I'd like to hear your opinions on non-refundable airline tickets, especially if you're a lawyer. It seems to me it's a major lawsuit in the making. What other product can you buy, never use, find a better price later from the same merchant, and still not have your money refunded? Maybe theater or sports tickets, but at least you can sell them yourself since no name is on them. I understand why the airlines came up with this policy - I was in the industry for 12 years - but now that I'm a consumer, I think it stinks. Last month I bought NW tickets to Munich for my family at what was a great rate at that time, but now I've found I could fly non-stop on Lufthansa for less and on SAS for alot less. I guess I could try to find an unscrupulous doctor to certify all 4 of us as sick to get our tickets refunded, but it might cost as much as the savings just to see a doc. We'll stick with what we have, but I'd like to hear your opinions.

I understand where your coming from, but when you purchased those tickets your agreeing to the restrictions on them. You should have checked other airlines at the same time before confirming them. It's the chance you take when purchasing tickets far in advance. Also the fres constantly change, as the availability on the flight changes then the fare changes. I had tickets to Orlando one year for 6 of us and found a cheaper rate elsewhere. Doctor wrote a letter so I could get the tickets refunded. It's because of people like me that airlines are becoming more and more strict that they no longer except a doctors letter. I don't blame them, they are there to make money just as we are out there working to earn money, by making money for the company we work for.

Being in the industry for 12 years, you better than anyone else were aware of the penalties of the tickets you were purchasing. Now you have tickets you don't want, you should have thought of that before you bought them. I don't know what type of penalties your tickets hold, but while tickets are nonrefundable, most are reusable by the person named on them for a service charge and applied towards the purchase of another ticket, so you don't necessarily lose your money. That's exactly why the tickets are made reusable with the fee for illnesses, emergencies, death in a family, etc. Also being in the industry, that's exactly what we advise people who complain about their nonrefundable tickets who are fully aware of what they're purchasing but now find it an inconvenience to hold such tickets.

Maybe I didn't make myself clear or else you aren't paying attention...I do want the tickets and I do understand the rules. My point is, why are airline tickets allowed to be sold without the consumer being allowed a refund? Every other industry will allow a refund on an unused product or at least will <BR>honor a discount they offer after you've bought that product. It's a situation unique to this industry and it seems to me if someone wanted to make a big stink, they'd have a good shot at it. In today's litigious atmosphere, warnings and waivers don't mean a helluva lot.

I understand your point and agree with some of <BR>it and not others (and I have no vested interest, <BR>not being a travel agent and hating many airlines), <BR>but I think your mistake is in comparing airline <BR>reservations to other products. They aren't the <BR>same at all, the "product" is perishable so to <BR>speak, and the arcane pricing structure is based <BR>on special discounts that change depending on <BR>the airlines assessment of how full they are. For <BR>example, just try to get a full refund of an unused <BR>piece of meat that's past its freshness date just <BR>because you decide you don't want it. I think the <BR>airlines have made it a little too complicated and <BR>have too many different restrictions and diff. fares <BR>on the same flight, but on the other hand, this has <BR>allowed the cost of flights to remain fairly low and <BR>competitive. So, the one point I agree <BR>with you on is that as long as the ticket is not <BR>refundable and you can't get a better discount if <BR>you've already paid for it, I do not see why the <BR>airline cares (or the legality of forbidding) you to <BR>sell the ticket to someone <BR>else. I'm not sure if this is true or not since I've <BR>never had to do it, but I think I've read things to <BR>such an effect--IMO, as long as the airline insists <BR>you keep the ticket and pay for a seat/space, I don't <BR>see why they should be allowed to dictate whether <BR>you can sell that seat to someone else. Of course, <BR>I realize the reason is probably to avoid scalping <BR>(private parties buying up early AP seats cheap and <BR>then reselling them), which is a problem when you <BR>have a price structure based on date of purchase. <BR>If there is a way to solve this problem so that private <BR>party sales would be okay but not scalping tickets <BR>by businesses, that would be ideal. Of course, <BR>infrequent travelers are the ones that may get <BR>stuck--I travel quite a bit so if I have to cancel and <BR>reschedule, paying the change fee isn't too bad as <BR>I will likely use that airline again within a year. <BR>However, I think the fee has become too high--I <BR>think it's now $75 by many airlines which is too <BR>much if you're talking about a $100-200 special fare. <BR>$50, the old fare, was more reasonable.

