Utter disaster

This situation is simply unacceptable. How could they possibly "downgrade" your ticket? And then offer an economy return in exchange? Something seems off here, but at the least I would not give up and keep escalating the issue and document your communications in email only.

Please read the thread carefully. The OP got compensation and they should be entitled to a refund of 75% of the leg within 7 days and they ended up only 1 class lower. Unless that voucher waives your right under Article 10 in which case I agree it stinks.

Article Ten is not about compensation but about refunding 75% the fare for that leg. Now you could have an argument whether that is compensation or not but to me it is not compensation.

There is NO mention of compensation in Article Ten and so legally an airline does not have to offer ir - though many will as apology.

Unless the pieve of paper VS asked Murat to sign specifically mentions he would be signing away his Article Ten rights for the 75% then that to me (and am not a lawyer) would be an enenforcable contract. If the VS paper is simply about 'compensation' i.e. miles / 'free' flight that is a different matter.

Article Ten is not about compensation but about refunding 75% the fare for that leg. Now you could have an argument whether that is compensation or not but to me it is not compensation.

There is NO mention of compensation in Article Ten and so legally an airline does not have to offer ir - though many will as apology.

Unless the pieve of paper VS asked Murat to sign specifically mentions he would be signing away his Article Ten rights for the 75% then that to me (and am not a lawyer) would be an enenforcable contract. If the VS paper is simply about 'compensation' i.e. miles / 'free' flight that is a different matter.

I never said the compensation was linked.

I never said the compensation was linked.

Indeed but other people have (or inferred it).

Unpleasant though it may sound all the airlines over sell their seats because if PAX pay full fare they can no show without penalty and that means the flight leaves with a seat that is earning no money sitting empty (and the PAX can do this as many times as they fancy on a flex ticket and then even ask for a refund at the end !).

Therefore they have to over sell to make sure they have as many seats full as possible and thereby enabling them to sell some of the seats more cheaply ie.. not full fare, which allows most of us to fly.

If every one shows up there is a problem and as there is limited seats those that pay the most for the seat and/or are regular customers get priority over those that just got a good deal on a seat.

It is not much consolation if you are the one with the good deal and don't get the seat you expected but this is a long established and widely used formula that we all know about and is part of the deal when you buy anything other than a full fare ticket.

[honey lamb]

I'm sorry to hear of your being downgraded especially as you were looking forward to your first experience of UC.

It seems incredible that it should happen when you arrive 5 hours in advance which begs the question, had VS decided beforehand who they were going to downgrade?

May I ask if you had done OLCI or was your check-in only at the airport? I wonder if that made a difference?

Unpleasant though it may sound all the airlines over sell their seats because if PAX pay full fare they can no show without penalty and that means the flight leaves with a seat that is earning no money sitting empty (and the PAX can do this as many times as they fancy on a flex ticket and then even ask for a refund at the end !).

I apologise in advance for a rather impassioned post, but...

...you have put your finger on precisely the thing that I find so insidious about all of this.

The airlines choose to offer flexible tickets, at (very) high prices. Having had their revenue cake they then try to eat it by selling the seat again (and again), thereby taking a gamble on the chances of someone exercising their (legitimate) ability to no-show.

But who is most at risk in the gamble? It's the poor sod who bought the cheapest (and possibly only) ticket he could afford for a flight that he fully intends to take, and then finds himself unable to for reasons that may be utterly beyond his control.

Personally, I don't care whether everyone does it (not a great defence) or whether it's all set out in terms and conditions that are way beyond the legal comprehension of the layman, or whether it usually works out alright because people are willing to fly another day or take the compensation or whatever. Anyone who reads flying forums will know that it results in situations where some people are totally trampled by the airlines.

[honey lamb]

The airlines choose to offer flexible tickets, at (very) high prices. Having had their revenue cake they then try to eat it by selling the seat again (and again), thereby taking a gamble on the chances of someone exercising their (legitimate) ability to no-show.

But who is most at risk in the gamble? It's the poor sod who bought the cheapest (and possibly only) ticket he could afford for a flight that he fully intends to take, and then finds himself unable to for reasons that may be utterly beyond his control.

Quite! And the ones who by the non-refundable, non-flexible ticket are the ones who definitely do travel (unless they miss the flight for a variety of reasons some of which may be no fault of their own such as missed connections or are dozy enough to get the time or date wrong :w )

Absolutely agree - they sell the same seat twice and gamble on someone not showing up. But it is a one way gamble because whatever happens they get the revenue for the seat and it is the customer who loses.
I cannnot think of many businesses that are able to get away with this.

I cannnot think of many businesses that are able to get away with this.

Hotels do the same, though perhaps not to the same extent. It's also the case that Hilton Diamond status allows you to effectively turf some poor soul out of a sold out hotel as long as you book 48 hours in advance. The webpage guarantee shows overbooking as a policy and the Diamond clause

"The Diamond Reservations Guarantee allows Diamond members to place a guaranteed reservation at a sold out hotel when made 48 hours prior to arrival, except during Extraordinary Demand Date periods, when the hotel becomes overbooked on inventory by more than 10%, and for some hotels when the hotel becomes overbooked on inventory by more than 2%."

I do hope that the OP comes back to this site in the future and clears up the outcome of this.

I've got loads of sympathy and would be extremely upset if this happened to me.

Does anyone know the criteria for downgrading? Are award redemption passengers the 1st to be bumped? Getting 75% of a fare back when the fare is 'Free' wouldn't be too good. I personally dislike Premium Economy in that being 6'2 the extra leg room is negated by the more substantial seat cushion and recline (or extra padding)of the seat in front. I'd certainly prefer an economy seat so that I didn't have to pay the premium taxes and lose PE level redemption miles. I reserve my hard earned points for UC redemtions only - I consider anything else to be poor value.

I've read this thread with interest - and I have to say, regardless of ts&cs, "established practice" etc, if this were to happen to me I would be nothing short of incandescent. I would very likely never fly with the airline that did this to me again...at least, I'd try.

Can you imagine a business whereby you paid, say, 15k for a Bose hifi, only for the retailer to send you a Sony mini-system and say "tough, it's in the terms and conditions, we oversold our stock of Bose, and here's a 50 quid voucher to spend with us in the future to make you feel better"....how would we all feel about that?

I accept entirely the point that it's all written down (if you go look for it), but quite honestly, this practice is extraordinary in it's implementation.

In context, they will upgrade people when cabins are overbooked, and I've seen people get upgraded onboard when BPs are duplicated for example, but really this is like reserving the right to punish the client for your mistake - outrageous!

I echo the call for the OP to return and give us an update...

incandescent.

I love this adjective ^)