A $50 fee to redeem a 50 cent credit? Too bad you’re not flying on Southwest — oh, wait a sec, you are!

Southwest Airlines likes to think of itself a no-fee zone in the skies, with its promises of bags flying free. But it has at least one absurd surcharge of its own, according to Julian Vasquez Heilig.

The carrier recently charged him a $50 fee when he tried to use a 50 cent credit — that’s right, I said cent — on a ticket. Seriously.

His story shows air travelers must always be on their guard when it comes to fees, even when they’re flying a so-called “no-fee” airline.

Here’s what happened to Heilig:

I am a college professor and I travel frequently on a variety of airlines. Southwest is convenient because they allow bag to fly for free as well as using the amount of a ticket towards a new ticket in the future.

I was amazed when Southwest Airlines took $50 for 50 cents.

I booked a trip to DC in the summer of 2010. About two weeks before I departed, my meeting was changed and I came back a day earlier. I bought a different ticket last year and had a 50 cent balance.

When I booked the DC ticket I used the 50 cents not wanting it to go to waste. In October, I attempted to book a new flight using the DC canceled ticket balance. Southwest informed me that because I had used the 50 cents from last year’s ticket they were going to keep all of the $233 from my ticket that I bought three months ago.

I was shocked.

The customer service agent stated that a special screen had notified me that they would do so. I contested that no such notification had been provided. Eventually, they offered a $50 fee and provided a voucher for $183. I believe that 50 cents for 50 dollars was clearly a steep and unfair (even hidden) fee. Is there anything that can be done?

In fairness to Southwest, it tends to have some of the most reasonable fees in the airline industry. Some of them are outlined here.

But on this one, I’m not sure if it’s doing itself any favors. It should have allowed him to undo the redemption so that he wouldn’t lose $233, or the compromise $50 — and if it did keep the money, it should have at least notified him before the transaction.

Should Heilig have known that this could happen, by making himself aware of Southwest’s policies? No. No reasonable airline passenger can be expected to review all of the fine print and policy associated with a ticket. Even as a frequent Southwest passenger, this isn’t something he should have been aware of, in my opinion.

I contacted Southwest. Within an hour it called Heilig and credited him with $50. A representative blamed the glitch on “the state of their computer system.”

Good work, Southwest.

Update (11:30 a.m.). I asked Heilig to clarify his situation after some commenters said they were confused. On re-reading the post, I can see why they might feel that way. Here’s how he explained it:

I bought a ticket last year. I had to cancel the flight in 2009. I used the balance on another flight in 2009. There was a 50 cent balance from the 2009 ticket.

I bought a new ticket to DC in Summer 2010. I used the 50 cents from the 2009 balance when I purchased the ticket in 2010. I cancelled the ticket in September 2010.

I expected to be able to purchase a new ticket using the balance in October 2010. However, the 50 cents from the 2009 ticket had invalidated the entire balance of the cancelled Summer 2010 ticket to DC of $233 (365 day limit on the 50 cents).

I called Southwest with the issue. They told me the $233 was gone forever because of the expiration date of the 50 cents. I protested. They gave me $183 electronic voucher but took a $50 fee to “reissue.”

  • Cynthia

    Okay, I have to admit I’m actually having a little bit of an issue with the whole concept of “No reasonable airline passenger can be expected to review all of the fine print and policy associated with a ticket.” Don’t get me wrong, I think this resolution was more than fair, and well-deserved. The OP *should* have been informed of the fee to use his credit at the time of redemption. The resolution was called for, and fair.
    However, the phrase used above seems to indicate the mentality that customers are never responsible for the fine print. With that logic, they would never be held to the conditions under which they purchased their tickets. And I’m sorry, the trade-off of paying $150 for a round-trip, cross-country, discounted ticket is that you do subject yourself to more restrictions than a full-fare, walk-up ticket for the same trip. They need to at least have some idea of those restrictions, and with all the on-line purchasing, yes, it IS up to the customer to read that fine print. That’s why it’s there. If they want an expert to help them out with it, go to a travel agent, or call the airline directly and have them go over the details.

  • Kevin

    I do not say Good for Southwest.

    If it takes this sort of intervention to fix this stupid of a problem, I say bad for Southwest. If someone on the ground does not have enough common sense to say, we can not do this to this guy over 50 cents, let me call someone to fix it….then they are just not competent at their job. If they have no common sense or discretion, then they do not understand the basics of customer service.

