![]() => I agree in that there should be *some* time frame in which a receipt can be re-printed without charge. "A carrier should never charge a customer for a receipt for a ticket within one year of travel." ![]() Therefore, if you have a good case, I might suggest your contact them with a polite letter requesting reconsideration. ![]() Much like bank, credit card or other type transactions, there commonly is a cut-off where records go "inactive" and accessing them can come with a fee.Īs to legality, that naturally falls to either State or Local ordinance if applicable in these matters, but I do know there is nothing under Federal regulations- DOT- that addressed this issue specifically.Īs the fee is DL's fee and not a governmental tax or the like, DL can waive it at their discretion. So, to a point, while bad for the customer, I can see a legitimate case being made for a fee to off-set whatever are the carriers added costs to go back to records/archive and re-print records from an old transaction that no longer appears on the active mainframe. It's just not realistic to have and store that much data on the carriers active systems- even more so when you consider the statistical probabilities that someone- carrier or passenger- would ever have cause to access it again.Įven in cases where it's a baggage claim, those commonly get closed out shortly after the 21st day, so that too would fall under the 30-day window. and if something does need to be "pulled" it comes from the carriers records or archives department. I'll tell you that most carriers do "move" older transactions from their active mainframes to independent back-up systems.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |