Comments on: Burned by a fat-finger fare

By: Charles Clarke

Charles Clarke — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 05:33:17 +0000

Orbitz should have honored the $3 Tokyo Bay Intercontinental price because they confirmed it. He gave them a chance to rectify the mistake and they didn’t. They need to learn to be adults now.

My philosophy on great deals is that if you want them, check for strings and if you don’t find any you don’t like, grab the deal. Then ask for confirmation that it is the real deal and not a mistake before you build more around it. Great deals don’t usually last long, so it doesn’t pay to wait. If it is a mistake, then you haven’t locked yourself into other arrangements. If they confirm that it really is a great deal, then I’m going forward and I expect them to uphold their end. If they can’t do that, I won’t do business with them again.

By: Melody Shaeffer

Melody Shaeffer — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:48:43 +0000

If I have to doubt everything a website says, and even what it confirms in writing, and the amount charged to my card, I am not going to use it. They are responsible for honoring their committments just as I am responsible for honoring mine. Orbitz is responsible for whatever rate is on their site, and either they or the company should pay for it. It’s not just good service to do so, but it gets into Truth in Advertising as well as Contract law.

By: Roberta S

Roberta S — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:49:42 +0000

Sometimes you can’t really tell if it’s a mistake or just the ever fluctuating airline rates. Two incidents for seperate trips leave me with a continual head scratch. I made a reservation to get to phoenix for myself and then a friend later. Same flight, time, etc. and her reservation was $79 round trip. I booked at around 7 am or so. Later that day the same trip was nearly double. Another incident happened in the travel agent’s office where we watched the rate fluctuate up by $20 then $30 on tickets to Florida. We asked for an upgrade to first class at the gate and the rate stayed nearly the same for both tickets. Even the agent was surprised, called ahead to confirm that the reservation was right (she hadn’t actually done one in a while) and we only ended up spending $100 more per person for a round trip first class upgrade.

Almost too good to believe…yes but valid all the same.

By: Robert Johnson

Robert Johnson — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 06:03:34 +0000

Airlines, travel companies, hotels, etc all have Contracts or Terms and Conditions published, usually on their websites. If you don’t read them how will you know what your rights are?

EVERY state in the USA has a states Attorney General and a corresponding web page with a section on consumer fraud section. I have easily gotten full refunds with a click of the mouse after a well written non emotional e-mail.

Also a well written letter to the companies general counsel. Not hard to find they are officers in a public company and the info is on the company website also works. It’s a simple letter. Goes like this “Your contract of Carriage says this. You delivered that, where’s my check plus compensation”

If you don’t stand up for yourself who will? The Tooth Fairy. These companies set up their customer relations group not to help you, but to frustrate you into giving up. Once they see that you are NOT going away and the letter arrives from the Attorney General they tend to be shall we say “More Accomodating”

I never have more than ONE conversation with a travel provider before it’s off to the Attorney Generals web site. For airlines the D.O.T works wonders as well. Use the tools that you have as a consumer. Play Bob Marleys “Get up Stand Up” while you write the e-mail LOL

By: Donna Williams

Donna Williams — Thu, 14 Sep 2006 13:00:00 +0000

I had this problem with Travelocity several years ago. I found a “too good to be true” rate at several locations of a French hotel chain. I booked two rooms at this rate. When it was still showing on the site several days later, I told a friend about it, and they also booked confirmed reservations at this rate. We could hardly believe it, but since the reservations were confirmed and the same rate continued to show at several locations for several weeks, we thought it must be some sort of gimmick, but legitimate. We called Travelocity twice and were assured that if they confirmed the rate, it was correct. Then we called the hotel. They lost know time in telling us that rate was a mistake, and they would NOT honor it despite our confirmed reservations. Travelocity’s reply: “Oh, that was just a placeholder until the right rate was typed in. We must have made a mistake.” They then said they would not honor the rate even though they had (1) confirmed it, and (2) confirmed that it was okay on two different calls to their customer service. And a further irony: that rate was still being shown on Travelocity the day they reneged on their confirmation, several weeks after our initial booking. So I am a little ambivalent about Chris’s stand. Travelocity made a mistake–made it and made it and made it–even after it was called to their attention, but we, the customer, would have been left holding the bag if we had not aggressively followed up. We did not even get a real apology or offer of help in finding alternative lodging to replace those rooms. I still feel unhappy about the situation several years later. If I had failed to honor my half of our obligation, Travelocity (and the hotel) would have felt justified in charging me a no-show fee or change penalty. But they can just fail to honor their commitments because they had made a mistake–over several weeks and at several locations despite our calling them on more than one occasion–with no more than a shrug of their shoulders? There is something wrong with this picture, and I don’t think it is me (the customer) who is in the wrong…

By: David Adler

David Adler — Wed, 24 May 2006 22:08:54 +0000

What has been missed in the discussion here is that the customer daid in his letter that he thought that the $3 rate was an error, and *brought this to the attention of Orbitz* If Orbitz quoted *and confirmed* the $3 when questioned about it later, they should honour it. If the hotel charged more, Orbitz, not the customer, should have absorbed the difference.

“It’s not our fault, the computer did it” is an excuse which is used far too often. Orbitz is responsible for their computer, and if they are unable to program it correctly there is no reason why this should become the responsibility, or problem of the customer.