  • Tanya

    I am glad that this story had a happy ending, but I am really do not agree that we, as passengers, are not responsible for the fine print. Especially when we are using free tickets or funds from a previous ticket. Having navigated the free tickets on Southwest for many a year now, while I think their policies are some of the most flexible, there are a few things to watch out for. One of those being when you are using funds that are about to expire, which can cause funny things to happen, like being charged $50 for the use of almost expired funds. $50, by the way, is the charge that Southwest uses if you want to renew an expired award. Again, glad this worked out, but I do think we are responsible for the fine print. It is there for a reason, ignorance is no excuse.

  • Carver

    @Cynthia

    I respectfully disagree. The sole reason why merchants have fine print is so that its customers won’t be fully knowledgable about all of the terms and conditions of that can apply. Why should we reward such underhanded behavior?

  • Steve

    I’m confused about what happened here. According to the customer, he had a credit of 50 cents left from a changed flight last year. Then he booked a flight this summer and canceled it. Then he rebooked another flight, using the 50 cents then, and was told he had to forfeit the credit for the first flight this summer? Or I am misinterpreting what happened? In short: is the issue that they wouldn’t let him combine credits from two cancelled flights to pay for another?

    If that’s so, I don’t see anything on Southwest’s website that states that this is prohibited. The page Chris linked to just describes the differences between refundable and non-refundable fares, and everything I have found on their website indicates that the only current restriction on reusable funds is that they must be used within 12 months of the original ticket’s date (apparently in January they’re also going to restrict the funds to be applied to a ticket in the original passenger’s name, which I think is unreasonable, but at least they still have the most liberal change policy in the industry).

    The bottom line is that I think Southwest was wrong here, no matter what happened. There’s no valid reason for them to have a policy that you can’t redeem credits from two cancelled flights to pay for one flight (except a money grab, of course), and even if they do have that policy, it’s not spelled out anywhere that I can find.

    I’m glad they responded quickly and gave the customer a full refund of the fees. Too bad Chris had to get involved, though.

  • cjr

    “However, the phrase used above seems to indicate the mentality that customers are never responsible for the fine print.”

    Have you tried to read the fine print of anything lately?

    Either way, as we’ve seen time and again, companies don’t know their own fine print, or there are contradictions, and so on. Common sense is gone to be replaced by the kind of legalese that even a good lawyer can’t understand.

  • dot

    During the northwest-delta merger i had a ticket worth $150 that i had not used.. so i decided to do so… The change fee was $150 to use it so i was told since the tix value was the same as the change fee it was unable to be processed… and the tix is now gone….????

  • Tom Thornton

    I think if the case had been pursued further (going higher up) by the passenger Southwest would have done the right thing without outside intervention. They seem to “get it” when it comes to understanding the customer and fairness.

    I feel sorry for all the families that travel infrequently and have no idea of the baggage fees they are going to pay on their vacation trip. Southwest deserves everyone’s business because as they prosper the other airlines will get the message. As long as consumers continue to pay fees the charges are here to stay. Fly Southwest anytime you can. Check your bags and travel more comfortably and for less cost. And there is a bonus–they treat you like a human being.

    I just traveled on Southwest last week and the positive experience is fresh in my mind so I feel the need to defend them.

  • Mike Z

    I’m really confused here and to be honest, I’m surprised everyone who posted yet isn’t confused as well.

    Based on what I see, he had a ticket that he got using the $.50 credit.
    he bought new ticket before cancelling old ticket.
    he now should have had a $233 credit for new flight because of the old ticket.
    He was now informed that he would have to pay a $50 fee to redeem that $233 credit????
    So it appears that SW charges a fee when you continually roll over credits into ticket refunds. I cans ee why they would do that, but not over something as small as a $.50 credit.

  • Mel

    I’m as confused, if not more so, than you are, Mike Z. Are there paragraphs missing from the story or am I just more obtuse than the average bear? I don’t get “because I had used the 50 cents from last year’s ticket they were going to keep all of the $233 from my ticket that I bought three months ago.” What should one have to do with the other? If you have credits, you should be permitted to use them. It’s like Kohl’s saying “you have 2 in store credits for refunded items, so we’ll keep the second one after you use the first” or maybe I’ve just cunfused myself more!

