[compunuke]

Flight NK298, LAS/IAH, was delayed on March 13, 2014, more than 12 hours because of a reported windshield crack. The flight should have departed at 1:55 AM and instead was rescheduled for after 2 PM. No assistance to passengers was offered other than [up to] $21 in meal vouchers. No Spirit flights were available in the 12 hour delay window. Spirit does not assist with rebooking on other airlines. Limited hotel reimbursement is possible but at 1AM, no hotels were available at the "authorized hotels". Spirit does not reimburse if you make your own arrangements.

I was travelling with a person in a wheel chair who had a doctor's appointment at the destination later in the day. We were forced to reschedule.

Our attempts at any assistance were stone-walled and agents responses "stayed on script" limiting us to the food vouchers. After much persuasion, someone actually found us a "meager" two blankets we could use to keep warm while we attempted to sleep on the floor/carpet. The blankets weren't even useful as a floor cushion.

[compunuke]

I should have noted in the original message that this was a fully loaded flight to Houston and although I may be the only one writing a complaint, more than a hundred passengers were similarly affected.

I did some research about Spirit's "responsibilities", if any, in a situation involving a long delay [over 12 hours in this case]. Airlines once had mandatory responsibilities under something called Rule 240. Since deregulation, the requirements of Rule 240 no longer apply and airlines have "taken a stand" about what they are willing to do to help passengers they have severely "inconvenienced".

Spirit airlines level of concern/support is one of the lowest/poorest in the industry. Please see how the airlines rate/rank at the following URL.

http://www.airfarewatchdog.com/blog/...240-revisited/

[Der Richter]

Originally Posted by compunuke

Since deregulation, the requirements of Rule 240 no longer apply and airlines have "taken a stand" about what they are willing to do to help passengers they have severely "inconvenienced".

Wow, thanks for the update. I don't think anyone would have realized that airline operating policies have changed in the last 36 years without your informative post.

If you have the time could you also look into the reasons why I can't get a rotary dial phone from Southwestern Bell, why I am having so much trouble booking a flight on Braniff, and why I am having difficulty locating a Plymouth dealer?

As to your complaint:
Last flight of the day ... bad idea.
Flying Spirit ... bad idea.
Last flight of the day on Spirit ... bad idea squared.

[compunuke]

Gee ... your handle is so fitting ... even if German. You fill the role so well!!! What's next, sein Henker?

If only everyone was as smart as you then you wouldn't have to work so hard to educate the whole human race. I'm sorry we are such a burden for you.

You know, your contribution to this thread is a bad idea to at least the Googol power.

[Leatherboy2006]

While traveling several years ago on Southwest (Big mistake) and they cancelled even under rule 240, they could not and would not re book me on another airline because they did not have ticketing agreements with them.
I have heard from friends that have had issues with Spirit that it is the same thing, they don't have ticketing/rebooking agreements with other airlines.
I steer clear of them when traveling, as well as Southwest (and I live about 5 miles from Dallas Love field).

[Der Richter]

Originally Posted by Leatherboy2006

While traveling several years ago on Southwest (Big mistake) and they cancelled even under rule 240, they could not and would not re book me on another airline because they did not have ticketing agreements with them.
I have heard from friends that have had issues with Spirit that it is the same thing, they don't have ticketing/rebooking agreements with other airlines.
I steer clear of them when traveling, as well as Southwest (and I live about 5 miles from Dallas Love field).

So, you must fly AA quite a bit. Exactly how many times do you find rule 240 mentioned in their COC?

[azstar]

Most airline employees don't have a clue what's in their contract of carriage. The benefit of flying a traditional carrier with multiple ticketing agreements is that many (if not most) agents will put you on another carrier right away if your flight is significantly delayed or cancelled just to get you away from them. I've had many airport agents transfer me to another carrier even when the delay is due to weather.

[Der Richter]

Originally Posted by azstar

Most airline employees don't have a clue what's in their contract of carriage. The benefit of flying a traditional carrier with multiple ticketing agreements is that many (if not most) agents will put you on another carrier right away if your flight is significantly delayed or cancelled just to get you away from them. I've had many airport agents transfer me to another carrier even when the delay is due to weather.

Sure, so have I ... so what? The point is not what an agent may do that they aren't required to do. It is, rather, the apparent belief in a rule 240 that does not, in fact, exist. Its one thing to ask an airline to do something, its quite another to expect an airline to follow a fictitious government policy.

Rule 240 was never a uniform, government-imposed rule that applied to all US airlines. During the era of regulation the U.S. government required all airlines to submit tariffs containing fares, fare conditions, etc. In the old standardized tariff system, paragraph 240 of every airline's tariff dealt with airline responsibilities in the event of delay or cancellation. The rule stated in paragraph 240 was always self-imposed. Airlines were free to set their own conditions, but once set they had to abide by them. Post deregulation, airlines were no longer required to file domestic tariffs. The continued reference to rule 240 is simply false information propagated by ill-informed individuals. It serves no purpose to expect airlines to follow a long obsolete system. An airline's failure to do so is certainly no basis for complaint. Flying under an expectation that any airline will be governed by rule 240 is simply culpable ignorance.

[azstar]

Originally Posted by compunuke

Airlines once had mandatory responsibilities under something called Rule 240. Since deregulation, the requirements of Rule 240 no longer apply and airlines have "taken a stand" about what they are willing to do to help passengers they have severely "inconvenienced".

Spirit airlines level of concern/support is one of the lowest/poorest in the industry. Please see how the airlines rate/rank at the following URL.

http://www.airfarewatchdog.com/blog/...240-revisited/

Perhaps if you had read the original posters comment you would have noticed that they were aware that "Rule 240" no longer exists. They were simply making a statement that Spirit does a poor job of accommodating passengers when they are delayed/overbooked/cancelled. I do agree with your comments, however:
Last flight of the day ... bad idea
Flying Spirit ... bad idea
Last Flight of the day on Spirit ... bad idea squared

[cliff7080]

You bought the ticket on Spirit because they are the CHEAPEST there is.. Now you know WHY they are so cheap. NO extras because they cost money. If you want Cadillac treatment you don't buy the absolute CHEAPEST car you can find, then complain because it doesn't have heated, electric leather seats.