Delta to tlv opening May 8

[ilherman]

So the TA is lending money to the customer and making a profit at the same time? Do you have a heter iska?

He is making commision from the sale. He is laying out money to the airline and then collecting it back from the pax via his cc. The money he collects from the CC is simply to pay himself back. These are the facts here.

I am not a rav but if in these facts TAs need a heter iska then do a PSA...

[menachemd1]

Maybe with EL AL it's a מציל מזוטו של ים if they go bankrupt

[yandmk]

Lost as in cost out of pocket or lost profits?

Mainly, returning commissions to the airlines from all the canceled trips (money which has long been spent on daily living expenses). I also generally refund the booking service fee (in cases where there was no comms) when the client needs to cancel involuntarily. (I know many ta's disagree with that approach, but that's a discussion for another time - not now)

[aygart]

Mainly, returning commissions to the airlines from all the canceled trips (money which has long been spent on daily living expenses). I also generally refund the booking service fee (in cases where there was no comms) when the client needs to cancel involuntarily. (I know many ta's disagree with that approach, but that's a discussion for another time - not now)

Okay so lost profits. I understand that it hurts because it is profit already received. That is worse than a layoff since it is essentially retroactivly. But no out of pocket losses. That is better than some.

[yandmk]

So the TA is lending money to the customer and making a profit at the same time? Do you have a heter iska?

Totally irrelevant. He's not charging the customer more for the fact that he's laying out the money and getting paid later. He's paying the  airline, and collecting that amount from the client. If the airline pays him a cut from the sale, or if he charges the client a service fee, it's completely unrelated to the borrowing/paying situation. He's making/charging the same that he would if the client paid directly to the airline by cc.

[davidrotts63]

Okay so lost profits. I understand that it hurts because it is profit already received. That is worse than a layoff since it is essentially retroactivly. But no out of pocket losses. That is better than some.

Many TAs, mainly ones booking mileage or using other tricks did lose money, by doing irreversible moves for bookings, or making nonrefundable payments, as well as some paying credit card processing fee on refunded transactions too.

[aygart]

Totally irrelevant. He's not charging the customer more for the fact that he's laying out the money and getting paid later. He's paying the  airline, and collecting that amount from the client. If the airline pays him a cut from the sale, or if he charges the client a service fee, it's completely unrelated to the borrowing/paying situation. He's making/charging the same that he would if the client paid directly to the airline by cc.

Right so it woul not be ketzutza. Is this speculation or discussed with a rov? He is lav davka making the same because now the customer can't see the markup.

[Dan]

So, when is the headlines podcast on this?

If TAs don't want to write an op-ed, do any business halacha places want to?

[ilherman]

Right so it woul not be ketzutza.

add to that, that the loan was not a loan in terms of someone actually needing the money and pay back later. It's just technically how it works. Sometimes it's a loan for a minute, from when the agent issues the ticket until he charges the card.

Or better, he can charge the card and then issue the ticket..

[Lurker]

@ilherman My issue is that on one hand you're telling me that you're just a broker and my business is not with you, it's with the airline. On the other hand, you're telling me I shouldn't take my complaints up with the airline (ie chargeback) because how can I cost you money. I'm trying to understand how you defend this business position. The way @yandmk laid it out, I can respect. If you're telling me that's your position as well, I'll respect that, too. But that's not the way you've been saying it until now.

[ilherman]

@ilherman My issue is that on one hand you're telling me that you're just a broker and my business is not with you, it's with the airline. On the other hand, you're telling me I shouldn't take my complaints up with the airline (ie chargeback) because how can I cost you money. I'm trying to understand how you defend this business position. The way @yandmk laid it out, I can respect. If you're telling me that's your position as well, I'll respect that, too. But that's not the way you've been saying it until now.

Where did I say you can't do a charge back to the airline. That's a whole different discussion. I am talking the whole time in case where you paid the agent directly to his merchant and now you want to dispute that.

[yakov116]

Talking about charges from the airline.

[aygart]

add to that, that the loan was not a loan in terms of someone actually needing the money and pay back later. It's just technically how it works. Sometimes it's a loan for a minute, from when the agent issues the ticket until he charges the card.

Or better, he can charge the card and then issue the ticket..

Because at that point in time he did you a favor a borrowed you the money?

?
I am basing purely on what you wrote.

