“The representative asked me if I had been drunk when I booked the flight”

I’m tired of reading stories about people who book flights or hotels on their own through the internet and then say the company screwed them by not “protecting” them from themselves and ordering the wrong tickets. This guy chose to buy the tickets himself so he should have checked what he was buying closer. People don’t seem to take responsibility for their own errors any more. If he wanted someone to offer advice on the tickets he should have used a travel agent. The travel agent would have noticed the change in airports and advised him before he booked. I know it’s normally cheaper to book yourself but you get what you pay for.

Note to self – NEVER EVER fly Icelandair. This is ridiculous. 100 percent Icelandair’s fault. A passenger should be able to book from Point A to Point B without checking to ensure that the flights are actually real. In this case the product was faulty as it was impossible for ANY of the six billion people on Planet Earth to use it.

What business gets away with presenting an flawed product then gets to say, tough luck. You’re just SOL.

Now, had the terms and conditions said

” We are selling you these tickets which you may or may not be able to use beause the flights may or may be possible and the planes may or may not exist, let alone it and if it doesn’t then tough luck.” Then the airline might be right.

But seriously, just because someone assents to something doesn’t make it morally or ethically right or enforceable. I think i I hear small claims calling.

I’m a travel manager for a couple of companies and I have to say after reading this that there is a need for someone like me to notice a very important detail like this!

It is very important for the purchaser to pay attention to every little aspect of the booking process and understand an airline’s policies, whether or not one agrees with them.

I also have booked tickets on Icelandair’s website for my clients and their site does require that one pay very close attention, as I have noticed that they offer a good number of itineraries that are not solely on Icelandair metal. As a travel professional, I would have recognized the MSP-EWR leg as a NW route. And I definitely would have noticed MSP-EWR, then JFK-KEF!

I have to disagree with carver. I have clients who fly Icelandair and it is a great little airline. Their in-flight service is excellent and I have not had any issues interacting with their e-mail customer service.

While the Icelandair website can be a little challenging, it is up to us as consumers to beware and understand policy and what we are purchasing. The separate legs of of the itinerary should have been displayed to the purchaser, as well as the fact that one of the legs was operated by a carrier other than FI (Icelandair).

I am not a travel agent, but rather a travel manager, but I know which airports are served by FI and I am sure I would have caught the fact that the itinerary had the customer flying into one airport and out of another.

Just to test this out, I tried booking the same flight about a month from now. While the MSP-Reykjavik direct flight was cheapest, I found both a MSP-LGA-Reykjavik and the aforementioned MSP-EWR-Reykjavik flights.
The fact that these flights are even returned on Icelandair’s website is troubling to me.

I don’t know about Icelandair’s website, but I know on most travel websites (Travelocity, Orbitz, etc.) you get a big warning if you attempt to do anything out of the ordinary. That includes airport transfers (which I get all the time, as there are 3 major airports that are convenient to me) as well as short layovers.

For fun, I decided to attempt to book Arnar’s route on Icelandair’s website. My conclusions are thus:

1. Arnar has to be a total idiot to think he was booking a nonstop flight. The user interface is 100% clear that the flight is NOT nonstop–it even prints “Change of plane required. Time between flights = 2:40 ” in big, bold letters.

2. I can see how Arnar did not realize that a change of airports was required. I didn’t get the EWR -> JFK transfer, but I did get a LGA -> JFK transfer. Here is the only indication that would let you know that there is an airport transfer:

“Arrival: 5:55PM New York, USA – La Guardia, terminal DL” And then a few lines below:
“Departure: 8:35PM New York, USA – John F Kennedy, terminal 7″

I don’t think that’s a clear enough warning that an airport transfer is required. If you weren’t from the US, or you don’t do much international travel, I could see how you might think you’re only changing terminals instead of actually taking a cap ride across Queens, NY. And I sure wouldn’t want to try to make that connection during rush hour.