  • Dan

    Mike Z, I’m confused too, I have no idea what’s going on ;)

    And I have to agree with Chris about the “no reasonable person can be expected to understand all of the fine print.” It’s fine print for a reason, and as another poster pointed out, that reason is so you don’t know what’s in there.

  • Joe Farrell

    Fifty cents, huh? What a maroon. . . . can I just send him the fifty cents and you can go find someone deserving of help? Sure, the airlines has procedures in place that cause one to have to pay the fee – but once again – RTFR = with the M for manual substituted with an R for rules. . .

    If you had RTFR with your AAA membership you would have understood they they cover YOU for breakdowns of vehicles you are in . .. . same thing here.

  • Anna

    I’m glad I’m not the only one who has no idea what’s going on story. Bottom line, while I think people are responsible for themselves; there should be some common sense approach when the OP called up customer service. No one, when clearly confronted with a $50 fee, is going to insist on a $.50 credit and they should have given him the chance to forgo the credit to avoid the fee. It’s too bad that this needed intervention.

    Chris – can you clarify the situation so that the rest of us will understand and know what to avoid in the future?

  • Heather

    @ Joe: Never underestimate the power of change. I saved up $300 in my change jar over about 4 months for a big purchase in high school. Also there was a news report about a group that skimmed cents from people’s accounts and made a killing from the fraud.

    That said I’m also sort of confused. Did they say one was expired and charge to reinstate it? Did they say you cannot combine credits? Either way charging to use a credit runs counter to the logic that it is a credit in the first place. You either have it or you don’t in my opinion.

  • T. Keyser

    This makes sense to me because I fly SW quite often, and sometimes use credits from previous flights. Based on my past experience, and even though dates aren’t given in this post, I can assume that the initial $0.50 credit he used had expired when he tried to rebook.

    This is probably what happened:
    -prior to Oct. 2009 – has $.50 flight credit
    -summer 2010 – books DC trip WITH $.50 flight credit (this flight now has the OLDER expiration date because of the flight credit)
    -Cancels DC trip
    -Oct. 2010 – tries to use $233+ credit from canceled DC trip, is told the credit has expired, and there is a $50 fee to reinstate it.

    When I’ve used credits to pay for a new flight, I always get a screen letting me know that any funds from my flight will have the older of the expiration dates.

    And if you don’t notice the screen, it’s on your confirmation as well.

    Even though I love SW, I still understand their flexibility has to end somewhere. And honestly, 12 months is very reasonable to use a flight credit, and a $50 fee to extend a credit or reward past the expiration date is reasonable. The onus is always on the passenger to keep track of their credits and the expiration dates.

    Regardless, the amount of the credit shouldn’t matter. The rules are the rules, and SW is probably the most rule-friendly airline out there. Even still, a $50 “change fee” if that’s the way the OP is looking at it, is still a bargain compared to any other airline. With another airline, he would have had a $150+ change fee to begin with, and I’m not even sure if they allow you to use expired credits, or how much that would cost.

    SW goofed this one only because it was such a small amount. But I’m sure they reinstate credits and rewards every day, and this is a common occurrence. I’ve even had to pay the $50 for a reward that has expired – but that’s cheaper than a whole new ticket! I really think the OP shouldn’t have gone to Chris with this.

  • LeeAnne

    Sheesh Joe Farrell! What’s eating YOU today?

    I didn’t read this article until after Christopher had already posted his update explaining better what the issue was. The short version is, he had an 50 cent credit from a canceled ticket, bought a new ticket using that credit, canceled that one, then went to buy a new ticket with his credit but was charged $50 because the 50c credit from the first canceled ticket had expired.

    Should he have known about this? NO WAY! That’s just absurd. Who would even consider something like this? OH garsh, I bought a plane ticket on the eleventh Sunday after I traveled on a code-share flight between states that only one of which conforms to the Jones act and I used a debit card instead of a credit card. WHAT? I’m denied boarding? I guess I should have read the fine print better! It was all right there – on page 24! :::rolling eyes:::

    I can possibly see that Southwest wouldn’t want people to escape the 365 day life of a credit by buying tickets with it, then canceling and buying, over and over for years. But 50 cents? The moment they realized that the whole thing was over 50 cents they should have immediately given him his full credit for the canceled ticket – MINUS the 50 cents. I’m glad they did the right thing, and it’s possible they would have without Christopher’s involvement, but the fact is that their initial reaction was to deny him use of the WHOLE canceled ticket – $233! They didn’t reduce that to $50 until he’d already complained, so somebody there obviously knew they were charging him $50 for 50c. Which is undeniably unfair and unreasonable.