[yandmk]

@ilherman My issue is that on one hand you're telling me that you're just a broker and my business is not with you, it's with the airline. On the other hand, you're telling me I shouldn't take my complaints up with the airline (ie chargeback) because how can I cost you money. I'm trying to understand how you defend this business position. The way @yandmk laid it out, I can respect. If you're telling me that's your position as well, I'll respect that, too. But that's not the way you've been saying it until now.

My understanding is, that theoretically we are only brokers. However, the airlines (being the bullies that they are), hold the agents responsible for chargebacks on tickets that they brought to the airline.
Which would basically mean, that by disputing you aren't stealing from me, but rather causing me a loss indirectly.

[Dan]

Where did I say you can't do a charge back to the airline. That's a whole different discussion. I am talking the whole time in case where you paid the agent directly to his merchant and now you want to dispute that.

I've been referring to airline charges and the potential debit memo.

[yandmk]

Right so it woul not be ketzutza. Is this speculation or discussed with a rov?

This is not a loan. It's a sale. Period.
It happens to have entailed you paying and then charging his credit card. But you never lend him the money. I know you are referring to his specific comment, but I'm replying to what you answered me...

He is lav davka making the same because now the customer can't see the markup.

Don't get me started here... Let's just say we're dealing with an honest travel agent.

[Lurker]

My understanding is, that theoretically we are only brokers. However, the airlines (being the bullies that they are), hold the agents responsible for chargebacks on tickets that they brought to the airline.
Which would basically mean, that by disputing you aren't stealing from me, but rather causing me a loss indirectly.

I understand that, and if I was a customer, I may be willing to work with that, depending on our relationship and whether this was presented to me from the get go. It is also my understanding that you, as a TA, have gotten into this business with a full understanding of the risks involved, and are accepting of them as a cost of doing business. Every business has risks.

What I don't understand is the uproar and assumption that a client needs to ask his rov before filing a chargeback because "it's my money." A chargeback is a last resort. If this is a risk that occurs in this industry, why aren't TAs coming up with preventative measures from the time of sale to avoid the chargeback? How many products do people buy that come with instructions to contact the manufacturer directly instead of returning it to the store? It's not a foreign concept.

[Chaikel]

I'm not fluent enough in halacha to answer, but lets try to take our negious out of it for a minute.

Case 1) Someone comes to me, buys a ticket to a movie at a theater I don't own, I just sell tickets for on commission. He shows up and the show was cancelled. I don't want to refund the purchase. Any halachic issue to dispute?
Case 2) I sell the ticket, and the theater processes the payment. He shows up, and there is no show. He disputes the charge, and the theater comes after me. Any issue with him disputing it?

If someone buys something, and doesn't get it back, they are due their money back from whoever they paid it to. Everything else is between the TA and the airline.
The anomaly here is force majeure, which might release TA/Airline from responsibility, but other than that I don't see why the customer has to worry about what damage he's doing to others if the money is rightfully theirs

[ilherman]

I've been referring to airline charges and the potential debit memo.

My whole back and forth here I was referring to the situations where you dispute the TAs own merchant account. And that you're basically taking out money out of the travel agents pocket.

Of course they are. The fact that the transaction went through my agency processing is a technical detail which is not working out in your favor now. I am not holding your money. Not al all.

Its like robbing the attorney who you kept the money in escrow with. I don't know how else to explain it.

Do you know how a travel agent works? He is brokering you a ticket. He is not responsible for anything else. If the airline goes bankrupt and the CC company does not want to pay you back for whatever reason, the TA would have no obligation to you

Of course, disputing a charge which was charged directly to the airline I am pretty open to it. When they costumer has no other choice. I think I posted somewhere here about that. Even if the airlines were to send ADMs I could understand that. But especially in this situation where it's very unlikely and some airlines have clearly said that they won't pass on any charge backs to the agents, I can totally understand someone arguing about dispute. I kept on referring to disputing the TA when he charged to his own processing for example because the airline only accepts check payment so he layed out the money for you and got it back via cc that it makes no sense to dispute that.

[aygart]

My whole back and forth here I was referring to the situations where you dispute the TAs own merchant account. And that you're basically taking out money out of the travel agents pocket.Of course, disputing a charge which was charged directly to the airline I am pretty open to it. When they costumer has no other choice. I think I posted somewhere here about that. Even if the airlines were to send ADMs I could understand that. But especially in this situation where it's very unlikely and some airlines have clearly said that they won't pass on any charge backs to the agents, I can totally understand someone arguing about dispute. I kept on referring to disputing the TA when he charged to his own processing for example because the airline only accepts check payment so he layed out the money for you and got it back via cc that it makes no sense to dispute that.

How many major airlines only accept check payment?