Q: I recently booked a multi-city trip through Orbitz first from Chicago to Fayetteville, Ark., and then on to Washington. Unfortunately, my plans changed and I wasn’t able to leave Fayetteville until two days after my original departure date.
I contacted Orbitz by phone to change my second flight, which was on Northwest Airlines. After being on hold for two hours, I was told that my itinerary “wouldn’t be released” by United Airlines, the carrier I had flown from Chicago to Fayetteville, because I had already used the first part of my ticket. United would allow a change, but only if I took another United flight.
But United couldn’t get me to Washington on time. I needed to be on the earlier Northwest Airlines flight. In the end, I had to pay for a second ticket on Northwest, which cost $665.
I’ve used Orbitz many times and have never encountered a problem with an airline holding my reservation. I feel strongly that I, as an Orbitz customer, should not be penalized for a problem the airlines have with each other. I’d like to get my $665 back. Can you help?
– John Knapp, Minneapolis
A: You should have been able to change your flight after paying a change fee and any fare differential. And when you couldn’t, your online agent should have stepped in to help — even if it meant finding you a new ticket.
I’ve checked with both United and Orbitz to see what went wrong. When I contacted United, it said it had never heard of a reservation being “held” in the way you describe. But between what Orbitz was telling you and what United and Northwest were telling Orbitz, it’s hard to know exactly what was going on.
You did the right thing by contacting Orbitz. The company Web site promises unrivaled service with a “seasoned customer care team” that monitors everything from air traffic to weather data to ensure you’ll have a pleasant trip. Putting people on hold for two hours probably isn’t something Orbitz would want to be known for.
It’s a little ironic that United and Northwest are two of the airlines that started Orbitz in 1999 (they no longer own the online agency). You would think that they could have worked out their differences on this one.
A call to United probably wouldn’t have hurt, but in the end, I think it was up to Orbitz to resolve this problem. And when I contacted Orbitz on your behalf, that’s exactly what it did.
“Ultimately, as the customer’s agents, the buck stops with us,” said Brian Hoyt, a company spokesman. “We could have done more to improve the level of service this customer received and we apologize to Mr. Knapp for this gaffe in service.”
Hoyt said there were “multiple steps” along the way — from the customer to the airline – that could have been improved, and that Orbitz is working to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
✓ Get the latest travel news, tips and commentary from Elliott’s E-Mail, the subversive newsletter from industry gadfly Christopher Elliott. You’ll travel like a pro. Sign up here. It’s free.
Sign up for my 
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
If John had taken advantage of his local travel agent and the ticket was issued with in 24 hrs from his date of travel his agent could have voided the ticket for him. Most airlines will take over the original booking unless it was booked through a service that buys out seats and resells them. Similar to Consolidator tickets. Or he purchased a restricted non refundable ticket that stated “no changes in routing” and he was trying to change his destination. Another senario would be if he already took the outbound portion of his trip and the return portion did not have enough value for an exchange. Not all round trip tickets are divided equally in half. John should make a formal complaint with the company he purchased the ticket from advising that he was not informed of the restrictions of his ticket. All though I’m sure it was clearly stated on his itinerary.
this is a common one,the travel agent should have tried to help john.
Common in what way? I agree that there are airline and industry employees who for no apparent reason disregard the traveler. However what is more common are travelers who are unaware of the restrictions of the fare they purchased.
I guess in this day an age everyone is looking for the ‘cheap’ deal. If you book on the internet- then it is YOUR responsibility to know the rules..that what you get when you dont use a local travel agent that has figured out ‘ the ins and outs’ of problems. When everything goes well on your trip – thats great – but more so than not- there are problems.. Basically, when it is bad – who is there to pull you out of the hole?? If you dont know the answers or have not time to research (which can take HOURS)— then pay a few extra bucks and book with the travel agent.
