United MileagePlus (Consolidated) - UA won't refund my unused economy plus seat

I purchased 3 economy plus seats for a UA flight EWR to SEA. Sometime before the actual flight, the plane was changed without notification and 2 of my 3 seats were bumped back to economy class. I was traveling with my husband and toddler and wanted the three of us to sit together, especially as I am currently pregnant. The agent at the gate refunded the economy plus fare for the 2 economy seats (25 D & E) but refused to refund the third seat (9F). I boarded the plane and explained the situation to the flight attendants, and they moved the person in 25F to 9F. I asked them to communicate with the gate agent so that I could get a refund on the economy plus seat that I was no longer using; they stated that they could not do so but that I could run back to the gate to clarify the seat change to the agent and request a refund. I did so and the gate agent with whom I had dealt with earlier shot me a dirty look and refused to address my concern. I explained that I did not want to pay for a service that I was NOT getting and she showed no sympathy nor concern for my situation and waved me away with her hand saying that I should just contact customer service. I wanted the situation resolved AT THAT TIME, rather than resorting to the anonymous nature of online customer service. All I was asking for was a refund for a premium seat that I was not using.

I've posted my complaint to UA's online customer service but with the rising tide of complaints, I am afraid my $79 is lost and simply added to their $3.4 billion in fee revenue. Anyone with any feedback on this?

dragonroll

There is no incentive for UA to refund the money, as you voluntarily gave up that seat when you could have used it. In a more rational world, they would try to keep families seated together, but this is the "new" UA that randomly changes seating without warning. You can write emails, letters, and tweets, but your chances of getting a refund are nearly zero. Sorry.

While I would think good customer service would provide a refund, the fact you voluntary gave up the seat is going work against you. If this is recent you might be able to dispute the credit card but again it was a voluntary change (understanding you believe you had no other choice).
You best hope is getting a hold of someone who sees the bigger picture but I would not hold out much hope of that.

Welcome to FT!,dragonroll

I purchased 3 economy plus seats for a UA flight EWR to SEA. Sometime before the actual flight, the plane was changed without notification and 2 of my 3 seats were bumped back to economy class. I was traveling with my husband and toddler and wanted the three of us to sit together, especially as I am currently pregnant. The agent at the gate refunded the economy plus fare for the 2 economy seats (25 D & E) but refused to refund the third seat (9F). I boarded the plane and explained the situation to the flight attendants, and they moved the person in 25F to 9F. I asked them to communicate with the gate agent so that I could get a refund on the economy plus seat that I was no longer using; they stated that they could not do so but that I could run back to the gate to clarify the seat change to the agent and request a refund. I did so and the gate agent with whom I had dealt with earlier shot me a dirty look and refused to address my concern. I explained that I did not want to pay for a service that I was NOT getting and she showed no sympathy nor concern for my situation and waved me away with her hand saying that I should just contact customer service. I wanted the situation resolved AT THAT TIME, rather than resorting to the anonymous nature of online customer service. All I was asking for was a refund for a premium seat that I was not using.

I've posted my complaint to UA's online customer service but with the rising tide of complaints, I am afraid my $79 is lost and simply added to their $3.4 billion in fee revenue. Anyone with any feedback on this?

dragonroll

the best way to deal with extra fee at airlines is not to pay them.. you were giving them $79 for a few inchs? i would rather take my family to a $79 steak dinner.. but to each their own.. but airline suck.. my expectation are so low i never get mad...hehe

Yes, the OP voluntarily gave up her seat but UA voluntarily changed the aircraft type forcing the family to separate. As the OP was pregnant, she wanted to sit with her family.

Clearly, the OP deserves her money back. If UA didn't change the aircraft type there wouldn't be a problem. Who created this pickle?

What am I missing?

Yes, the OP voluntarily gave up her seat but UA voluntarily changed the aircraft type forcing the family to separate. As the OP was pregnant, she wanted to sit with her family.

Clearly, the OP deserves her money back. If UA didn't change the aircraft type there wouldn't be a problem. Who created this pickle?

What am I missing?

Hundreds of thousands of UA flyers are asking the same question, and coming up with the same answer.

Talk to UA Cust Service and let us know what they say.

Hundreds of thousands of UA flyers are asking the same question, and coming up with the same answer.

Well, I guess I was really referring to posts #2 and #3 that seem to side with UA since the OP "voluntarily" gave up her seat. My point is that UA first voluntarily changed the aircraft type. I didn't get their rationale.

