Gary Leff posts about a traveler who successfully sued Orbitz over their airline ticket cancellation policy.

My Orbitz adventure began with reading about Orbitz’s “courtesy cancellation policy” on its website. The site stated that one could cancel an airline reservation by 10:00 P.M. Central Time the following day and get a complete refund. The exceptions were paper tickets, tours, and “certain airlines.” I wrote to Orbitz customer service, and was told that “The two airlines that are an exception from the ‘Courtesy Cancellation’ option are Spirit Airlines and AirTran Airlines.” So, I felt safe booking Virgin America through Orbitz.

The day after my booking, I needed to cancel. I went to the reservation, but there was no “courtesy cancel” button. I then called Orbitz customer service, and got someone in the Philippines. Both the first person I spoke with, and the claimed supervisor, said that the courtesy cancel policy did not apply because there was no button allowing a courtesy cancel, therefore the policy did not apply. The simple logical assertion that somehow Orbitz was bound by its own website and its prior response to my email inquiry seemed to be over the head of the representative.
[...]

The rest of the saga is well worth reading, detailing the negotiations before court, the company’s refusal to clarify its policy online, and final judgment: Award to the plaintiff for a full refund, legal fees, and $500 for the trouble. Despite voting fully for the consumer in this case, small claims courts can’t force the company to change their policy or the content of the website.

There are a few surprises in this for me.

First, I’m actually surprised that Orbitz showed up in court. I’ve heard many cases of large travel companies just not showing up in small claims court, and accepting the judgment in absentia. (Lesson: Sue.)

Second, I was frankly surprised to hear that Orbitz even HAS a 24-hour cancellation policy for airline tickets. Airlines have been scaling these policies back for purchases on their own websites, so it’s surprising that Orbitz can afford that kind of generosity. (Admittedly, the booking fee, if applicable is not refundable. But Orbitz eliminated most booking fees for airline tickets a while ago, and didn’t bring it back.)

Third, I’m surprised that the company was so resistant to clarifying their policy on the website. Orbitz has been pitching itself as the friend of the little guy, and transparency should be a big part of that. But this policy is far from clear.

Having fine print is bad. Having invisible print is worse.

Orbitz would be wise to reconsider the vagaries of the policy. Having the 24 hours to cancel is a great way to encourage someone to click “buy” in the first place. But not knowing if you’re covered until you hit “purchase”? That’s not a guarantee. That’s a lottery.

I was chatting with a friend recently, and his comments reminded me of a cruel reality for passport holders: The lifespan of passports is shorter than advertised.

[My youngest daughter] got a passport at age 6 weeks. She’ll be stuck with that photo until age 4 1/2, because passports aren’t really valid up until the expiration date; most countries require 6 months of remaining validity to let you in.

And since kids only get 5 years’ validity anyway, for us crazies who get passports for babies, we’ll have to buy 4 passports before they’re adults and move up to the 10-year passports.

This is really a great point. Passports aren’t really fully valid as they approach their expiration date. Some countries require your passport to be valid three or six months past your date of intended departure. Presumably, this is meant to assure the country’s immigration folk that you’ll be legally permitted to return home, if circumstances were to cause your stay in their land to be extended.

I learned this the hard way, nearly 16 years ago. At the time, I unwittingly thought that the date of the intended departure from the foreign country mattered. But no. I tried using a passport that had only 2 months’ life on it, for a one-month trip abroad. It required special dispensations from the customs and immigration offices of Fiji and Tonga, the countries I was traveling to. Luckily, I had a long layover at LAX, and Air New Zealand staff were able to make it work. But that was in 1994. I don’t know if that would be possible today. Lesson learned.

Most airlines will catch this at the time of check-in. But that is likely too late to do anything about it. In our hypersensitive security environment, you won’t likely be able to smooth-talk your way across a border without a passport with many months of validity.

The U.S. State Department offers a list of expiration restrictions by country on their website, here. Scroll down to the “entry/exit requirements” section.

So be forewarned: those 10-year passports will only be valid for travel for 9.5 years. They’ll still serve as valid identification, though. Just not at many overseas points of entry.

(image)

United is once again “enhancing” its frequent flier program, Mileage Plus. My first thought was, “Oh no, here we go again.” I immediately flashed back to American’s rollout of one-way awards — which killed one of the best award ticket features, the free stopover.

With United, it’s actually a better proposition, on the whole. Don’t get me wrong: It’s a good news/bad news scenario. But on the whole, it’s better than AA’s offering.

The program changes actually incorporate two new policies: Cash+miles tickets, and one-way awards.