When you book a multi-carrier itinerary, one airline is in control of your ticket, and is the one that actually charges the credit card directly. After you complete ALL travel, including changes made to the original itinerary, the owning airline then divides the money with the other carriers for the actual flights taken. The owning airline is known by the first 3 numbers in the ticket number. This sounds like the first 3 numbers were 016 on your ticket, meaning United owned your itinerary. There are rules that are in the fare that was purchased, rules for each leg, different rules for each carrier, etc. When you want to make a change, the most restrictive rule in the whole itinerary is what the industry goes by, whether you book on Travelocity, Orbitz, CheapTickets, or directly with the airline. It’s an industry standard. In the booking path, generally a page or more before you click the ‘purchase’ button, the rules for the itinerary you selected are provided, so that you, acting as your own travel agent, can make an educated purchase. If you decide you don’t want to read what is provided, then no one is to blame other than yourself. Most of the airlines, if they are the ‘owning’ carrier, demand that they be on the new itinerary, usually the first flight on the new itinerary created by the exchange. When you clicked ‘purchase’ the airline charged your credit card directly, and your contract is created between yourself and them. The travel website does not own your ticket, they have a type of guardianship over the ticket, but they don’t own it. They have to follow all the rules of the contract the airline made with you, that you agreed to. It sounds like in your case, United is the one you entered into contract with. The travel website could only make changes that stayed within the rules you agreed to. In this case, United, since you took the first leg, would have to appear on the new itinerary. It’s not a travel website rule, or attempt to mess up your day. It’s part of the rules in your ticket, rules you agreed to at time of purchase. The travel website didn’t change your plans, whether business related or not. The agent appears to have called United in your behalf to attempt to see if they were willing to give up their ownership of your itinerary, and evidently they weren’t. So, your beef should be with who you contracted with, even though you agreed to it at the time you contracted with the airline.
I went to http://www.united.com and picked a random itinerary from Chicago to Fayetteville, Ark., after selecting the first flight that came ujp, on the next page. On the review page, in the blue price bar, I clicked on the view fare rules link. Under sales restrictions, the rule of issue on UA is repeated over and over again, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED TICKETS MUST BE ISSUED ON/BEFORE 10JAN 08. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED FARES MAY ONLY BE SOLD BY CRS 1A AND TRAVEL AGENTS. TICKETS MAY ONLY BE SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES. SALE IS RESTRICTED TO SPECIFIC AGENTS. NOTE – TICKETS MUST BE ISSUED ON UA TICKET STOCK/016/. FARES MAY ONLY BE SOLD BY CRS 1A AND TRAVEL AGENTS. SALE IS RESTRICTED TO SPECIFIC AGENTS. NOTE – TICKETS MUST BE ISSUED ON UA TICKET STOCK/016/. SALE IS RESTRICTED TO SPECIFIC AGENTS. TICKETS MAY ONLY BE SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES. When you make a change, the ticket has to be reissued, a new ticket number is given, and UA says it has to be issued on their stock. That’s the contract you made with the airline….. Nice job, according to CNN.com, the ombudsman for National Geographic Traveler magazine helped you get a free trip you shouldn’t have. Way to extort, be wrong, get someone to try to make a company look bad to help you, and get a free trip! My conscience wouldn’t let me do that.
Way to go, just noticed while trying to book a multi-city itinerary, that multi-carrier flights are no longer an option. There goes any hope of getting flight times preferred, and lower fares by being able to combine airlines and schedules…. Without that option no longer being available, Mr. $665.00 Windfall Man may have cost millions of people millions of dollars in increased airfare. Without the multi-carrier option, my trip south of the border appears to be several hundred dollars more, way to go. The ombudsman for National Geographic Traveler magazine, and Mr. $665.00 Windfall Man may have fiended together and ripped us all off, and earned a place in history with their very names, as did Benedict Arnold, Judas, and others before them!
Although this is an old thread, I would like to respond to “ohbrutha” above:
While I understand the need to respect a contract, airline ticketing agreements smack of “contracts of adhesion.” There is no opportunity for bargaining or a true meeting of the minds between the contracting parties. In fact, the disclosures about ticket restrictions are often coded and worded in such a way as to be entirely indecipherable to the average consumer. (Even to the sophisticated consumer!) I’m glad you’ve enlightened us as to the meaning of the first three numbers on the ticket and the various restrictions, but there is little chance that even those consumers who attempt to wade through the legalese will come away with that meaning. Add to that the fact that airlines encourage consumers to book on their own, charging fees to book over the phone and speak with someone who can explain the restrictions, and it looks as though airlines are doing their best to get their customers to sign a contract without understanding it. That is not acceptable. The restrictions should be in plain language and should be clear to the reasonable consumer.
(As to booking multi-carrier flights, there are many other websites to choose from which currently offer that option — I’m not really sure what your issue is.)