AerLingus put me on standby?!

Happyrabbit

Does anyone know what factors decide if you get put on a "standby" list for a flight?! I'm flying Airlingus and I checked in 4 hours before my flight so I don't think I would have been the last one to check in, yet I've been told I have "no assigned seat". I didn't turn up for my outward flight in my booking but it doesn't mean I won't be using my return flight.

I'm now sitting here and waiting if there will be a seat for me. I need to be back to work today:(.

I have 4 more flights coming up with airlingus and this is putting me off.

Not particularly angry or worried just bemused, perhaps lone travellers are more likely to be in this situation! Any info or people's own experiences very welcome!

ED E

Happyrabbit wrote: »

I didn't turn up for my outward flight in my booking


perhaps lone travellers are more likely to be in this situation!

The former more than the latter.

Happyrabbit

KLM did that to me on the 2nd flight of a two flight journey. I went to a desk asap and they sorted me out but if they didn't unfortunately it's a case of such is life.

Happyrabbit wrote: »

............. I didn't turn up for my outward flight in my booking but it doesn't mean I won't be using my return flight.............

To be fair, if you were them who would you put on standby before you?

mmg0305

" I didn't turn up for my outward flight in my booking but it doesn't mean I won't be using my return flight"

Er, actually that's not an Aer Lingus thing. It's fairly standard for many airlines. I'm assuming you didn't tell them in advance, so count yourself lucky to be on standby rather than being asked to buy a new ticket.

https://www.aerlingus.com/support/legal/conditions-of-carriage/##a5

5.6 CANCELLATION OF ONWARD RESERVATIONS

Please be advised that if you do not show up for any flight, without advising us in advance, we may cancel your return or onward reservations. However, if you do advise us in advance, we will not cancel your subsequent flight reservations.

Larbre34

It begs the question, purely out of nosiness, how did you get there?

Happyrabbit

mmg0305 wrote: »

" I didn't turn up for my outward flight in my booking but it doesn't mean I won't be using my return flight"

Er, actually that's not an Aer Lingus thing. It's fairly standard for many airlines. I'm assuming you didn't tell them in advance, so count yourself lucky to be on standby rather than being asked to buy a new ticket.

https://www.aerlingus.com/support/legal/conditions-of-carriage/##a5

5.6 CANCELLATION OF ONWARD RESERVATIONS

Please be advised that if you do not show up for any flight, without advising us in advance, we may cancel your return or onward reservations. However, if you do advise us in advance, we will not cancel your subsequent flight reservations.

Thank you. 😳😳😳 I have been travelling a lot and I didn't know that airlines have right to cancel my return flights if I didn't turn up for the outbound ones. I never read the small prints.

I missed my outbound flights a few times and I had no problem with the return flights until this time.

tea and coffee

If you miss your outbound flight, most airlines cancel any remaining legs.

theoneeyedman

mmg0305 wrote: »

" I didn't turn up for my outward flight in my booking but it doesn't mean I won't be using my return flight"

Er, actually that's not an Aer Lingus thing. It's fairly standard for many airlines. I'm assuming you didn't tell them in advance, so count yourself lucky to be on standby rather than being asked to buy a new ticket.

https://www.aerlingus.com/support/legal/conditions-of-carriage/##a5

5.6 CANCELLATION OF ONWARD RESERVATIONS

Please be advised that if you do not show up for any flight, without advising us in advance, we may cancel your return or onward reservations. However, if you do advise us in advance, we will not cancel your subsequent flight reservations.

How do they get away with that one.

If the flight is paid for in advance (which I'm assuming it is) what difference does it make if you use it or not, you've paid for both seats?

Happyrabbit

Larbre34 wrote: »

It begs the question, purely out of nosiness, how did you get there?

I bought two outbound flights with two different airlines. Decided to go with the other because they had earlier flight. Last min thing.

papu

theoneeyedman wrote: »

How do they get away with that one.

If the flight is paid for in advance (which I'm assuming it is) what difference does it make if you use it or not, you've paid for both seats?

Because when you book the flight you agree to those T&Cs? Nothing to get away with, its just laziness that most people don't read the contract..

Happyrabbit

theoneeyedman wrote: »

How do they get away with that one.

If the flight is paid for in advance (which I'm assuming it is) what difference does it make if you use it or not, you've paid for both seats?

True, that's what I thought too. I paid for both flights and they had confirmed my seats. They have my money anyway if I didn't turn up. I was expecting an email " Thank you for not flying with us, we are going to cancel your return flight and sell the seat to other customer 🙄"

goingnowhere

The reason the rule exists is traditionally the price of tickets was a function of the journeys undertaken not the separate flights.

In that case you ended up in strange situation where you can actually buy a return for less than a single, hence the rule.

The logical question is if you didn't travel outbound it implies there is doubt that you won't be there to come back. If you call Aer Lingus they will unflag your ticket if no fare difference is due and you are good to go, otherwise they will demand the fare difference to reflect the actual journey taken.