• Good: Cash+miles options
  United is offering a “Miles and Money” option, so a smaller mileage balance can be supplemented with cash. A nice option for flexibility.
• Not so good: Availability and fees
  However, it’s not available on every flight (“select flights”). I ran a few searches, and there was no cash-supplement option.

  Note also that you’ll be responsible for more fees (like airport passenger facility fees) which aren’t typically charged for tickets paid 100% with miles. So the cost for the Miles and Money option will be more than just the cash fare paid.

  The complete rules are here.

• Good: One-way awards
  One way awards are a great feature, especially if you’re traveling to a city that’s serviced by another airline that offers a similar award structure. (Say, fly one-way there on AA, and one-way back on UA.) United is making one-way awards available only via united.com, and you can only book flights operated by UA (no codeshares or partners). The one-way redemption chart is here. (pdf)
• Not so Good: The threat to stopovers
  Booking a ticket on entirely UA metal can no longer include a complimentary stopover. Each leg will need to be booked separately, as a one-way segment. This will drive the number of miles required higher. But this shouldn’t be a big concern for true stopover buffs. For example, if I were to fly from New York to Paris, spend a few days there, then fly on to Istanbul, and eventually return, that would have to be booked using a Star Alliance ticket. Those ticketing rules appear unchanged. But all-UA award itineraries — already less desirable than most Star Alliance partner flights — will be even less desirable. And I worry that Star Alliance tickets are next…

On the whole, this really does strike me as a program enhancement. Perfect? No. But I’m not going to complain.

(image)

Downgraded: Reptiles and amphibians
A German reptile collector was caught trying to smuggle 42 endangered lizards and skinks out of New Zealand. In his underwear. For once, I’m in favor of full-body scans, if only to see what this looks like on the monitor.

Upgraded: Advice for worst-case aviation scenarios
No one wants to think about what they would have to do in the case of an inflight accident. But if you were to survive such an event, make sure you’ve read this guide to surviving a 35,000-foot fall.

Downgraded: Machu Picchu
Sad news: The train line that provides access to the ancient Incan city of Machu Picchu in Peru has been washed away, destroyed by recent flooding. This not only has devastating consequences for tourism in the immediate vicinity of the ruins, but for Peru as a whole:

Whether the fault of a mafia-like Cusco tourist industry, simple laziness by foreign and local tourism companies who slap an image of Machu Picchu on advertising and say “that’s Peru”, or the ignorance of cash-rich tourists happy to hand over money and be taken to where they are told – the result is the same. A Peru without Machu Picchu, despite there being dozens of equivalents across the country, is a country with a tourism industry in trouble.

See here for more amazing photos and videos of the destruction. Also here, for a sense of the breadth of the humanitarian disaster in Cusco.

Upgraded: Kayak’s hotel deals
Kayak, the leading fare aggregator, is following the online travel agency trend and pushing harder into the hotel space. Not only are they offering metasearch capabilities, which they have long done, but they’re now branching out and offering “private sale” rates. Though they’ll be technically sold directly by the hotel, it’s direct competition with the online travel agencies.

Upgraded: Hotel booking advertisements
Upgraded: Japanese business-cats
I don’t speak Japanese, but I suspect that this is an ad for a travel booking engine targeted at business travelers. Or at cats who travel on business. (Anyone who speaks or reads Japanese is invited to help with the translation. What’s on the business card??) The awesomeness of these 13 seconds cannot be overstated.

As much as I am an advocate for point-earning credit cards, sometimes there are more important considerations than your kickback.

One argument I’ve made on several occasions (such as here), is that international travel is a time to choose your credit card on the basis of fees, rather than rewards. (Ideally, you can get both, but most rewards cards slap hefty foreign transaction charges on your account.)

Another consideration is rental car coverage. Because of Visa’s more generous loss-of-use coverage in the case of damage to the car, I always use a Visa when renting.

But another rationale became clearer to me this past week: For expensive items, it can make sense to choose a card on the basis of its purchase protection.

Last week, our home was broken into and burglarized. The thieves took one item: a nearly-new high-end netbook, purchased just a few months ago.

After the police left the house (and after we cleaned up the CSI staff’s fingerprinting dust from our bedroom…) I filed a homeowner’s insurance claim. But I remembered that our credit card might be able to cover a part of it, and that the credit card might have been our only coverage had the computer been lost outside the home.

In the process, I was reminded of the variations between cards:

American Express Purchase Protection will cover the expenses of a lost, stolen, or damaged item if the incident happens within 90 days of purchase, up to $1000 per incident and $50,000 annually.

