Flying on just 1 leg of 2-leg flight

Has anyone ever done this? I'll explain in more detail:

Say you book LHR-LAX return flight that includes a layover in JFK. Could you leave the airport at JFK, not get on the 2nd leg of the flight, stay in NYC until your return flight, then get back on the 2nd leg of the LAX-LHR flight?

Would virgin let you do this?!

It sounds crazy that anyone would need to do it, but I'm going to the US in a few weeks and have the opportunity to claim back for 3 return flights UK-US/US-UK - so I was wondering if I could book a US-UK return flight via, say, new york, and then just stay in new york instead of going home (as they wouldn't let us claim for a trip to new york!)

Hope that all makes sense ^_^
Thanks

[honey lamb]

If you failed to turn up for the second leg of a through ticket I feel sure you would find that the return was cancelled also and you would not be able to get the second leg of the return flight.

Like you say, I can't think why anyone would want to pay for a longer flight and presumably a higher fare to get off half way there! ?|

[Nottingham Nick]

Welcome to V-Flyer.

I have read and re-read your post, and am still not sure what you are trying achieve.

You say you want to travel to LAX with a lay-over in New York. How do you intend to get from New York to LA? The only thing I can think of is by using another carrier - maybe Virgin America?

You then intend to have a direct flight on Virgin Atlantic from LAX to LHR when it is time to come home.

If it is possible to do this one one ticket (which I am not sure about- but there may be student deals, or similar, that I am not aware of), then as soon as you fail to to appear for the second leg of three, the rest of the itinerary will be cancelled.

Aren't you just over complicating things? Why not just book and 'open jaw' Virgin Atlantic flight from LHR - JFK with the return out of LAX? You can then book a one way cheapie on Virgin America from JFK-LAX.

If I have misunderstood, or am missing a point, please let me know and I will have a re-think.

Nick

Thanks for your reply, I thought this might be confusing! You've slightly misunderstood ?| , so I'll try again

So, say I'm in america (easier perhaps this way round) and I book LAX to LHR that has a layover in NYC, i.e. LAX-NYC-LHR. The return would then be LHR-NYC-LAX.

I would want to use only the first leg of the outbound (LAX-NYC) and the second leg of the inbound (NYC-LAX). I'd be staying in New york and not actually ever going to London. So the flights I'd actually use are highlighted here:

LAX - NYC - LHR
LHR - NYC - LAX

So basically I'd be going LAX-NYC, staying in NYC, then going NYC-LAX.

What honeylamb says sounds right, for this reason and due to possibly having checked baggage, I imagine it would only be possible if Virgin would agree. I know it would be a strange request for them, but I don't see why they'd say no as they're getting paid for the seat and would have it confirmed that it won't be used so can sell it again.

So my question is, would virgin let this happen and has anyone done this before! (perhaps booking a flight and then deciding to 'jump off' at the layover! hah)

Thanks again oo)

Like you say, I can't think why anyone would want to pay for a longer flight and presumably a higher fare to get off half way there! ?|

Unless I'm misunderstanding things, it's because the beneficiary of the flight wouldn't actually pay for the flight as that would come from the Student Loans Company or similar. So you claim a return trip LA-Home but instead hop off in NYC, and instead of going home three times in year go home twice and go to NYC once.

There are a number of complications, aside from the, ahem, ethical.

1. What single carrier would do this? VS will sell you flight to NYC or to LA; they don't do layovers as standard (though ISTBC). A stopover flight as described will probably cost way over the "usual" fares which someone in SLC will pick up as being outside the norm and question.

2. IIRC the condition on SLC claim is dependent upon financial circumstance. Thus you may not actually get it back anyway. (Speaking as one half of the bank of Mum and Dad who recently funded as similar trip)

Wouldn't it be less risky to claim two legitimate flight and look for a bargain LA-NYC return?

I believe you have to travel all legs on the ticket in order or the ticket gets cancelled.

[honey lamb]

What I hadn't realised until your second post was that your journey was starting in LAX and you were only going as far as NYC and returning. There are two points against your proposition. One is that if you were considering flying with Virgin, it can only be done, as Nick says, with Virgin America on the LAX-NYC leg and Virgin Atlantic on the NYC-LHR leg. They are two separate companies and so you will not have a through ticket and indeed even your bags would not be interlined. Therefore you would be booking two separate tickets. In this scenario you would only be flying on the Virgin America flights and not using the Virgin Atlantic flights at all. This makes your proposition do-able but the question is (apart from the ethics as PJH has pointed out) whether the student finance company will support such a routing given that there are direct flights between LAX and LHR and if they do allow a stopover whether it would have to be with the same carrier such as United!

My experience of student fares are that they are very restrictive

Put simply you want to pay VS to do

LAX - NYC - LHR
LHR - NYC - LAX

But only want to actually travel LAX - NYC and the NYC - LAX

Am I right?

If you fail to check-in for the NYC - LHR leg then you would loose EVERY remaining leg of your itinerary including the final NYC-LAX leg.

The whole 'who pays for the flight' issue (including the Student Loan Company) is irrelavent as the the UK SLC only loan money to students for 'tuition' and 'maintenance' and it is then up to the student how they use the 'maintenance' element. The UK SLC is not like a bank where you ask for a loan to do anything you like. They only loan for those two things and tbh if you want to fritter it away on flights or booze then thats no concern of theres!

BUT whatever country you are based in applying for reimbursements for flights you havn't taken is FRAUD

Hah, indeed the ethical side... I am not planning, merely speculating! But thanks all the same for the replies, think this clears things up in that it's probably not possible anyway.

If any of my staff claimed for this type of routing when there are plenty of non-stop options I would immediately smell a rat as it is so obvious and dig deeper.
This would mot be a smart career move by them or you.

Student Loan Company) is irrelavent as the the UK SLC only loan money to students for 'tuition' and 'maintenance' and it is then up to the student how they use the 'maintenance' element. The UK SLC is not like a bank where you ask for a loan to do anything you like. They only loan for those two things and tbh if you want to fritter it away on flights or booze then thats no concern of theres!

Not quite true. I have in front of me a "Claim For Reimbursement of Travelling Expenses for Study Periods Abroad 2010/11" from Student Finance from the LFO's dalliance at the University of TN (Go Vols!)earlier this year. A claim can be made for

- travel at the start and end of the course of study, plus two other return journeys during vacation if permission is granted
- medical insurance (up to 40% of the premium)
- visa costs
- vaccinations

It is, however, just that. A claim, with a £303 excess and "subject to financial circumstances"...

Paul

Three observations:

1. As others have said, booking an indirect flight on a route where there are many direct flights may well raise suspicions and prevent you claiming reimbursement. If you book separate itineraries then it will be fairly obvious what you are up to.

2. If, however, you book all travel on ONE itinerary, I believe that, in general, all remaining sectors will be cancelled if you fail to show for any flight.

BUT whatever country you are based in applying for reimbursements for flights you havn't taken is FRAUD

3. I don't think that's correct -- you might legitimately be reimbursed for flights that you bought but couldn't take for any number of reasons. I guess you are talking about applying for reimbursement if you haven't PAID for the flights in the first place. That's a different kettle of fish!

The OP's proposal is slightly different. It may be a civil rather than criminal matter. Either way, if I was the OP, I wouldn't want to find out which...