Multiple plans by charter operators

[form49]

This problem has reared its ugly head again today, whereby companies file multiple plans for the same a/c to take advantage of the slot that best suits them!!

I seem to recall that a couple of years ago the powers that be in flow decreed that if we found multiple plans in the system, we could cancel all the plans and require the company to re-file one plan for the flight.
Is my memory correct?
If so, does this still stand?
Anyone else suffering from all the confusion that this causes?

------------------
Turn left heading 230, close from the left, report established

[bookworm]

IFPS User Manual Section 3.3.3 implies that the IFPS would reject any FPL submitted for an aircraft id that would already be in the air on another FPL.

Do they use the same callsign? If so, it shouldn't get accepted. Are you prepared to name names (or rather, callsigns)? :)

[form49]

Glasgow to Larnaka XXX817 and XXX817A.
He didn't get away with it, he thought he had a 27 slot, we had a 41 slot, then noticed the additionall callsign, queried flight Nowith pilot who said whichever has the 27 slot, neither did, so he had to make a decision, made the wrong choice!!!!

------------------
Turn left heading 230, close from the left, report established

[chiglet]

Since I have been in ATC, the Airlines Companies, call them what you will, have ALWAYS slot busted. EG, Laker filed UA25 to LEPA and on the same callsign filed UA1 Ua34 to LEPA

[Goldfish Watcher]

Alpha

Have you no netiquette?

Do you want me to reveal your name too?

GW

[information_alpha]

goldfish, as you can see from my reply, i was going to write more (see the comma), decided against it and thought i had deleted it - have only just gone back to the thread and realised it has been posted - will delete it now, sorry again.