Visa Signature has a similar product, dubbed Purchase Security, but incidents are limited to $500 of coverage. The $50,000 annual cap still applies.

MasterCard’s Purchase Assurance is also limited to 90 days, but it’s not clear what the dollar limits are. You need to check with your card-issuing bank to see how large the benefit is. (In my own case, Citibank offers $1000 coverage per incident, with a $25,000 annual cap.)

I would rank those 1) Amex, 2) MasterCard, and 3) Visa.

(I remember when these programs lasted an entire year, instead of just 90 days. But times change, and benefits get shaved back.)

The computer that was stolen from me was bought with a Visa, and it isn’t covered, as it was stolen just over 100 days from the time of purchase (the credit card coverage had run out on day 91). Our normal go-to card, our Starwood Amex, or our Citibank MasterCard, wouldn’t have been any more help, given the 90-day limit. But if the crime had occurred a few weeks ago, the Amex or MC would have been the better cards to have used.

But for big purchases, the Visa just went down a notch in my estimation, and the Amex moved up.

Air New Zealand is launching new seats in its longhaul economy class, with a section of the plane fitted with “Skycouch” seats designed to create a three-seat wide airborne equivalent of a foldout couch. It’s an effort to create the first lie-flat bed in coach, a worthy goal if ever there was one.

Starting in November 2010, the window seats in the first eleven rows of economy class of newly-delivered Boeing 777-300s will have cushioned extensions (positioned like calf supports when in “seat” mode) which extend up to create a couch-like flat surface.

To reserve a Skycouch, you’ll need to buy three seats, obviously. If you’re traveling as a pair, you can buy your usual two seats and add on the third seat for half the price of the other two.

My first thought, when I saw the design, was that they were making the “ghetto upgrade” — laying down across a row of empty seats — an official booking class. And indeed, that’s the basis of the design, but expanded to be wide enough for two consenting adults.

No curtains, and no undressing, so don’t get any ideas.

The biggest shortcoming at this point appears to be the length of the bed. The width of three airline seats isn’t that big. Average seat width is 17″. Let’s even add a few inches for gaps between cushions, to be generous. (I know, gaps?) Let’s bump it up to 55″ — 4′ 7″ or 1.4 meters — across all three seats. That’s great if you’re short, but if you’re any taller than that, your feet will be hanging out into aisle. Look at the promo photo below. The guy’s head is angled up the wall of the plane:

There’s some romper room risk here, too. I can see families, especially large ones, buying these seats if they can afford them, and keeping the seats in couch mode for the duration. That means higher odds of noise. If traveling in a non-Skycouch economy seat, and looking for rest, try to find a location as far from the couches as possible.

The airline is also changing its premium economy seats and improving some service delivery in the business cabin. And there’s “new oven technology that will cook food from scratch rather than simply reheating,” but the big news is really (deservedly) the couch-in-coach concept.

A short promotional video to give further perspective (and showing the changes to business and premium economy), after the jump:
(more…)

Reader Richard T. writes:

The incident where the guy snuck through security to see his girlfriend off on a flight got me thinking: Is there a legal way for a person to go through airport security without having a boarding pass? I’m happy to submit to all manner of screenings, wandings, pat-downs, etc.

Yes, actually, there are a couple.

1. Request a gate pass from the airline
Under certain circumstances, you can obtain a gate pass, essentially a permission slip issued by an airline, which allows you to pass through security and to the gates. (Of course, you’re subject to inspection, like everyone else.) Gate passes are typically issued to parents/guardians of a minor traveling alone, to a medical assistant, to an interpreter, or to someone designated as accompanying an elderly person, usually for health reasons. And under TSA Security Directive 1544-01-10w, family of military personnel may get passes to “sterile concourse areas to escort the military passenger to the gate or to meet a military passenger’s inbound arrival at the gate.” Gate passes are free, but are issued at the airline’s discretion. Just saying you’d like to meet your friends and family? Not good enough, typically, but take your best shot!

2. Buy a refundable ticket.
Buy a fully-refundable ticket — to anywhere. Somewhere cheap, somewhere expensive, it doesn’t matter. Buy it, then check in. Print your boarding pass. Walk through security, with a perfectly legal boarding pass. Wave goodbye (or hello) to your friends from the gate. Exit the secure area of the airport. Refund the ticket, by phone or at the counter. (Remember, it was fully refundable. FULLY. But do it before the flight leaves.) It’s an annoying step, but there’s nothing illegal about it.