The issue here will be any evidence UA really has is the scan of the boarding pass with her assigned seat. There is no way to verify she switched after the fact, and as said that was voluntary so they have a legitimate case that we offered you the seat that you paid for.

It is not in the terms an conditions that if we provide the seat you paid for in E+ but decide you're rather go sit further back in E- to be with your family that we will give you your money back on the up charge.

It is not in the terms an conditions that if we provide the seat you paid for in E+ but decide you're rather go sit further back in E- to be with your family that we will give you your money back on the up charge.

Completely and utterly baffled by this reply...

UA changed the aircraft type and split up the family!!!!! :rolleyes:

They were originally sitting together!!!

Time for bed.

Well, I guess I was really referring to posts #2 and #3 that seem to side with UA since the OP "voluntarily" gave up her seat. My point is that UA first voluntarily changed the aircraft type. I didn't get their rationale.

They don't have any rationale, just seemingly random seat reassingments without warning. It has happened to many posters on FT.

Not siding with UA's crap, just pointing out what the juicebags will say when refusing to fix their mess. Again.

Sometimes it is futile to fight something, and unfortunately I doubt the OP will get anywhere, so advising her not to waste much energy on this.

....
UA changed the aircraft type and split up the family!!!!! :rolleyes:

They were originally sitting together!!! .....going to hazard a guess they were on seperate PNRs

Completely and utterly baffled by this reply...

UA changed the aircraft type and split up the family!!!!! :rolleyes:

They were originally sitting together!!!

Time for bed.

Why would you be baffled? Not saying it's right, but she did get issued a boarding pass for E+. Her choice not to take it. Far better case if the two who didn't get didn't it get refunded. There is no law anywhere that says families must sit together.

So if she wasn't pregnant it's all in UA's favor?
Aircraft changes happen all the time and it's written into the purchase agreement that seating is not guaranteed. I do agree that not refunding the 3rd seat was poor customer service but the reasoning the OP and others are giving is what I can't get behind. Being pregnant has nothing to do with it. 3 seats were purchased together and if they can get 3 seats together by moving 1 person it should be done. You page the person or let it happen when the BP is scanned and wow you give an E+ seat to someone making a family feel good about the airlines. Or you release the seat in hopes that someone buys up to E+ and then stick the single person you moved initially into the opened seat. Revenue is maximized and people are happy with the airlines.
Also expecting FAs to get you a refund because you can't sit together...not their job. I'm all for making an FA do their job but this isn't one of them.
Yes, the OP voluntarily gave up her seat but UA voluntarily changed the aircraft type forcing the family to separate. As the OP was pregnant, she wanted to sit with her family.

Clearly, the OP deserves her money back. If UA didn't change the aircraft type there wouldn't be a problem. Who created this pickle?

What am I missing?

OP just look at it for what it is ,you just made a donation to Jeffs and company Retirement pkg

So if she wasn't pregnant it's all in UA's favor?
Aircraft changes happen all the time and it's written into the purchase agreement that seating is not guaranteed. I do agree that not refunding the 3rd seat was poor customer service but the reasoning the OP and others are giving is what I can't get behind. Being pregnant has nothing to do with it. 3 seats were purchased together and if they can get 3 seats together by moving 1 person it should be done. You page the person or let it happen when the BP is scanned and wow you give an E+ seat to someone making a family feel good about the airlines. Or you release the seat in hopes that someone buys up to E+ and then stick the single person you moved initially into the opened seat. Revenue is maximized and people are happy with the airlines.
Also expecting FAs to get you a refund because you can't sit together...not their job. I'm all for making an FA do their job but this isn't one of them.

Agreed. And the OP knew before boarding what the situation was. I'd have a completely different opinion if the toddler wasn't sitting with one of the parents. Not the case.

There were likely no seats to assign in E- at that point and certainly not 3 together. It was her choice at that point on the seat trade. UA met it's obligation here. Everyone sitting together is not one of them.

Now the gate agent situation sounds a little uncalled for, but we're getting one side of the story here as well.

Don't give a lawmaker any ideas.

snip There is no law anywhere that says families must sit together.

The OP deserves his money back. They paid to sit together, got split up due to aircraft change, and the computer split them up.

