: I was astounded to read in the July 24 "On the Spot" column ["Enjoy Your New Seat"] that an airline can reassign a confirmed seat to allow passengers with children to sit together. Suppose I have booked a seat in business class because I can't physically fly in coach. If there's an equipment change and there are fewer seats in business class, can airlines downgrade me to coach and refuse to refund my purchase?

Mary-Lynne Fisher

La Crescenta

Answer: Yes, airlines can downgrade your seat, but they should refund the difference between the cost of the original seat and the new one.

But I was astounded to hear Jonathan Harriman, an attorney with Anolik Law Corp., a Bay Area company that specializes in travel law, say this: "You don't have a seat till you're sitting on it on the plane." So who really has the upper hand?

Advantage: airlines.

But you do have some "friends" who can come to your rescue if you're unseated.

First is the airline's contract of carriage, which says what the airline can and cannot do. Quickly now, answer this: If there's a snowstorm in Chicago and you miss your connection there on a United flight, does the airline have to find a hotel for you? If you have the contract of carriage handy, you'll know that. You can read it ahead of time, print it out or download an app. (A new app, The Plane Rules, from contracts expert Terry Trippler, is helpful. Here's what it says in answer to that question: The "rule reads that United's only liability for delay, cancellation or misconnection [in case of weather] is to refund the unused portion of your ticket." (Good luck finding a place to sleep.)

Advantage: consumers. Sort of.

Second is 49 United States Code 41712, the "Unfair and deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition" law, which says: "On the initiative of the secretary of Transportation or the complaint of an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent, and if the secretary considers it is in the public interest, the secretary may investigate and decide whether an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent has been or is engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice or an unfair method of competition in air transportation or the sale of air transportation. If the secretary … finds that an air carrier, foreign air carrier or ticket agent is engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice or unfair method of competition, the secretary shall order the air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent to stop the practice or method."

Advantage: consumers who know the law.

Third is the Aviation Consumer Protection Division of the Department of Transportation. If you think the airline is not adhering to rules and regulations, you also can file a complaint with the DOT. Call (202) 366-2220 or go toairconsumer.dot.gov/CP_AirlineService.htm to record or file a complaint online, respectively. Note that the recorded message at the start of the hotline says that airlines are really in the best position to resolve service issues. (Right. Everybody who believes that, stand on your head.)

Advantage: consumers who know how to complain effectively.

In many of these cases, intent may be key, Harriman says. Let's say you have that business-class ticket and you paid $3,000 for that seat — the last one. The plane is sold out. But here comes a guy who will pay $5,000 for the ticket, so the airline decides to dump you. The airline "shouldn't be doing this as a way to screw people out of their money to make a little bit more money…. That's a wrongful act," Harriman says.

Advantage: consumers, although the passenger really would not have a way to find this out. Still, the passenger should be given the difference between his fare and the coach fare, if he's downgraded. And, Harriman says, you need to be told that you can get cash for this, not just vouchers. (Airlines love to give vouchers, which, if you're angry enough, you'll probably never use.)

And what if you've bought a coach ticket that can be upgraded and you use miles to buy a business- or first-class seat but you get moved back to coach? Isn't that deceptive?

No, Harriman says. On most airlines' websites, those kinds of purchases don't come with guarantees. Here's what American says about its awards flight upgrade: "You will have a confirmed seat, as long as award seats are still available for the award you are using when you make your reservation. However, all accommodations are subject to availability at the time reservations are made." Which means they can take them away whenever they wish.

Advantage: airlines.

If you do lose your upgrade, "You should get your miles back and you should battle for bonus miles," says Trippler, who spent part of his career working for the airlines. Sometimes, he says, airlines will give you miles to go away and quit complaining.

Advantage: annoying consumers, which many airlines consider most of us to be.

Have a travel dilemma? Write to travel@latimes.com. We regret we cannot answer every inquiry.

View the original article here

No Refund For Airline Taxes

The IRS has decided that passengers who purchased airline tickets before the lapse of the FAA's authorization, but also traveled during that time, will not receive a refund for the taxes collected.

Maybe the better news for passengers is that the IRS is not forcing those who purchased tickets during that lapse, to pay taxes for those future flights, now that the FAA authorization has been reinstated.

Since the FAA Reauthorization Bill was delayed for about two weeks beginning July 23, 2011,without an extension agreed upon in the House and Senate, there was a loss of at least $20 million in taxes that were not collected from passengers during that time frame. Plus around 70,000 workers were furloughed. Taxes are now being collected and those were workers should be back to work.

The new extension will last through September 16, 2011. By then a new Reauthorization Bill is hoped to be agreed upon by the House and Senate. There has not been a permanent FAA Reauthorization Bill since 2007.

The shutdown also caused airport construction projects to shut down. The FAA also could not collect tax on avgas as well, creating pricing problems with companies who sell the fuel.

What problems or questions came about from passengers to their travel agents during this period? Did clients save a lot of money overall?

View the original article here