Value Options Claim Forms: Fill & Download for Free

It depends. If you're flying nonstop from L.A. to Chicago and miss your flight because you overslept, were feeling sick, or just decided to delay your trip, the worst thing that could happen is that you would lose the value of your ticket (and potentially your return ticket, as well), and in practice, you’ll probably just wind up paying the delta between the value of your missed flight and the cost of a rebooked (and presumably more expensive) one. No one's going to sue you on the theory that your failure to sit in seat 21E (it was an exit row!) somehow damaged the airline.But what recent articles have covered is something different. Any experienced traveler knows that if you’re willing to endure a stop or two on your itinerary, you can sometimes save money compared to a direct flight. For example, I often fly to San Francisco; usually, the direct flights are reasonable if purchased in advance, but if they’re not, I might agree to a quick stop at LAX or DEN to save a few hundred dollars on a round trip. It’s pretty common with airfare that route A-B-C will be cheaper than A-C, because airlines often make you pay for the convenience of a direct flight.But another kink that sometimes emerges is that a flight that goes from A-B-C can be cheaper than one from just A-B. As an example, last year I took a trip with my son to the Black Hills of South Dakota (Rapid City) from Houston via Denver. For whatever reason(s), those tickets were noticeably cheaper than those same flights just from Houston to Denver (I learned this only because I was concerned about weather delays and was trying to figure out my options). But of course, we wanted to go to Rapid City, so we just chalked it up to good fortune.Had I wanted to go only to Denver, I never would have thought about pricing a flight to Rapid City (or Chicago or Seattle etc.). But now that everyone has powerful travel tools at their disposal online, it is possible to run thousands of searches—including seemingly bizarre ones—and come up with myriad fare options. “Hidden city” fares, i.e., tickets where you purchase the A-B-C flight but exit in B and never take your trip to C, are among those options. The savings—especially when international travel is involved—can be significant, but they come with risks, as failing to board the last leg of your flight generally voids the remainder of your itinerary, and also opens you up to a claim for breach of contract, as the fare you pay is predicated on your utilizing every leg of the flight.You may say “what's the harm, I paid money for the flight to C, so it's not like the airline got nothing,” but the airline's position is (correctly) that ticket prices are complex animals involving many variables (some itineraries, even under the same carrier name, may technically be on multiple airlines, there may be various fees/incentives/regulations involved, etc.). Your deeply discounted fare was discounted because for whatever reason, the airline(s) wanted people going to destination C; you would have paid more for a ticket only to B and the airline could have sold that B-C ticket for more money, as well, so there is at least a plausible claim that your decision to stay in B caused damages.Airlines aren't going to sue everyone who engages in this practice, but at least some airlines apparently plan to make an example of a few travelers, likely in the hope of scaring the general public away from hidden city bookings.

This answer is based on the personal experience of my husband Sandy Jain with Anugrah and the unfolding of the events after the scam came to light.The Anugrah scam is nothing but what the Karvy scam was in 2019 or about 20 other scams perpetrated by brokers on unsuspecting investors. Brokers offer various investment options alluring investors, options other than Mutual funds, FDs etc. and loot the poor investors of their savings. These options range from the absurd promising 3X returns etc. to very smart market operations in Futures & Options using algorithms. Some brokers not running any schemes even, decamped with investors shares in their demat accounts – pure theft. These shares were sold to cover some other loss made by the broker.Anugrah was offering an algo based FnO investment option for more than 10 years. The algo inputs were coming from Teji Mandi Analytis, an associate. The lure was that investor’s long term investments in shares could be used as leverage to increase the amount under investment i.e. shares sitting in demat accounts could start earning a return – in addition to capital increase/ decrease in share price and dividends.Sometime in 2019, the owners of Anugrah Stock & Broking seem to have gotten greedy and started taking very high value and very risky positions. Many such trades resulted in huge losses. Neither such risky trades nor the loss was informed to the investors in whose accounts Anugrah was making them.These trades were certainly not authorized by the investors.The daily reports to the investors were doctored to continue to show profit and also that the shares were intact as security margin. However – the truth was that losses piled up, then theft happened to cover the loss and the investors not only lost their money But also the shares in their demat accounts.Anugrah blames the sale of investor’s shares on Edelweiss (clearing member) – stating that Edelweiss sold individual investor’s shares without information to cover some “other loss”.In all this no one is questioning the role of the NSE & SEBI. The exchange and the regulator are equally at fault as the errant brokers. NSE audits every broker for irregularities and is supposed to act on behalf and in interest of the investors. Help is required to put out in public domain that the " holier than thou" NSE with their slogan of Investor Protection... is actually a wolf in the garb of a lamb. They knew the reality about the working of the fraud broker - as they were auditing every few months BUT did not ring a bell for the investors or penalise the broker - who has now gotten away with 1000's of crores of investor's money. NSE has made a huge fortune from the huge trade turnover of Anugrah and were therefore probably in cahoots with them.Key responsibility of SEBI is to protect interest of investors apart from regulating the markets. However, both SEBI and NSE not only miserably failed to ensure compliance by brokers, but they seem to be working totally against lakhs of investors. Misuse of client funds and securities was done across the board by brokers, inspite of their regular audits. SEBI and NSE claim to have sophisticated early warning systems in place, but they were of absolutely of no use. Brokers had cash as well as securities of investors as collateral for providing margins, which they sold on their own, without any intimation to investors. Most of these securities were sold prior to 90 days disablement period, which might make them ineligible for IPF claim due to NSE’s new criteria. Brokers have been running so called Derivative Advisory Services (DAS) for years, but SEBI and NSE could not find this even after their regular audits over years and now they seem to be findings ways to penalize investors in the name of DAS.In short, the Anugrah Scam is nothing but - Looting by unscrupulous brokers aided and abetted by the regulators and exchanges of the country.

The way this is normally done in the car dealer industry, when they are intent on being dishonest, is that they will offer the sale price only for a specific VIN.When you go to look at the VIN online, it will show a set of the options that it does or does not come with, based on that VIN.When you get to the dealership, one of several things “will have happened”:The particular VIN will be gone, but they will sell you another vehicle for a “similar” price, which will be higherThe particular VIN will be there, but they will have claimed to recently add on “a lot of extras”; these will be parts dismounted from similar vehicles, normally offered as factory options, which they unbolted from the other vehicle(s) in order to lower their price; now “your” vehicle has these other options, because “they were just about to change the price to cover the new options”A very common example of this is “undercoating”They will claim that the offer is a misprintThey will claim the offer has expiredIf you negotiate with a trade-in (never, ever negotiate with a trade-in; you are better off selling it separately, and you will lose thousands of $ if you trade it in), they will claim your trad-in value is lower, and they had to adjust the priceBut the bottom line is this: an advertisement is, in itself, not an offer to contract, so you cannot hold them to the advertised prices.However.You can sue them for False or Deceptive Advertising, and you can sue them for Bait and Switch, both of which are illegal.You can contact an auto fraud attorney to recover.Your recovery is pretty much limited to making the dealership pay your attorney fees, and any other payments which might have been made, such as registration, etc., and take the car back (cancel the contract).Such cases hinge on documentation, so it’s better if you have original copies of the advertisement, screenshots if it was online, all your contracts, and so on.If you bought at the higher price, and want to get out of the contract, consult an auto fraud attorney.