For those saying its not worth, you havent traveled with a pregnant woman. I have, and those few inches mean something. I was also forced once before to buy E+ as I was traveling with a car seat, and the extra inches meant the world for my tall 1 year old.

And for people saying families don't need to sit together, again, you do not know the OPs wifes condition.

Sometimes, this board is pretty harsh. The OP deserved a refund, I'm pretty sure shares makes this a 20 min process.

The OP deserves his money back. They paid to sit together, got split up due to aircraft change, and the computer split them up.

For those saying its not worth, you havent traveled with a pregnant woman. I have, and those few inches mean something. I was also forced once before to buy E+ as I was traveling with a car seat, and the extra inches meant the world for my tall 1 year old.

And for people saying families don't need to sit together, again, you do not know the OPs wifes condition.

Sometimes, this board is pretty harsh. The OP deserved a refund, I'm pretty sure shares makes this a 20 min process.

You should re read the OP's post. It was HER in E+ that took the down grade and ran all the way up the gate to get her money back. Doesn't sound like pregnancy was affecting her much at that point when she wanted her money back.

Yes, the OP voluntarily gave up her seat but UA voluntarily changed the aircraft type forcing the family to separate. As the OP was pregnant, she wanted to sit with her family.

Clearly, the OP deserves her money back. If UA didn't change the aircraft type there wouldn't be a problem. Who created this pickle?

What am I missing?

I agree with you totally.
UA bumped this family first and UA should refund the money.

You should re read the OP's post. It was HER in E+ that took the down grade and ran all the way up the gate to get her money back. Doesn't sound like pregnancy was affecting her much at that point when she wanted her money back.

It doesn't matter who went to the counter.
They paid for the E+ and reserved the seats.
United couldn't provided what they paid for, The E+ with the seat assignment.
United should refund the money.

I agree with you totally.
UA bumped this family first and UA should refund the money.

They didn't bump anyone. They all made the flight. Seats assignments are never guaranteed on any airline. The even change seats on full F on carriers like CX or SQ. They are always subject to operational constraints.

You're only entailed to a refund if you cant' be seated in the class of service you paid for. The OP was.

You should re read the OP's post. It was HER in E+ that took the down grade and ran all the way up the gate to get her money back. Doesn't sound like pregnancy was affecting her much at that point when she wanted her money back.

I read the post. The OP deserves a refund. Again, have you traveled with a pregnant wife. You have no idea what support she may need. Have some respect for a pregnant woman. I've traveled twice with my wife during 2 seperate pregnancies, I purchased E+ for her comfort and having her husband next to her just in case is worth 75.00 dollars. So, you may attack the OP and make fun of him, (families dont need to travel together). He paid for a service and UA did not provide this service at the en of the day. He absolutely deserves a refund.

They didn't bump anyone. They all made the flight. Seats assignments are never guaranteed on any airline. The even change seats on full F on carriers like CX or SQ. They are always subject to operational constraints.

You're only entailed to a refund if you cant' be seated in the class of service you paid for. The OP was.

Again you are wrong! They would never have paid for E+ if they were not guaranteed seats together. Refund deserved!

I read the post. The OP deserves a refund. Again, have you traveled with a pregnant wife. You have no idea what support she may need. Have some respect for a pregnant woman. I've traveled twice with my wife during 2 seperate pregnancies, I purchased E+ for her comfort and having her husband next to her just in case is worth 75.00 dollars. So, you may attack the OP and make fun of him, (families dont need to travel together). He paid for a service and UA did not provide this service at the en of the day. He absolutely deserves a refund.

The pregnant argument doesn't get you very far in this day and age. If women dont wont to be discriminated against in the work place they dont use this card. None i've worked with ever have.

The fact the OP threw it in (when obviously very able bodied) was a play on sympathy that worked on you.

United couldn't provided what they paid for, The E+ with the seat assignment.
United should refund the money.

United did provide what they paid for - one seat in E+.
Now whether they should refund it is different.

But I'm surprised that OP didn't at least ask to change to sit together (especially considering how important it was) as soon as they found out. Even if the seats only got reassigned at check-in, ask an agent there, or failing that, ask at the gate before the flight starts boarding. They're much more likely to help you when they aren't distracted by having to board dozens of other passengers and get a flight out on time.

United did provide what they paid for - one seat in E+.
Now whether they should refund it is different.



No United didn't provide what they paid for - 3 seats in E+.

No United didn't provide what they paid for - 3 seats in E+.