EC261 won't apply for denied boarding as you failed to present yourself on an earlier sector on the same ticket

In the UK BA has been chasing some people who consistently skip the last flight to avail of the fare matrix and contractually they owe BA the fare and tax difference

Locker10a

So did you get on in the end ?

theoneeyedman

goingnowhere wrote: »

The reason the rule exists is traditionally the price of tickets was a function of the journeys undertaken not the separate flights.

In that case you ended up in strange situation where you can actually buy a return for less than a single, hence the rule.

The logical question is if you didn't travel outbound it implies there is doubt that you won't be there to come back. If you call Aer Lingus they will unflag your ticket if no fare difference is due and you are good to go, otherwise they will demand the fare difference to reflect the actual journey taken.

EC261 won't apply for denied boarding as you failed to present yourself on an earlier sector on the same ticket

In the UK BA has been chasing some people who consistently skip the last flight to avail of the fare matrix and contractually they owe BA the fare and tax difference

Thanks for the explanation.
However, my question remains. If I pay for 2 tickets, out and return say, why can I not choose whether or not I actually use the seat or not. I'm assuming in this I guess (and I may be incorrect) that the tickets were paid in advance. Also, most ticketing on line anyway seems to be priced one way, ie you select outward journey separately from the return leg, rather than a round trip ticket

goingnowhere

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Thanks for the explanation.
However, my question remains. If I pay for 2 tickets, out and return say, why can I not choose whether or not I actually use the seat or not. I'm assuming in this I guess (and I may be incorrect) that the tickets were paid in advance. Also, most ticketing on line anyway seems to be priced one way, ie you select outward journey separately from the return leg, rather than a round trip ticket

Then buy two singles...

Two tickets sold as part of the same transaction are not two tickets but one, a single ticket number. Depending on the airline (and the route) they may or may not be priced as singles. If you read the full Aer Lingus T&C's you will see they cover both cases.

Locker10a

theoneeyedman wrote: »

goingnowhere wrote: »

The reason the rule exists is traditionally the price of tickets was a function of the journeys undertaken not the separate flights.

In that case you ended up in strange situation where you can actually buy a return for less than a single, hence the rule.

The logical question is if you didn't travel outbound it implies there is doubt that you won't be there to come back. If you call Aer Lingus they will unflag your ticket if no fare difference is due and you are good to go, otherwise they will demand the fare difference to reflect the actual journey taken.

EC261 won't apply for denied boarding as you failed to present yourself on an earlier sector on the same ticket

In the UK BA has been chasing some people who consistently skip the last flight to avail of the fare matrix and contractually they owe BA the fare and tax difference

Thanks for the explanation.
However, my question remains. If I pay for 2 tickets, out and return say, why can I not choose whether or not I actually use the seat or not. I'm assuming in this I guess (and I may be incorrect) that the tickets were paid in advance. Also, most ticketing on line anyway seems to be priced one way, ie you select outward journey separately from the return leg, rather than a round trip ticket

This actually depends on the type of fare you booked. Most low-cost basic fares are treated as individual tickets however airlines have their own terms and conditions. If you book 2 tickets as part of one itinerary an outbound and inbound then it's not unreasonable for the airline to assume you will not travel on the return if you don't show up for the outward leg.
Most long haul flights are sold on the basis of a return fare as these are more traditional tickets. It means a particular fare will only be available as part of a return journey. This also means failure to show up for any part of this ticket will void all your booking.
I recently was in a situation where I had a return flights but I no longer need the outward journey. Therefore I contacted my airline via social media and alerted them of this, I explained I would still need the return flight and the amended my booking without issue.

endofrainbow

so you didn't read the small print then ?

Happyrabbit

Locker10a wrote: »

So did you get on in the end ?

I did get on in the end but the other 4 people did not. There were two couples but only 2 seats left on the plane so they let me on and again I don't understand how they often choose who gets the seat and who doesn't. Perhaps whoever checks in first?!

Peregrinus

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Thanks for the explanation.
However, my question remains. If I pay for 2 tickets, out and return say, why can I not choose whether or not I actually use the seat or not . . .

The answer is that they don't like flying with empty seats, even if the seats have been paid for. If they are flying from A to B with an empty seat, they'd like to put someone in that seat in the expectation that they can also sell that person a flight from B back to A. Letting you "block" a seat that you aren't using deprives them of that opportunity. Hence, they have set up their T&C's so that if a passenger bails on any segment of a multi-segment journey, they can re-sell the later segments. Not reselling them would represent an opportunity cost which they would rather avoid.

goingnowhere

Sideline to this at some airports the airlines have agreements which grant discounts on fees if they deliver a certain number of passengers per annum, not seats sold, but real passengers through the doors.

Empty seats don't buy tea or sandwiches either