Richard, you asked about the legal options. So I know you’re not interested in illegal methods, like printing your own forged boarding passes. Phony passes won’t work to get you onto a plane, but they might get you through the security checkpoint. They could also get you a visit from the FBI, since they violate the U.S. code, title 18, part 1, chapter 47, § 1036. Needless to say, NOT RECOMMENDED unless you want to go to jail. But it’s been done…

Any other techniques out there? Hit the comments!

You can’t make this up: A TSA worker abuses his authority and scares the crap out of an innocent woman by planting phony contraband… as a joke. From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

After pulling her laptop out of her carry-on bag, sliding the items through the scanning machines, and walking through a detector, [Rebecca Solomon] went to collect her things.

A TSA worker was staring at her. He motioned her toward him.

Then he pulled a small, clear plastic bag from her carry-on – the sort of baggie that a pair of earrings might come in. Inside the bag was fine, white powder.

The innocent passenger understandably freaked out, realizing she had been framed. And when drugs are involved, it’s not just a missed flight that’s of concern. But wait:

Just kidding, he said. He waved the baggie. It was his.

Kidding? Kidding??? Unbelievable. Not only is this offensive, but so stupid. On what planet did this agent reside, that he thought this was even remotely okay? And what kind of power trip must he have been on, to do this in front of other passengers and fellow agents?

According to the Inquirer, the agent in question no longer works for TSA, but you have to wonder how someone with such miserable judgment was ever hired in the first place.

So, how would you have handled being framed by TSA?…

This may be the dumbest marketing/PR gimmick I’ve seen in a while. Via Barbara de Lollis, the Telegraph reports:

A hotel chain is employing human bed warmers to help guests get a good night’s sleep.

The walking electric blankets are dressed in special all-in-one sleeper suits and are sent to warm the beds of guests staying at the Holiday Inn before they get under the covers.
[...]
Holiday Inn spokeswoman Jane Bednall said the idea was ”like having a giant hot water bottle in your bed”. The five minute free bed warming sessions are being tried out in London and Manchester at the end of January.

This is so dumb it hurts. If you’re not looking for, umm, a casual encounter… why on earth would you want a stranger hanging out in your bed??

I guess the labor cost of hiring people to warm beds is lower than actually buying electric blankets and hot water bottles?

Upgraded: Making the most out of a small airport
For those who are frustrated with the seemingly slow-as-molasses pace of relief efforts and the ceaseless flow of depressing imagery from Haiti, consider this, from the commander of the earthquake-damaged airfield that was once the Port-au-Prince airport:

Col. Buck Elton, who was given the mission to open up airfield and assist with airlifts, says they have controlled 600+ takeoffs and landings in an airstrip that normally sees three takeoffs and landings a day.

Because the air traffic control tower has collapsed, all of this is being done by radio, on the ground – in a place that only has one runway/taxiway for planes, set directly in the middle of the airport and thus making it difficult for other planes to take off and arrive.

Col. Buck talked about how they have to “stack the aircraft until we have space for someone else to come in. ” The maximum number of aircraft that can fit on the ground: one wide-body, five narrow-body planes. and three smaller aircrafts that can taxi in on the ground, filling that spot as necessary. (It sounds like a game of Tetris.)

“The volume is similar to running a major airport without computers, radar or other equipment,” he said.

That’s great work in a bad situation. Here’s hoping that they can squeeze a few more relief flights in and out.

Downgraded: JAL
Japan’s JAL officially declared bankruptcy and defaulted on its bonds. The bidding war for the airline reached an impasse, but will resume now that bankruptcy is definitive.

Upgraded: Your debit card’s PIN
For some time, debit cards have been accepted as a form of payment on airline websites, but in the US, the cards have been processed much like a credit card, through the Visa or MasterCard number to which they’re linked. Now, Spirit Airlines is serving up a way to use your debit card to pay for airline tickets, using the same PIN you use at the ATM. PIN-enabled transactions at retail locations have gained acceptance (and are far cheaper for the retailer than swipe-and-sign transactions), but entering your PIN into a website? That may be a tough sell to the American consumer.

Upgraded: Really big new threats to air safety
Downgraded: Reality
On a lighter note, forget airport patdowns. Worry about giant sharks that are larger than super-jumbo jets and can attack aircraft from deep in the sea. There’s so much to enjoy in just this short clip from the B-movie horror spectacle “Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus.” The wooden acting, the awful computer animation, the absurd physics. Aviation geeks will enjoy the near-slanderous depiction of a “Condor Airlines” (alert the German airline of that name of this abuse!) Boeing 747-8 — a plane that hasn’t even been built yet — bouncing through the clouds, before it … just watch below. Words get in the way.