The other 2 were refunded so they only paid for one.

Folks on either side obviously will not ever agree. UA clearly has no legal obligation here and the OP wont be be able to provide proof otherwise, that is clear.

The real debate centers around should they refund? Some of us say no, others say yes. Don't expect either side to change their position.

But as always wise to point out, it was a first time poster who will likely never be back, so debating it at this point probably doesn't mean much.

The other 2 were refunded so they only paid for one.

So...I can sell you a plane but the engine company have problem with their
engines. Then, I say that I will give you an airplane with only one engine and
refund the other engine.

So...I can sell you a plane but the engine company have problem with their
engines. Then, I say that I will give you an airplane with only one engine and
refund the other engine.

Not even a remotely valid comparison. The OP paid for travel from point A to B, and guess what, got it.

So...I can sell you a plane but the engine company have problem with their
engines. Then, I say that I will give you an airplane with only one engine and
refund the other engine.

I wouldn't accept the airplane then. But I would argue that BEFORE accepting it and then complaining after the fact. Once I've accepted it, then yes, I've gotten what I've paid for.

(best I can do with this questionable analogy)

So...I can sell you a plane but the engine company have problem with their
engines. Then, I say that I will give you an airplane with only one engine and
refund the other engine.

I guess it depends on how the contract was written. If the engines are optional, then, you can technically sell me a plane with only 1 engine.:D

Going back to OP's plight, I think it would be good customer service for UA to refund the 3rd seat. However, customer service is not in today's UA's employee manual, so it's unlikely to happen. Is UA obligated to refund the 3rd seat? I don't think so as an E+ seat was provided at the time of the flight. While it was UA's own doing with the aircraft swap that led to this, seating is never guaranteed even when one pays a premium for it as I have heard people complain about voluntary downgrade even from F/C. Again, it all comes down to whether UA would do the right thing, and I doubt the new UA would.

LAX

OP, I think you should get a refund but you won't. It's the new normal for airlines, which operate on such thin margins that they really do fight to keep your money even though it isn't what some of us think is the right thing to do.

OP, I think you should get a refund but you won't. It's the new normal for airlines, which operate on such thin margins that they really do fight to keep your money even though it isn't what some of us think is the right thing to do.

Now that i can agree with.. didn't say it's right. but it what it is. She will just have no proof. All UA will see is the issued boarding pass in E+.

If the OP has any chance of UA giving her money back she will have to edit her story.

Now that i can agree with.. didn't say it's right. but it what it is. She will just have no proof. All UA will see is the issued boarding pass in E+.

If the OP has any chance of UA giving her money back she will have to edit her story.

Even if she had proof that she was downgraded to E- (voluntarily), she would still have a tough time getting a refund as it would have been a voluntary downgrade. The spew associated with E+ is pretty clear that the money is usually not refunded under most circumstances.

LAX

Even if she had proof that she was downgraded to E- (voluntarily), she would still have a tough time getting a refund as it would have been a voluntary downgrade. The spew associated with E+ is pretty clear that the money is usually not refunded under most circumstances.

LAX

A voluntary down grade to a lower class "on board" is never refunded by any airline. If you choose to swap seats to a lower class to sit with someone, that is your choice. You dont get a refund.

Worked out at the gate before ( which was not done in this case) is different. But once you board your on your own taking a downgrade and that's pretty true on any airline.

Amazing how people completely disregard the fact that they have no legal right to what they are demanding. UA owes nothing to the OP - the OP was supposed to know that seating was not guaranteed. Also, all the people saying that she should get a refund - you are wrong. She waited LITERALLY until the last minute to let UA know that the new seating doesn't work for her, thereby depriving UA of a chance to sell the seat to somebody else (yes, I know that you can upgrade after boarding). Also, since she was supposed to know that she has no legal right to a refund, she could have asked passengers to BUY her 9F seat instead of looking for people willing to take it for free.

A voluntary down grade to a lower class "on board" is never refunded by any airline. If you choose to swap seats to a lower class to sit with someone, that is your choice. You dont get a refund.



I thought it's not allowed to swap seats between F and Y, right?
If it's allowed, I will report a nasty experience from the pmCO crews.

