[chriscolombo]

"Except that there are extenuating circumstances. It is the lack of any discretion which rankles. In this case, the passenger had travelled early as the baby was premature. Having done so, I fail to see why Delta, or any other airline, can't exercise some common sense discretion for extenuating circumstances."

This is unfortunately the chance you take when purchasing a non-refundable fare. The ticket price is greatly discounted in exchange for the condition that the ticket must be used for the date and flight specified. This is the agreement passengers make when purchasing such fares. The airline is counting on the fact that a certain percentage of customers will not be able to travel due to extenuating circumstances. Accordingly, airlines overbook. They can literally sell two tickets for the same seat. This is one way airlines make money, and are able to keep their ticket prices competitive for everyone. An extenuating circumstance preventing an individual from traveling is not the fault of the passenger, but it is likewise not the fault of Delta.
The ticket does not say, non-refundable "except if someone has a baby." Common sense dictates that the line must be drawn somewhere. If airlines accommodate every non-refundable passenger's extenuating circumstance, then the flying public should expect significantly higher airfares. The fact is, the public demands low fares, and non-refundable tickets are one way to ensure prices to not increase exponentially. Accordingly, when you purchase a greatly reduced excursion fare, you do so under the condition that it is non-refundable. If you fail to travel, the airline keeps the money, because you agreed to a non-refundable condition. Extenuating circumstances are not part of the rules. Conversely, If you show up, the airline must provide transportation. If you are denied boarding due to overbooking, you are entitled to compensation. If a mechanical problem arises, they must get you to your destination within four hours of scheduled arrival time, or else provide compensation. Weather and Air Traffic Control (ATC) delays/cancellations are outside factors not controlled by the airline. If such events effect the masses (which they inevitably do), airlines are required to refund your ticket to its original form of payment, or schedule on the next available flight to your destination. They are not required to provide hotel or meal vouchers. As a courtesy, however, many airlines do block a hundreds of hotel rooms in the event of a snow storm, and provide their passengers with a distressed rate, which significantly reduces the cost. Regardless, the point is individual extenuating circumstances effect the individual. Airlines only consider extenuating circumstances when they effect the masses, such as weather disruptions. If their planes are not flying, they will refund your ticket. If your car breaks down, you are out of luck.

"After 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, may airlines waived their normal rules to assist people. Why is that ok, but not ok to do it for individual circumstances."


Natural disasters and terrorist attacks effect the masses, and therefore are not individual personal circumstances. During 9/11, the entire air system was shut down for days, effecting tens of thousands of flyers. Passengers who did not travel received full refunds on their non-refundable tickets. Those who still wanted to travel were re-accommodated on other fights without penalty. Again, the difference is that such disasters effect everyone, versus incidents that effect an individual. During Katrina, the entire city of New Orleans was flooded, and the airport was closed. Because everyone was effected, the airlines accommodated the masses. Had one passenger's house been flooded, and not the entire city, the airline would not refund his non-refundable ticket.

"They can be limited to genuine medical cases and could even stipulate that there must be no monetary loss to the airline. In this case, there would be no loss whatsoever to Delta. They were simply trying to extort higher sums of money out of their passengers misfortune."

What exactly is a "genuine medical case?" How do you authenticate a medical case? Are psychiatric cases medical? Why stop at medical cases? What about if your house catches fire, you are the victim of theft, or you were in an accident on the way to the airport? The manifestation of such incidents all result in the inability to travel, but the essences vary. Where do you draw the line? Moreover, consider how opportunistic people are, and how such a system would be scammed. In effect, anyone and everyone could weasel their way out of a non-refundable ticket, and receive the same service as someone who is paying considerably more for a fully refundable/changeable ticket. In such cases, the passenger is extorting the airline, not the other way around. Furthermore, consider the paperwork involved to implement such a system, not to mention the additional employees that an airline would need to hire to accommodate all those requests. The verification process alone could take weeks just for one passenger. Such a system would increase the costs of the airline, which would be reflected in higher ticket prices for the masses. In short, you get what you pay for. If you want a low fare, please realize there is a chance you may loose your money entirely if you get sick, have a fire, are in a car accident, or any other unfortunate personal circumstance preventing you from flying. If you can not assume that kind of risk, then purchase a fully refundable ticket. It will cost you more, but if something goes wrong, you can receive a full refund. If you can not afford a fully refundable ticket, consider a train or bus. This is all common sense. Enough said!