Have any Australians used this company and had success? I am about to book with them and am getting nervous.
>>>Then you might care to point out where it says that Thai will cancel a flight<<<
"THAI reserves the right to withhold or confiscate award documents, void remaining "
From a legal point of view, Id say the 'confiscate award document' part would comfortably fall into the cancellation interpretation. And I certainly wouldn't try challenging what discretionary powers the airlines have with their own property in court. And it is THEIR property. It's akin to one renting a house, then trying to sell it as if we're their own.Edited: 13 November 2013, 07:42
I will also borrow USBT's famous bargepole and avoid these people.
The fraud management teams in a number of airlines revenue management departments have just got new software to help flag and cancel these bartered miles tickets.I would expect to see more posts in the next few months.
USBT's is very famous. TP also has a famous one, but occasionally she leaves it behind and also needs to borrow USBT's. I hadn't realised these are also called 'Quants' - learned that today.
Wouldn't touch AFG with a quant - nah doesn't have the same ring about it....
"The selling, purchasing, bartering, auctioning or exchanging of USBT's Bargepole is strictly prohibited. USBT reserves the right to withhold or confi scate bargepoles. "
However I make exceptions, and this is one. :-)Edited: 13 November 2013, 08:02
"Whether or not it's against an airline's conditions is irrelevant"
The mind boggles....
No, your analogy falls down immediately. If you're standing in front of a judge, you're charged with a *specific offence* at law, not with some vague 'not doing something in the spirit it was intended' kind of charge.
Now if you'd care to point out to me which of those proscribed actions in the T&C I have done, I'd be obliged.
My analogy stands because in this case the airline, is judge, jury and executioner.
No it's not. You have a remedy at law if it cancels your flight capriciously, without recourse to specific items of its Terms & Conditions.
>>>You have a remedy at law if it cancels your flight capriciously, without recourse to specific items of its Terms & Conditions<<<
Yes. AFTER the fact you've already been inconvenienced, missed appointments, schedules and potentially cost hundreds in unplanned stopovers and delays. That's without including the stress and embarrassment caused.
Not only that, the person that "purchased" the ticket would be the one that would seek remedy. That wouldn't be you, but the FF member who used their miles, and whose account would have been suspended or terminated. They would be the one who would have to seek recourse from the airline. And if they were successful, any refund would be miles back to that person, not you. Remember that you would not have paid the airline a penny.
You have a remedy at law if it cancels your flight capriciously, without recourse to specific items of its Terms & Conditions.
Which were violated by the sale of miles so there is nothing capricious about it! Doh! So good luck with that, the airline would have all the evidence, all you'd have is a contract with a third party. Anyway you seem happy to go ahead so do, same goes for anyone else happy to claim in the courts months after flights have been cancelled and you had disruption and cost.I've read many accounts of cancelled flights due to air miles issues like this, none of anyone successfully suing the airline for cancelling a ticket in this type of circumstance. If it was as clear cut as you make out, you'd think the agencies would have done so wouldn't you?
Anyway its all about the odds, so if you are happy to go ahead, do so, and same for anyone else reading this who has read and understood. It's about awareness. Many people buying these tickets have no concept what underlies them. you are the first person on any forum I've read who doesn't just disagree with the "morality" of airlines not allowing miles resale, but thinks that due to a loophole they cannot cancel flights, despite the very clear evidence they do !Edited: 15 November 2013, 06:35