Yes, the customer should have been more diligent in booking his flight, but Icelandair has a nice little scheme going in garnering a little extra cash from the inexperienced and trusting traveler.

I’m with the customer on this one. An airline has no business selling flights with connections that are impossible to make. Of course it is our responsibility as consumers to pay attention to what we are buying, and I wouldn’t say the customer is blameless in this case. But that does not excuse an airline from selling something that is not viable. Just as a contrasting example, when I book online with American and fly through Dallas, there is always a warning notice alerting you if the connecting flight requires a terminal change. This flight required something far more complicated–an airport change–and it doesn’t sound as though Icelandair’s booking engine alerted the customer about this. It seems like this is the least they can do in the future.

Hi Chris — For quite a while now, there has been a flaw in the Icelandair website which makes it very easy to make the exact error that you report Arnar Hjartarson having made. I covered it last year at http://www.ferdastofan.is/frettabref.php#2008-05 (scroll down to “Booking connecting flights on Icelandair”). It’s high time for Icelandair to improve this particular part of the online booking engine. Sure, Arnar could have avoided problems by being more careful and double checking everything during the booking process. But to be fair to him, Icelandair’s booking engine is set up in a way that requires an abnormal amount of double- and triple-checking in order to ensure a workable connection.

Didn’t say something about 5 topics back about the competent and the qualified NEVER get stuck with these problems?

Mr. Hjartarson, having no clue bout his transfer city, accepts a routing which CLEARLY specifies a change in AIRPORT – not a change in terminal or airline, but a change in Airport.

I own an airplane -even I could only get from EWR to JFK in about 60 min because of all the vectoring required.

Now, that being said, I HAVE gotten from EWR to JFK using public transportation in about 60 minutes. Leave the terminal at EWR, hop on the tram to the Amtrak station, take the FIRST train that shows up to penn Station [NJ Transit or Amtrak], hop to the A train or LIRR, get off at the transfer point and then the Air Train – and the Airtrain takes FOREVER – its soooooooo slow.

sure, Icelandair’s booking engine really is to blame here for even offering the transfer. And this COULD have been solved without a $384 + 80 change fee by simply taking the next earlier flight out of MSP to EWR – giving yourself 4-5 hours to transfer using public transport that runs very frequently will solve the problem.

But, if the OP was competent [meaning he understood what he was doing and where the connection was] or qualified [meaning he knew what the system was telling him] then he never would have bought that ticket. Icelandair really needed to fix it. They did, for a fee, but then the OP would have paid that price anyway – so expecting it for free seems a little on the extreme side.

I agree that the flight option should not have been offered, but Icelandair is not the first nor will not be the last to offer an itinerary like this. We as consumers need to be very careful in what we purchase.

And I also agree with Ian Watson that the Icelandair website does require double- and triple-checking of bookings, based on my firsthand experience.

If the purchaser did not understand that Newark and John F. Kennedy were separate airports or that his flight was non-stop based on the information provided, he probably should have waited and sought assistance before committing to a non-refundable fare that requires a fee for changes.

As a travel product consumer, If I am ever in doubt about understanding what I am booking, especially if it is a non-refundable fare, then I either don’t do it or I seek assistance.

@ Carver

A travel professional may not be required for point A to point B, but in cases such as this, where websites and routings are challenging or complicated, then a travel professional such as myself is justified.

And in defense of myself and other travel professionals, we are well worth our fees. We do more than book travel. In my case, for my clients, I do all of the legwork and research, I keep up with schedule changes (the airlines rarely notify travelers of these changes, but I check itineraries once a week!), I set flight alerts for all flights that come to me so I can be proactive with regard to last minute delays and cancellations, I check in my clients and e-mail or fax their boarding passes, and I am a voice/liaison/advocate between the customer and the travel companies. Ask my clients, I am well worth my fees. In fact, I am a bargain considering the time and stress I save them!

If I had been working for the purchaser in this situation, this would have never happened!