I read the post. The OP deserves a refund. Again, have you traveled with a pregnant wife. You have no idea what support she may need. Have some respect for a pregnant woman. I've traveled twice with my wife during 2 seperate pregnancies, I purchased E+ for her comfort and having her husband next to her just in case is worth 75.00 dollars. So, you may attack the OP and make fun of him, (families dont need to travel together). He paid for a service and UA did not provide this service at the en of the day. He absolutely deserves a refund.

LASUA1K, I will try as polite as possible in stating objectively how I see it. You read the post, but you missed that the OP was the pregnant wife, not the husband, as you keep calling the OP "him." That aside, maybe you should be a bit more open minded as well. We don't know who the OP is, what kind of a person she is, whether she may or may not need support. We don't know how pregnant she is (maybe she is not far along and doesn't even appear pregnant). We don't have this information. Sure, we should respect pregnant women; we should respect everyone else as well. I'm from New York City, have been on many full buses, and I have seen pregnant women decline a seat when offered. I'm not saying that that is the norm, but I am saying don't make assumptions.

I can see that OP wanted to sit next to her family, and bought E+ tickets because of it. I agree that she should've been able to in her situation, just like I think I should be able to sit next to my SO on a flight if I book seats together. Unfortunately UA doesn't see it that way. UA gave her a seat in the same class of service she purchased, failed to do so in the other two tickets, and refunded those as should've been done. The airline doesn't actually guarantee seating, and that's what happened. In terms of UA's contract, they did their part. Ethically or otherwise, sure, I think OP deserved a refund. Unfortunately, UA doesn't care and it is unlikely for the OP to receive that refund for a seat she gave up willingly. Is it a less than ideal situation? Sure. I would be extremely unhappy as well. Is it the end of the world if they couldn't sit together? No.

Is it the end of the world if they couldn't sit together? No.

Is it the end of the world if UA refunds her ticket? No.
Will UA get more revenue from this family or this family's family or friends if they refund her ticket? Maybe.
Will UA get more revenue from this family or this family's family or friends if they don't refund her ticket? Maybe not.

You earn $7x USD one time and you lose more revenue in the future and it's how COdbaUA do business these few months.

Amazing how people completely disregard the fact that they have no legal rights to what they are demanding. UA owes nothing to the OP - the OP was supposed to know that seating was not guaranteed. Also, all the people saying that she should get a refund - you are wrong. She waited LITERALLY until the last minute to let UA know that the new seating doesn't work for her, thereby depriving UA of a chance to sell the seat to somebody else (yes, I know that you can upgrade after boarding). Also, since she was supposed to know that she has no legal right to a refund, she could have asked passengers to BUY her 9F seat instead of looking for people willing to take it for free.

Sarcasm noted. I guess the question really is, did she not trust to hubby to look after the toddler for 5 hours? Hell, most women i know, with a toddler and especially expecting another would have LOVED the break. Let Daddy deal with him for a change.

You earn $7x USD one time and you lose more revenue in the future and it's how COdbaUA do business these few months.

This obviously was not that situation that they were loosing a high revenue flyer. We know that by the simple fact they had to pay for E+. An economy passenger is an economy passenger unless you have top tier status. So no, UA wont really care. They will fill the seats with someone else. It's just a reality of air travel.

They can always go fly Spirit and see how much they like that.

Did you pay using American Express?

In my experience, Amex reliably sides with the customer in such disputes, while Visa and Mastercard reliably side with the merchant. The only downside is no satisfaction sticking it to UA, as Amex is willing to absorb such trifling amounts without a contest, to keep customers happy. (Clearly, not UA.)

I'm not one to repeat the "Look! UA apologists!" refrain, but this thread is astounding. For a warmup, imagine instead that two out of three family members were entirely IDB'd from the flight, and the third "voluntarily" gave up her seat to stay with her family. Is UA legally required to fly groups together? Nevertheless, even the present UA has enough class to try to keep groups on the same flight. I see the OP's situation as entirely parallel, and it's a shame that UA didn't.

Is it the end of the world if UA refunds her ticket? No.
Will UA get more revenue from this family or this family's family or friends if they refund her ticket? Maybe.
Will UA get more revenue from this family or this family's family or friends if they don't refund her ticket? Maybe not.

You earn $7x USD one time and you lose more revenue in the future and it's how COdbaUA do business these few months.

I did not mean for that to be my final point. However, if you've been reading this UA forum in the past few months, it doesn't seem like UA cares about building customer loyalty (feel free to correct me if you feel otherwise). Even many 1Ks don't seem very happy with the level of customer service UA has provided them. Do I agree with what UA is doing? No, and that's why I make AA my preferred airline. But that's what I see UA doing these days...