    Yay Christopher for the happy ending. Joe, take a breath…have a drink…talk a walk around the block or something!

  • Jesse

    Invalidating $233.00 or so based on a 50 cent invalid credit seems unreasonable.

    If the face value of the ticket is $233 and the ($0.50) invalidated it, how about giving the customer the credit for $232.50 instead?

  • Steve

    @Joe Farrell: If you can find where on Southwest’s website it indicates that this situation would happen, maybe you’ll have a point about reading the rules. I scoured SW’s website this morning and came up with nothing regarding reusable funds except for the statement that they are 100% reusable towards a new ticket within 12 months. In fact, if you type “reusable funds” into their search box, you get a page that lists the differences between the three types of fares, and in the fine print below that table, the explanation states “On cancellations, 100% of the ticket value may be applied to future travel to be completed for up to 12 months or by your ticket’s expiration date, whichever comes first.”

    I see with the clarification Chris posted that as it turned out, the 50 cents had expired but the $233 had not. Clearly, the reasonable course of action for Southwest would have been to deny the 50 cent credit and allow the $233 to be used – not disallow the $233 and try to charge him $50 to reinstate the 50 cent credit. Clearly, no one in their right mind would want Southwest to do that. (And Southwest’s explanation that the 50 cent credit somehow tainted the $233 to make it “expired” as well is ridiculous, and as egregious an example of deceptive business practices as I’ve seen from any airline).

    I’m generally a big Southwest fan, as I think I’ve made clear in previous posts here, but their initial handling of this situation was terrible. I’m glad they made it right (whether or not they would have if Chris had not gotten involved is debatable) in the end.

  • Mark K

    OK, lets get all of this straight.

    Southwest allows you to use the funds you paid on any flight you purchased but did not fly for up to a year after the original purchase date with no fees. If you go past the one year time frame you can pay $50 to get another year to use those funds. Sounds fair to me. I don’t know of any other airline that is that generous in this area.

    Every ticket issued by SW has a statement on it in fairly large letters “All travel involving funds from this Confirmation Number must be completed by the expiration date” and provides the expiration date clearly in even larger text on the ticket receipt. No where are you required to look at the “fine print.” Also, when applying previously unused funds to a new ticket when booking online there are several optortunities to verify you really want to use those funds and since you have to type in the original six-character reference number you can see on that ticket receipt what the expiration date is. There is also a statement on the web page when using previous funds that all of the funds on the new reservation will expire on the date of the oldest previous ticket. You can apply up to 6 previously unused ticket funds to your new purchase. This all happens before you click on the purchase button to finalize he process.

    In the specific issue here, the OP should have noticed that the expiration of his remianing 50 cent was close when booking the new flight. Personally, if I was unsure about actually making the flight I was reserving, I would have simply let the 50 go so that I would not have faced the possibility of losing the entire fare. If he is prone to cancelling tickets on SW, he needs to stay aware of those dates.

    So in reality the OP did NOT get charged to use a 50 cent credit. He got charged $50 to reinstate the $233 of expired funds. The fact that the funds expired in mere days after the purchase instead of a year is unfortunate and iut is good that SW did refund the $50 charge in this case.

    This just goes to show you really need to understnd what you are doing and not simply blindly charge ahead assuming that things are going to go your way.

  • Elsie

    The same thing happened to me!!! I didn’t pursue it further and grudgingly wrote it off as a buyer beware lesson. I just didn’t have time to pursue it by going through the swa channels. But now armed with knowledge of this other customer’s bad experience, I will contact them again!

  • Steve

    @T. Keyser: “Even though I love SW, I still understand their flexibility has to end somewhere. And honestly, 12 months is very reasonable to use a flight credit, and a $50 fee to extend a credit or reward past the expiration date is reasonable.”

    I wholeheartedly agree (in fact, until today I didn’t know that expired credits could be reinstated for $50 – I assumed once they were gone, they were gone, and I was fine with that). My issue is categorizing the $233 this passenger paid three months ago as expired simply because he was also trying to use the 50 cents.

