United=B9s Contract of Carriage is fairly explict (copied below.) Other carriers embed their =8Cno-back-to-back=B9 in their =B3fraudulent intent=B9 clause; book a flight you don=B9t plan to use constitutes fraudulent intent and is in violation of your Contract of Carriage. The president of a company I used to work for used to commute YYZ-MSP every week. The flights were almost always sold-out, his schedule always changing= , so the travel agent (Carlson Wagonlit) used to book multiple reservations o= n Friday afternoon (i.e the 4pm, 5:30pm and 7pm flights) and cancel the ones he wasn=B9t going to take. Since they were all full-fare refundable, there wa= s merely a minor paperwork issue on the agent=B9s side, but of course it sent A= C through conniptions. AC=B9s process for dealing with no-shows on day of departure is atrocious (so bad that frequent AC travelers know that AC=B9s process solution won=B9t even permit standby=B9s unless you are on basically a full Y fare... Even though subsequent flights in the day, including the pax who wants to fly standby, are oversold.) AC caught on, called him (and the agent) on the fraudulent intent clause an= d his reservations were summarily cancelled. He said fine, and traveled Northwest every week for the subsequent two years. (At $2k a week, a good chunk of change.) I don=B9t believe he ever traveled AC again. Airlines may talk big, but they know what side their bread is buttered on. Matthew http://www.ual.com/site/primary/0,10017,2743,00.html C) USE OF COUPONS FROM TWO OR MORE TICKETS ISSUED AT ROUND TRIP FARES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CIRCUMVENTING APPLICABLE -TARIFF RULES (SUCH AS ADVANCE PURCHASE/MINIMUM STAY REQUIREMENT) IS NOT PERMITTED. UA AGENTS AND AUTHORIZED TRAVEL AGENTS ARE PROHIBITED FROM ISSUING TICKETS, COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS "BACK TICKETING," UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCE WHEN THERE IS OBVIOUS INTENT TO ABUSE AND/OR MISUSE RESTRICTED ROUND TRIP FARES. AGENTS FOUND ISSUING SUCH TICKETS MAY BE LIABLE FOR THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FARE PAID AND THE FARE FOR TRANSPORTATION USED. UA HAS THE RIGHT TO DENY TRANSPORTATION TO PASSENGERS FOUND UTILIZING TICKETS IN THIS MANNER, UNLESS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FARE PAID AND THE FARE FOR TRANSPORTATION USED IS COLLECTED. On 7/14/02 6:21 PM, "David Ross" <damiross@attbi.com> wrote: > So will Untidy Airlines penalize a person who frequently commutes and use= s > back-to-back ticketing? For example, I knew a guy who commuted OAK/LAX > every week. Don't know if he did but it would be possible for him to b= uy > a roundtrip leaving on Monday, returning the 2nd Friday after that Monday= . > And he could get an LAX/OAK on Friday, returning on the following Monday. > He would have used all coupons on both tickets. >=20 >=20 >=20 > David Ross > http://home.attbi.com/~damiross/ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Hough" <psa188@juno.com> > To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> > Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 9:29 > Subject: [AIRLINE] SF Gate: United plans to track users of 'back-to-back' > tickets >=20 >=20 > Rather than hassle, annoy and piss off their best customers, why don't > airlines simply rationalize their pricing structures? No wonder people ar= e > flocking to Southwest. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > This article was sent to you by someone who found it on SF Gate. > The original article can be found on SFGate.com here: > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/chronicle/archive/2002/07= /14 > /TR175499.DTL > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sunday, July 14, 2002 (SF Chronicle) > United plans to track users of 'back-to-back' tickets > Ed Perkins >=20 >=20 > United Airlines just announced that it has both the technology and the > will to go after travelers who violate the company's rules on > "back-to-back" tickets. > The airline is referring to the practice of buying two cheap round-trip > tickets, both requiring a Saturday night stay, when the intent is to take > one actual round-trip without staying over Saturday night. > "Foolproof" ways to avoid detection have already appeared in the press, > but I'm not so sure they'll work. Given the risks, I suggest trying > several other alternatives before trying to use a tricky ticket. > The allure of the back-to-back tactic is based on the fact that round > trips without a Saturday night stay can cost as much as five times as the > cheap round-trips that do require Saturday night stays. The airlines' > idea, of course, is to make business travelers pay a lot more than leisur= e > travelers, although the restriction often hits leisure travelers as well. > Here's how it works. Let's say you want to leave home on Monday and > return > on Thursday. On a big airline, the cheapest ticket for that trip would be > unrestricted coach, for, let's say, $1,200 round-trip. Too much money, yo= u > say, > so instead of paying that price, you buy two separate round trips, both > with a Saturday night stay, for, say, $240 each. > Trip 1 starts in your home city on Monday and is supposed to return > sometime after the following Sunday. Trip 2 starts from your destination > on Thursday, and also returns after the following Sunday. Your total > back-to-back cost, at $480, is less than half of what the airline wants > you to pay for the single round trip you really want. Most travelers > simply fail to show up for the return flights booked on both tickets. If > you want to, however, you can book the return portions of both tickets fo= r > a second round-trip within 30 days. > "No more," says United. "We have the technology to catch you." > Although United isn't saying exactly what it will do when it detects you= r > trick, the most likely action is to bill you the difference between what > you paid and what United says you should have paid, enforcing any demands > under threat of penalizing your frequent-flier account and status. > For years, the standard prescriptions for avoiding detection have been t= o > fly two separate airlines for the two cheap trips or, on one airline, to > use different versions of your name (for example, Joe Doakes and Joseph Q= . > Doakes) at different addresses (home and office) with separate > frequent-flier accounts. > Either ploy is safe if the airline's detection system is based on a trac= e > of your name or frequent-flier number. > But what if the detection method is keyed simply to being a no-show for > the return flights? Most airlines, I think, would say that any failure to > show up for the return portion of a round trip violates ticket rules. In > that case, the only way to avoid detection would be actually to take the > second round trip. (This would require scheduling the first trip to retur= n > at a later date - - or at least a later time on the same day -- than the > return flight of the second trip, so you will end up at home.) If you did > that, along with one of the standard ploys, I think you'd be 100 percent > safe. > As of this writing, no other airline had announced plans to copy United'= s > program, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it. > Given the risks, I can't recommend back-to-back. If you want to avoid > overpaying for a no-weekend trip, I suggest trying some alternatives: > -- Fly a low-fare airline that doesn't penalize you so much for not > staying over a weekend, even if you have to drive to a different airport > at either end, > or both ends, of your trip. > -- Find, or ask your travel agent to find, a discounted consolidator > ticket that doesn't require a Saturday night stay. > -- Submit a bid for your trip on Hotwire or Priceline. >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Copyright 2002 SF Chronicle >=20