I did not mean for that to be my final point. However, if you've been reading this UA forum in the past few months, it doesn't seem like UA cares about building customer loyalty (feel free to correct me if you feel otherwise). Even many 1Ks don't seem very happy with the level of customer service UA has provided them. Do I agree with what UA is doing? No, and that's why I make AA my preferred airline. But that's what I see UA doing these days...

I know. I just point out that UA might lose more money if they want to do this.
I am very happy with AA too.

Did you pay using American Express?

In my experience, Amex reliably sides with the customer in such disputes, while Visa and Mastercard reliably side with the merchant. The only downside is no satisfaction sticking it to UA, as Amex is willing to absorb such trifling amounts without a contest, to keep customers happy. (Clearly, not UA.)

I'm not one to repeat the "Look! UA apologists!" refrain, but this thread is astounding. For a warmup, imagine instead that two out of three family members were entirely IDB'd from the flight, and the third "voluntarily" gave up her seat to stay with her family. Is UA legally required to fly groups together? Nevertheless, even the present UA has enough class to try to keep groups on the same flight. I see the OP's situation as entirely parallel, and it's a shame that UA didn't.

Amex even in this case is likely to be of little help. Again the proof thing that she got E+ and UA could easily show that.

Didn't you know Amex likes DL better anyway? LOL But in all seriousness, UA can easily prove transit provided and class of service payed for. They wont get involved in case like this.

. . . I'm not one to repeat the "Look! UA apologists!" refrain, but this thread is astounding. For a warmup, imagine instead that two out of three family members were entirely IDB'd from the flight, and the third "voluntarily" gave up her seat to stay with her family. Is UA legally required to fly groups together? . . . I see the OP's situation as entirely parallel, and it's a shame that UA didn't.

See, you think UA apologists are the problem. We think people like you are the problem - those who see entirely non-parallel situations as entirely parallel.

First, there is a big difference between not flying on on the same plane and flying in non-adjacent seats on the same plane.

Second, there is a big difference in getting notice and being able to do something about it. IDB pax don't get notice until the last minute, when you often can't do anything about it - you can't even purchase a Y/B fare with guaranteed seating bc those require 24 hour advance notice. In contrast, if we are talking about seating, there are things you can and should do if seating is important to you. The OP could have bought a personal jet or have negotiated a guaranteed seating contract with UA. Or at least, I don't know, perhaps CHECK the seating on your upcoming flight at some time BEFORE you get to the gate?

Third, your analogy is inapplicable because UA accomodated the pax - they found a person willing to swap seats. The OP was seated with her family. She just wanted the refund on top.

1. The OP is not asking for a refund on the flight, which is what she paid for to get from point A to point B. To say that UA should not refund her because they got her from point A to B is irrelevant.
2. The OP is asking for a refund on a supplement. That supplement was purchased for all three tickets on the PNR at the same time.
3. UA involuntarily downgraded two of the tickets. And they forcibly broke up a family seating together.
4. If UA had IDB'd two of the family members and not the third, and the third did not want to fly without the other two, would the third be entitled to compensation?

Absolutely, and without a doubt, the OP deserves a refund. If I were her, I would dispute the credit card charge for the amount of the E+.

. . .3. UA involuntarily downgraded two of the tickets. And they forcibly broke up a family seating together.
. . .
Absolutely, and without a doubt, the OP deserves a refund. If I were her, I would dispute the credit card charge for the amount of the E+.

Every time I read something like this, I get to understand Einstein better.

Yes, it is true that UA changed equipment, which UA could do under the contract, and yes, it is true that UA thereby downgraded two of tickets, which UA could do under the contract. However, it does not follow that the OP "deserves" a refund.

OP voluntarily purchased contract without guaranteed seating. She could have said - I want a contract with guaranteed seating, and could have negotiated a contract fitting her particular needs. Or, if she didn't want the hassle, she could simply buy half of the cabin in refundable fares, and cancel the unneeded tickets prior to boarding. She could check the seating daily, and after equipment change, call customer service and plead her case then, even though legally she was not entitled to the refund. Even when/if all of that failed, she could have asked FA to ask pax onboard whether anybody wanted to buy an upgrade to E+.