On rereading this, it seems that the crucial issue is that Icelandair sold Arnar a ticket for a flight routing that was impossible to complete. Yet Icelandair had basically warranted to Arnar (by listing the Newark/JFK connection in response to his search engine query and allowing him to book it) that the itinerary was a practicable way of getting from MSP to KEF. When Arnar discovered the problem, Icelandair demanded a change fee of $160 in order to cancel the original booking. I don’t think this is defensible because the original booking could not have been made if not for Icelandair’s negligence in listing it. The difficulty of seeing and comparing connecting flight details on Icelandair’s website was a contributing factor but not the crucial one.

Wouldn’t Arnar have a good chance of recovering his $160 in small claims court in Minnesota? I don’t see much of a case for his recovering the difference between the cost of the two itineraries, but I do think he is due $160.

Would it have killed the passenger to go to Google Maps and type “EWR to JFK”? Here, I’ll do it for him:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=ewr+to+jfk&sll=40.68987,-74.17821&sspn=0.039179,0.077248&g=ewr&ie=UTF8&z=11

That wasn’t so hard, was it? Rather than guess how long the connection will be, or trust the airline’s judgement, why not do it yourself? This isn’t rocket science.

I think we’re missing the point. Is it reasonable for a traveler to rely on the airline to weed out impossibl itineraries? I think so. In modern society we expect suppliers of goods and services to provide them in a reasonable manner

Now, had the itinerary been inconvenient or silly, then I would say the OP is SOL.

The analogy would be purchasing expired food from a grocery store. Yes, the customer ought to have noticed the expiration date, but the store, as the merchant has the higher obligation and must accept the return.

A merchant who deals with the general public warranties that the goods and servces are suitable for their everyday and ordinary intended purpose at the time of the sale. If it isn’t then a refund is due. This protects the consumer from having to verify every little detail.

Icelandair sold an impossible ticket and refused to fix it. That violates every form of business ethics. Google earth is not a substitute for ethical behavior

Interesting debate…

First off, Carver…you are correct in the free market determines the price of something like…a “professional travel manager.” One of the smartest investments I’ve ever made. People who have forgotten more about piloting companies than I’ll ever know have coached me on doing it…and it’s saved me ENORMOUS amounts of time and energy. And yes, even for doing something you think is so simple, like going from Point A to Point B. You may well be shocked to learn…there are things to learn about it, never mind that my time is spent on other things that are better for my business…like finding a way to help our customers more.

Second, I do fly FI whenever I can. GREAT little airline. And I enjoy their Saga Class. I’ve flown it now…6 times…and I prefer it to most anything else going across the Atlantic…especially for the money.

Now…for the debate at hand….

I do see the point in “why would a search engine offer a ticket that is either unusable or difficult, at best, to use?” That being said, for my money, the accountability is NOT on the search engine, ultimately, it’s on the customer. I mean, who runs who? Do I or does the customer run the booking engine? Or does the booking engine run my life? Hmmmm

Me thinks this is a simple, simple issue…what I believe is that a customer saw a chance to save a nickel or two (can’t fault him or her for doing that) and then booked…never looking at times.

You see, for me, TIME trumps money, ALWAYS. And that would probably have been the first thing I would have caught…and because our Travel Professional knows how I think, she too would have caught it.

At the end of the day, “accountability” lies on our shoulders as individuals. While I agree FI should not offer an illegal/challenging/almost impossible routing, the ultimate responsibility is on the person who manages his or her own time and money.

I’ll be on FI whenever I can…and if others chose not to, then enjoy someone else’s more expensive, crappy service.

I am not missing the point. The point is that we all should be informed consumers and buyers should beware. I wish it were not that way, but it is.

A traveler should not have to weed out impossible itineraries, but unfortunately many of us have to do so regularly. In fact, I was booking a personal flight itinerary yesterday and many of the connection times that were presented to me were barely legal. The airline with whom I was booking really should not have been offering those options to me, because selecting one of those would have been a recipe for disaster. Therefore, it was my responsibility as an informed consumer to select the best possible itinerary from all that were presented and err on the side of caution.

