Can an airline prevent me from travelling on the first leg of a flight if the second leg is cancelled?

Question

Travelling from Doha to Philadelphia to Atlanta, and the Philadelphia to Atlanta flight was cancelled due to weather. The airline (Qatar) wouldn't let me travel from Doha to Philadelphia since my second leg (AA), even after I told them I would rather be stuck in Philadelphia than in Doha.

Do I have a reason for complaint?

EDIT: 1) Doha was not my point of origin - this was the second leg of a three-leg journey. 2) I was travelling during the snowstorm period in the US. First flight on 1/23 was cancelled due to snow, but the second Doha->PHL flight on 1/24 was not. 3) They rebooked me on the same flight 24 hours later (although there were other flights available earlier)

Answer 1

Yes that is pretty poor handling by Qatar. More generally I can imagine there would be immigration problems in certain circumstances, but obviously in your situation that doesn't apply.

I suspect [but obviously I don't know] that Qatar have messed you about here and offloaded you from the flight for other reasons, perhaps it was overbooked as a consequence of the weather situation and they needed a reason to give your seat to someone else.

I assume Qatar promptly routed you to your final destination. If they did not, in your shoes, I would certainly be invoicing Qatar for every expense I incurred as a result of their failure to offer carriage.

Answer 2

Really depends on why the connecting flight was cancelled. As I noted in a comment above, a severe weather condition could have created a scenario where you could have been stuck in the connecting airport, PHL in this case, for an extended period of time.

If the airline could have known that you might be stuck in a weather bound airport for a day or more, would you rather have them strand you or not fly you in the first place?

Answer 3

It is not uncommon for an airline to hold a passenger at the point of origin if they know the entire series of flights can not be completed as booked.

By doing so, for many passengers it means they simply go home and return the next day. For non-local passengers it means some lodging and meals to be provided. For legal responsibility it is simply a cancelled flight, rebook or refund (and yes there is probably some PC EU rule requiring a certain amount of compensation).

By sending passengers part way, it means accommodation and meals for all. It means more anguish and complaints from passengers about the uncertainity of reaching their destination and sitting around in the midpoint airport hoping to get on some flight. For legal responsibility it means an interrupted flight which carries more rules, regulations and potential for compensation.

While the OP preferred to fly, the airline has to set a single policy for the issue and holding passengers at the origin is the one most airlines enforce. I have been caught in the same scenario flying Florida to Thailand and was held at the point of origin in the USA, so it is not exclusive to Qatar.

Can you complain, of course you can, but ultimately if the airline followed through on their responsibilities for a cancelled flight there won't be any compensation, other than maybe a small token of apology (frequent flyer miles, etc).

Answer 4

Of course. Check your contract: you bought a service to get you from Doha to Atlanta. The could route your through a totally different city, put you on a direct flight etc. This is a well known risk to skipleggers. While it'd been nicer to get you to PHL if you are asking whether they can, whether they are legally allowed to, the only answer is a yes.