But she prolly did NONE of that. She prolly just came to the gate at the time of boarding, informed the GA, who, by the way, is usually busy managing LEGITIMATE requests, that the new seating didn't work for her, and demanded a refund of E+ to which she has no legal right. No wonder UA said no. I would too.

EDIT: Actually, it's even better - (She wrote that) she ACCEPTED the seating, boarded, then VOLUNTARILY gave her seat to the pax in 25F, and then asked for a refund.

4. If UA had IDB'd two of the family members and not the third, and the third did not want to fly without the other two, would the third be entitled to compensation?

A little off topic, but I'm not sure this is so "absolutely and without a doubt" clear as you think it is. The most recent flight I had with a family member was with my dad JFK-PVG. If one of us was IDBed, I wouldn't think it's such a big deal. I wouldn't have minded flying out the next day. I wouldnt expect compensation if we insisted on both taking the next flight and traveling together. If the flight was overbooked and they asked for a VDB volunteer, I certainly would've volunteered. I understand that families may have special situations, but some special situations are more emergent than others, and how do you compare them? For example, consider a family traveling together like my dad and myself, a pregnant woman traveling with her husband and small child, and a parent taking a child to see a specialist regarding a medical condition. Should some of them get compensation and some of them not?

Also, A family on the same PNR is unlikely to be IDBed, unless all of them were. They are more likely to choose solo pax for one IDB.

We've been talking about parallel situations, how about this one? Let's say the OP had bought 2 tickets in E+ for herself and her toddler. Then one of the seats gets bumped back to E- and she gets a refund for that one, but would have to voluntarily move back from E+ into E- to sit next to her kid. In that case, would we expect UA to refund that ticket?

According to the official "rules", it sounds like no. She was offered one seat in E+ and chose to sit back in E- with the toddler. But there's no way a parent would not sit with his/her toddler (and there's no way other passengers would tolerate having to sit next to a toddler with the accompanying parent sitting in E+). In fact, I'm not even sure how the FAs would handle a situation where a toddler was sitting alone with a parent assigned a different seat in a different class (esp. since unaccompanied minors start at age 5).

To me, it's the same situation as you have described. Yes there were 3 tickets - but who knows what their situation is? What if instead of flying with her husband, she was flying with her elderly parent who also needed assistance? There are a lot of scenarios where the OP would have been forced into an impossible situation and would have had to "choose" the voluntary downgrade to E-.

As frequent flyers, we see this stuff happen all the time. When airlines start charging extra fees for aisle seating, more legroom, etc. - it makes it a lot harder to switch seats on the plane without someone being the loser. Given that the airlines derive revenue from these fees, it seems like they would have programmed some business rules - like, "do not split up families with toddlers when they have purchased higher fare classes like E+ so that we don't have to deal with situations where we are forcing people to switch out of seats that they have paid for".

Of course, don't all the airlines make toddlers sit in the back??? Hmmm...

Yes my question, since UA changed the pre assigned seats, what if UA split all 3 into 3 different seats. 1 or 2 in E+ and one in E-. What would UA do if they had to all sit in E- due to no seats or no one willing to move in E+? Are we still saying too bad they should take the assigned seats and no refund given if they choose to move to E-? That's what people are talking about. I'm guessing people who think UA was in the right by not giving them a refund don't have families and are clueless how it feels traveling with a toddler and a pregnant wife.

This also got me recently, with the crazy seat change bug going on. I purchased a trip recently for 3 seats, 1 toddler, Pregnant wife and myself. About 3 days out, we had 3 different seats, no aircraft change, no nothing. Called UA, sorry we can't help don't know why seats were changed. I was eventually able to get 3 seats together.

The OP's wife, was assigned an E+ seat and the other two in the back. The UA agent made no effort to just upgrade the passenger sitting next to her family into E+ and put her in the E- seat, (if that's what she chose) It sounds like there were no 3 seats available together.

Anyways, the right thing to do is refund the money, but I'm sure UA will not and I"m sure they will lose 3 future passengers.

We've been talking about parallel situations, how about this one? Let's say the OP had bought 2 tickets in E+ for herself and her toddler. Then one of the seats gets bumped back to E- and she gets a refund for that one, but would have to voluntarily move back from E+ into E- to sit next to her kid. In that case, would we expect UA to refund that ticket?

Why start with even more crazy hypothetical scenarios?

No airline would knowingly separate a minor and their guardian like that.