It would be prudent for those who book their own travel to be more informed and educated when it comes to doing so. All travelers should make sure that they understand how restricted fares work and the policies, terms, and conditions of each travel company with whom they do business.

In this case, Icelandair did fix the ticket, but they did not waive their change fee. It would have been nice and very customer friendly if they had, but they were not obligated to do so.

Websites, reservation systems, and travel providers vary greatly and it is challenging for the leisure traveler to keep up with it all. Hence, having a travel professional like me, even if just for consultation, might not be a bad idea.

As an attorney, I can guarantee you that an American judge would easily side with the OP. Selling an usable product would be a slam dunk.

@beth

You mention that the tickets were barely legal. Well that’s the rub. Barely legal means that they are haven’t crossed the line. In the OPs case, the tickets were “illegal” in that the connection time was such that no one could use the ticket

Suppose for example, suppose Icelandair sold a ticket such that the first plane was scheduled to arrive after the second plane departed. Would you still fault the op for not noticing.

Here’s my challenge….

I put forth that no one can come up with a reasonable merchant to consumer scenario in which case the consumer purchases an unusable item and cannot return it to the merchant. For the lawyers, the one exception of course is when the merchant specifies that the item may be no good and clearly articulates that fact, e.g. going out of business type sales.

First of all, I am sick and tired of people saying “use a professional travel agent” to avoid any and all problems.

This is an issue of an airline offering an impossible itinerary on their website. They should have it programmed so it will not sell connections that don’t work – period. By presenting it to the purchaser, they are, in my mind, saying it will work, when in this case, it clearly doesn’t.

Airline websites are not perfect, but when they do make a mistake, they should fix the error at their expense, or at least give a full refund.

There is supposed to be an element of trust between the passenger and the airline’s website so these things should not happen.

Perhaps Icelandair’s permit to operate in the United States of America should be suspended until they do business in a fair way. I think maybe the web developer was drunk when they programmed the booking engine!

How about this? Be an informed consumer. Be aware that all itineraries presented by travel websites and reservation systems may not be feasible. Understand in advance airport locations and logistics, airport/airline required check-in times, and airline policies with regard to changes and cancellations. Do the homework/research BEFORE hitting the purchase button, not after.

The only thing the purchaser might be owed is the $160 change fee for two tickets, as he did still wish to travel MSP-KEF and he agreed to being rebooked on the direct flight for the difference in fare.

How about this? Don’t present impossible itinerariies. Don’t sell fake good and services that are unusable by everyone except perhaps Superman. Understand that your customers are a mix of sophisticated and unsophisticated air travelers some of whom actually trust the airlines to deliver what they promised.

Perhaps a more sophisticated traveler might have known. However, in the modern age, we allow customers to make certain assumptions such as

When I buy a car, the car comes with all the parts needed to make it work
When I rent a hotel room in the US it will have a bed
When I buy a computer, the power cord is included.

And when I buy a plane ticket, the itinerary is possible. Perhaps difficult, even unpleasant, but always possible. Let Caveat Emptor remain dead.

@Mark

The difference in your Ocho Rios trip was that they sold you a crappy ticket, but one that was still possible, if unpleasant and inefficient. While I agree with you, its not the same as the OP’s situation where they sold him an impossible ticket.

You know what caught my eye in this? Icelandair’s response of “…the fare on the direct flight from MSP was only available in a higher fare category, the difference of $384 per person…”

Not only was Mr Hjartarson not paying attention to the routing, he was price shopping. The Newark to JFK connection was cheaper by $384 per person, so of course he took that one. And only after he examined what he bought did he realize. Then he wants Icelandair to fix it at no cost?

I don’t think so.

Let’s suppose that the traveler accepted the tickets and itinerary and went ahead and travelled. If he missed the connecting flight, would it be treated as an ordinary missed connection and not as a no-show for the connecting flight?