    “Regardless, the amount of the credit shouldn’t matter. The rules are the rules, and SW is probably the most rule-friendly airline out there. Even still, a $50 “change fee” if that’s the way the OP is looking at it, is still a bargain compared to any other airline.”

    $50 to redeem a 50 cent credit (which IMHO is the only way to look at the situation – by no reasonable definition should the $233 have expired) is never a bargain.

    The appropriate response would have been to disallow the 50 cent credit and allow the $233 one, end of story.

    @LeeAnne: “Should he have known about this? NO WAY! That’s just absurd. Who would even consider something like this?” No one with any sense of basic fairness, that’s for sure.

    I’m doubly annoyed with Southwest over their bungling of this situation because they pride themselves on *not* being a “gotcha” airline (and market heavily on this basis). What they initially did to this passenger is not at all consistent with that philosophy.

  • SirWired

    Especially with the update, I think SW was in the wrong here. The expiration of the 50-cent credit should not have invalidated the whole amount. Only the 50 cents should have expired.

    This was probably an artifact of WN’s extremely antiquated IT systems, but customer service should have restored the full amount. (Minus the fifty cents.)

  • Mike Z

    OK, now after reading the update and the other confused readers’ opinions I see now what happened.

    And to agree with the others, SWA should just make the expired credit invalid and give credit for the non expired credit portion. So instead of a $233 credit, he would have just gotten a $232.50 credit, which I think anyone would be more than happy with.

  • Mark K

    I checked with COntinental on this type of situation. Their process is exactly the same as Southwest. (The phone rep I talked with seemed confused at first but was able to quote the rules. I could not find this level of detail on the web site.)

    If you have funds left on a non-refundable CO ticket that you chose not to fly and cancelled your reservation prior to original departure time, you can apply those funds to a new flight (after paying the $150+ changes fees) up to a year from the original purchase date of that flight. Any additional funds payed for the new flight retains the funds expiration date of the oldest flight. COntinental does not offer the option of extending the expiration. So, Southwest was not really that bad in this situation. At least they didn’t charge $150+

  • BG

    I’ve been flying SWA for years and I must say that this should NOT be such a confusing situation as you are all trying to make it. The customer who clearly knew they were using old funds to purchase a new ticket had to clearly input his prior confirmation # to do so and would have been asked to make sure he wanted to use those funds knowing the prior expiration date would become his new expiration date and the fact he said YES to doing that and then chose to cancel the flight soooo soon after booking it was very short sighted on his part. SWA like all other airlines has rules in place for a reason so that their customer service reps don’t have to be placed in a situation with making judgment calls / decisions on each and every situation that a customer would come to them with. If that were the case then where is the fairness when one customer rep is a lil more lenient than another. As well, thier having rules / fine print keeps the SWA customer service reps moving forward in a more expeditious way to be able to handle all of the calls they do receive each day in a timely manner. If each SWA customer service rep had to deal with situations such as this one each day and then have to figure out what to do on their own (meaning having no processes in place for them to refer to) we’d all be waiting on the other end for someone at SWA to answer our phone calls.

    We as travelers DO have an obligation to know the rules of each airline we decide to fly as unfortunately we are not yet at the point where each of these companies is being controlled by one governing agency that makes them all have the same refund / reissue rules. SWA has the most user friendly system in which to purchase, cancel and then reuse funds from a ticket so lets not make this any more complicated than it’s already gotten to be. I bet if they daily had to deal with situations such as this one (over 50 cents) someone in SWA operations is going to finally say this is costing us waaaaay to much labor to deal with all these continual petty situations and they’ll pass along those costs to us all in higher fares, or come up with a nominal change fee charge which I as a consumer don’t want to be faced with just because other travelers who don’t want to take the time to read the fine print then try to finagle their way around the rules. PLEASE take the time to read what they put in front of you before making your final click of the button to purchase the ticket, remember what you agreed to after purchasing the ticket and be willing to take the loss of funds if you make the wrong decision in purchasing a new ticket with soon to be expired funds. In this case, I believe that SWA should NOT have had to appease the customer but it was kind of them to do so. Lets try and keep these situations to a minimum going forward as I truly believe if we all “nickel and dime” going forward such as was done in this instance over 50 cents it’s going to cost us much more down the road…or should I say up in the sky!