We recently attended our son's graduation in Washington,DC. We booked 3 rooms at the Marriott Hotel at Key Bridge at the very highest rate, nonrefundable, nontransferable and a minimum stay of 3 days. It was a $1000 committment. And, our party included 3 grandparents all over 80 years of age. When I made the reservation I told the clerk that I sincerely hoped all of us would be alive to keep them in a year! But, we wanted that hotel, there were 3 unis graduating and it was Memorial Day weekend!! So, it's not just the airlines, and I don't think a good lawyer would take the case! <BR>

Doug - I am a lawyer, but I specialize in criminal defense. but then, this IS criminal, isn't it? I agree with you 100% but there is nothing I know of you can do. It's kind of like buying underwear, wearing it once, and trying to take it back, I guess. You also can trade the ticket in within one year of its issue date, but you have to travel on the same airline, pay the change fee (most are $75.00 now) and the difference in the airfare between the tickets if the second one is more. If you can find a ticket on the same airline for less somewhere else you want to go in the next year, it's worth the frequent flyer miles to just do the trade in. At least that way it's not a total loss.

<BR> I too am a lawyer, in civil practice dealing with contracts -- and that's what's involved here. I checked some tickets I have and there are three pages of fine print attached, with reference to other terms and conditions. <BR> I don't pretend to understand much of these specifics, but essentially in any contract you have an exchange of values. Here your "quid" is payment and agreement to the contractual terms (which you consent to by paying), in return for which the airline gives a "pro quo" of transportation. The airlines are required to disclose limitations applicable to the tickets, and you decide whether the (claimed to be) reduced price is worth accepting the restrictions. You indicate acceptance by paying. Once the money consideration is paid, the contract is binding. That doesn't mean that there couldn't be circumstances where you could get out of it and negotiate a different deal, but generally a binding contract is enforceable.

Dear Carol, I'm not a lawyer, but my husband is a corporate guy. I don't have the nerve to suggest advice about a contract, but am so happy you have done so! The airlines are not the only place this happens and people are just lax in reading the fine print and yelling about it later. We all need to become a little more savvy! Witness my story about the hotel rooms, the example of the underwear, and we all know the story of cosmetics---how many yucky lipsticks does any woman have hanging around in her bathroom? Unfortunately, the law is supposed to be fair and equitable, not Santa Claus! <BR>

Latest news from this month's Conde Naste - a class action suit has been filed against Alaska Air over non-refundable ticket procedures. Sounds like some of those lawyers must've felt the same way you do, Doug. It'll be interesting to see how successful they are. The airlines are moaning that if this policy is overturned, they'll have to raise fares, but it seems to me that they got along fine before when they were filling planes with super-saver and flexible flyer fares that allowed passengers to cancel or rebook without penalties.

I am not a lawyer, nor even play one on TV. But I would question your assertion that refundability is a legal "right". My understanding is that refund/return policies are established by businesses as a service feature, and are not mandated by law. While I, too, have been stuck in the situation where I would like to change a nonchangeable ticket without living up to the terms of the contract under which I purchased it, the maxim that would seem most appropriate is "tough noogies". Or, in parable fashion: <BR>A shepard was ready to cross a stream. A snake asked "please carry me with you"; the shephard replied "No - you are a snake and will bite me". "I'll be so grateful that I won't bite you, I promise." So the shephard carried the snake inside his shirt. On reaching the other side, the snake bit the shephard. "You promised!" exclaimed the shephard. Replied the snake as he slithered away, "You know what I was when you picked me up!" <BR>