In which case the booking airline would be obligated to get the traveler to his final destination with due dispatch and without collecting any more money for fees or fare differences, typically rebooking passage on the next flight?

I’m with the customer, 100%.

An airline had no business selling a product that didn’t ‘fit.’

If a travel agent had set you up with the same itinerary, would you feel they were to blame? They book your flights, not telling you how far apart two foreign airports or rail stations are, and that you can’t possibly make the connection, then you pay for the tickets, and they just say ‘sorry’ and leave it at that?

It’s no different. Shame on Icelnd Air.

The one thing I’ve found since moving to Europe (from the US) is that there really is FAR worse customer service on this side of the pond. My ex-pat friends and I rant about this stuff on a daily basis, then hit the pub to drown the memories! (Remember when Madonna moved back to the US, how she said she would NOT miss Londn customer service? Very telling.)

I’m a fairly experienced traveler–I flew over 75,000 miles last year and maintain elite status on an airline–and I participate on the frequent flyer mecca of flyertalk.com, so things like codeshares, terminal changes, fare classes, airport codes, legal connections, co-terminals and the like are very familiar concepts. I’ve been surfing the Internet since 1993 and have been dissecting travel deals almost as long. (I’d wager I know–or have the tools to find out–as much as any standard-issue travel agent.)

And Chris Elliott knows I’ve been one of his most exasperated readers: as someone fairly intricately familiar with airline practices and as someone who works in the travel industry, I constantly chide him for unnecessarily protecting his subjects’ stupidity and expecting the travel provider (be it airline, hotel, rental car, or whatever) to bend to every silly demand. (I’m now a firm believer that the customer is NOT always right.)

But in this case, Chris was right. The customer was right.

Did you hear me, Chris? YOU WERE RIGHT. And you didn’t do enough to help Mr. Hjartarson.

I agree wholeheartedly with Carver here that there is be an element of trust between a consumer and a reputable company. And I doubt Icelandair would consider themselves anything but a reputable company. His grocery store analogy is perfect.

My initial thought when beginning to read Chris Elliott’s article was that the customer was trying to save money by using the multi-city booking function. But that wasn’t the case. To expect the customer to have to even check up on the product the vendor is selling when using a simple round-trip booking engine is ludicrous. It’d be like expecting the grocery-store shopper to look for an expiration date on what appears to be a non-perishable canned item, and then refusing to honor the return when it the shopper discovers that the item has indeed perished and has an expiration date. Why would you expect to even look for an expiration date on a can of beans? Why would you expect to look at the legality or feasibility of the connection if the booking engine suggests it to you?

As someone who virtually breathes travel and travel-related discussion, and as someone who has worked in the travel industry and suffered the brunt of the pure idiocy and retardation of the general public (with which I am continually and greatly frustrated), I can STILL say that this is NOT a situation that any thinking person can expect a normal person to even question, much less do research or think they need to involve the services of a “travel professional.” Everyone who suggested that most people would assume it’s a simple terminal change–or that the airline shouldn’t automatically present a connection that cannot possibly be honored–is ABSOLUTELY correct.

Now, perhaps the fine folks at FI have read this column and the comments, or perhaps Chris Elliott did some further follow-up with FI that he hasn’t told us about (though that’s not usually the case), but it appears they have now instituted a small note:

“Change of airport required. Newark Liberty International – John F Kennedy. Time between flights = 3:21.”

Such information should, of course, be highlighted in red font, but at least this appears to be a step in the right direction. For those who say that Mr. Hjartarson should have known what he was buying, let me specify that even this note, which I assume was not present when most of the earlier commenters were posting (not to mention, of course, when Mr. Hjartarson made his booking), is not prominent at all. How can you tell people they should be informed consumers when the merchant–in whom you place good faith (unlike, say, a street vendor on Sukhumvit in Bangkok)–does not even give you the tools with which to even let you realize you’re not informed.

Chris, please ensure Mr. Hjartarson receives a full refund for an obvious mistake on the part of FI’s IT department.