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:33:50 +0000

Like Chris and many others commenting, I agree in being fair with suppliers. We need then to stay in business. That said, websites need to become a lot better at problem resolution. They are simply not good at it at all. I have brought up incorrect prices in the past, and have also brought up errors, say, when Expedia gets one Hilton’s name mixed up with another Hilton’s address in the same metro area. Instead of a “thank you”, all I got was a run around and I would have been better off just to not mention it at all.

By: ellipses.elliott.org

ellipses.elliott.org — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:19:33 +0000

Writing a few wrongs

Here you go.Factual errors are easy to fix when they’re published. You run a correction, append it to the story, and …

By: Christopher Elliott

Christopher Elliott — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 11:56:22 +0000

If the correct rate is $113 — and if the customer knew it — then that does, indeed, change the story. I take a hard-line position on fat-finger fares: It’s wrong to book them, whether they’re off by $1 or $100. So if this person knowingly purchased a fat-finger fare and then tried to use me to hold Orbitz’ feet to the fire, well, I’d be extremely upset. A lot more upset than those windbags on Flyertalk who think they have the moral high ground.

By: George

George — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 03:21:32 +0000

Well, if Orbitz told you that $90 U.S. was a correct rate in September, they lied to you. On their website, it is $111 U.S. I would guess that it was $113 U.S. per night when Mr. Goel booked it, which would have been around 135 N.Z. Orbitz had the same problem in N.Z. that they had in Japan – the U.S. dollar rates were entered in the N.Z. dollar fields, and converted. It just wasn’t as big a difference in New Zealand. Don’t feel bad that Orbitz lied to you – they haven’t been very honest with anyone. In the future, however, you might want to check what they tell you, in view of this experience.

By: Christopher Elliott

Christopher Elliott — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 01:29:48 +0000

Just by way of clarification, the NZ hotel rate was legitimate, according to both Orbitz and the customer. So Orbitz should not have zapped the honeymoon reservation, and when I pointed out the double cancellation, it reinstated the second reservation.

By: George

George — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 00:42:41 +0000

Hi, Chris. Thanks for responding. I wasn’t addressing my earlier comment to you, just thought it interesting that the only comment posted here by anybody but us was a flame. Perhaps some of the questions could be fodder for a future column? –
I’m not sure what makes the Tokyo rate a fat-finger rate and the New Zealand rate not one. They were both erroneous, the New Zealand rate was higher because of a different exchange rate between the N.Z. dollar and U.S. dollar than the exchange rate between the Yen and the dollar. It was an identical mistake that happened the same way. If your position is (as it seems to be) that $90 is an honest mistake by the Mr. Goel, but $3 is Mr. Goel stealing, then I think you need to answer point number 3 – at what price does it cease to be an honest mistake and become stealing?

If Mr. Goel is stealing by booking a $3 rate, does that make the employee who confirmed that Orbitz would honor that $3 rate an accessory after the fact?

By: Christopher Elliott

Christopher Elliott — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 12:59:07 +0000

Actually, George, your raise some good questions — most of which are beyond the scope of the story. Remember, these columns are syndicated, so I have limited space to address the issues. I usually have only 250-300 words to solve the problem and sign off. Regarding the “jerks” at Flyertalk, I have a strict policy of not responding to flames. I’ve made my position clear: I think that trying to take advantage of an erroneous fare is wrong. In fact, it’s stealing. The Tokyo rate was a fat-finger rate; the New Zealand hotel was not.

By: George

George — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 02:56:17 +0000

Well, I really stopped the comments here. Sorry, I didn’t mean to put a damper on things. I just had a few questions that I thought logically flowed from the situation described. Maybe I can get Chris’ readers back onto more comfortable territory: Those jerks at Flyertalk are a bunch of big fat self-absorbed bullies! They write a bunch of crap!! We spit on them!!!!

Does this help?

By: George

George — Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:50:29 +0000

There are a few issues here that you did not address, and I wish you would:

1. If the reader should have realized that his $3 rate was a mistake, why shouldn’t the employee who entered it have realized it? Why do you
(and Orbitz) expect the casual travel buyer to be more expert than the Travel Industry Professional?

2. If Ibis hotels in Europe can offer rooms for 1 euro per night ($1.25), how is your reader supposed to know that $3/night for Tokyo is
a mistake instead of a promotional rate?

3. You seem to be taking the position that the provider need not honor a $3/night mistake rate, but should honor a $90/night mistake rate. At
what price do you draw the line between mistakes that should be honored and mistakes that need not be? Where does Orbitz draw that line? Where
do Orbitz’s customers draw that line? Why does Orbitz not communicate that line to its customers, so they all draw that line in the same place?

4. Why did it take Orbitz 10 days to cancel reservations, when they knew within hours of their mistake?

5. Orbitz insists that a written confirmation from them of hotel, dates, and rates does not necessarily mean that you will have a room at that price when you get to the hotel. Orbitz says they can unilaterally cancel a customer’s reservation at any time, including when the customer is en route to the hotel. InterContinental Hotels says that they will
not do this.
What are the long-term implications of this for the online booking industry?

6. If a written confirmation of hotel, dates, and rates does not guarantee that you will have a room at that price when you get to the hotel, what is the purpose of sending it?

7. Why did Orbitz treat different customers with the same contract differently?

8. How many other industries make their customers their quality control department, and when the customer discovers a quality control problem, reward the customer with a sharp stick in the eye? How successful are those other industries?

While I would particularly like to hear Chris’ response to these questions, I invite others to respond as well.