If, for whatever reason, this occurred (such as travel on separate PNRs - which I suspect may have been the case in the present OP's situation), the ground staff, or at worst, the cabin crew, would resolve the situation such that the two could sit together.

No refund due. She was in E+, and opted to downgrade herself, despite her pregnancy.

As for splitting up the family, she should be pressing for compensation as such additional RDMs, or a dollars off certificate on future travel.

No refund due. She was in E+, and opted to downgrade herself, despite her pregnancy.

As for splitting up the family, she should be pressing for compensation as such additional RDMs, or a dollars off certificate on future travel.

She paid 79.00, what exactly do you think UA will give her? 50 off? They are better off giving her the 79.00 back.

I'm amazed at how many people are saying too bad, UA split the family, it's UA's fault. The same people saying too bad are the same ones who are mad about UA selling upgrades to others, while leaving Elites in the back.

No airline would knowingly separate a minor and their guardian like that.

If, for whatever reason, this occurred (such as travel on separate PNRs - which I suspect may have been the case in the present OP's situation), the ground staff, or at worst, the cabin crew, would resolve the situation such that the two could sit together.

Yes, I would expect that UA would make sure the two were sitting together. And if they both paid for E+ seats and they had to sit together in E-, I would *also* expect UA to refund the $79 additional fee for each ticket.

Which they are not doing in this case.

We seem to be assuming separate PNRs, but if they were on on PNR, does it make this situation different?

Hi OP here.

I was glad to see the healthy response and debate from the FT community generated by my quandary with UA.

Just to address some questions and concerns posted:

1. When I reached the airport (with plenty of time to spare) I decided to wait on line for those checking in with bags to be checked (rather than do curbside, which I usually like to to) in the hopes that the agent at the ticket counter could address my seating problem. However, the lines were crazy long and by the time we got to the kiosk , it was pretty much boarding time and the ticket agent threw up his hands and said that he could not do anything and that I should just go to the gate and talk to the gate agent. He could not even refund the two downgraded seats.
When we made it to the gate, most of the plane had already boarded and I knew that it was not reasonable nor possible to get the three E+ seats I had originally paid for so I just tried to coordinate the effort between the flight attendants and the gate agent in terms of the new seating arrangement. While I concede that there was little that could be done at the last minute, it was still poor customer service on UA's part that upset me the most.
2. I am 5 months pregnant, so I don't have a belly that's about to pop, but it is big enough that it does make it difficult bending down to reach for my bag on the floor while tending to the constant stream of demands of a toddler that I'm trying to keep quiet and distracted for the sake of all around me. Having my husband seated with me makes this all much easier. I would agree with those who posited that few people would want to sit in a window seat next to someone else's toddler for a cross country flight.

3. We were all booked under the same PNR.

4. I paid for the E+ fares with my Chase United Mileage Plus Explorer credit card (formerly Chase Continental One Pass credit card) so I doubt that Chase would be stepping up to bat for me on this one. As a total aside, I also found out 4 hours before my flight that my credit card information had been compromised so I also had to deal with cancelling my credit card while trying to figure out the seat snafu.

I am not optimistic that UA will send me any sort of reply generated by a human, nor do I anticipate my $79 to be refunded. I do see valid points made by those on both sides of the debate, but the bottom line is that UA now has an unhappy customer who is much less likely to book future flights with them.

I will keep you all posted in case any developments occur!

Dragonroll

Hi OP here.

I was glad to see the healthy response and debate from the FT community generated by my quandary with UA.

Just to address some questions and concerns posted:

1. When I reached the airport (with plenty of time to spare) I decided to wait on line for those checking in with bags to be checked (rather than do curbside, which I usually like to to) in the hopes that the agent at the ticket counter could address my seating problem. However, the lines were crazy long and by the time we got to the kiosk , it was pretty much boarding time and the ticket agent threw up his hands and said that he could not do anything and that I should just go to the gate and talk to the gate agent. He could not even refund the two downgraded seats.
When we made it to the gate, most of the plane had already boarded and I knew that it was not reasonable nor possible to get the three E+ seats I had originally paid for so I just tried to coordinate the effort between the flight attendants and the gate agent in terms of the new seating arrangement. While I concede that there was little that could be done at the last minute, it was still poor customer service on UA's part that upset me the most.
2. I am 5 months pregnant, so I don't have a belly that's about to pop, but it is big enough that it does make it difficult bending down to reach for my bag on the floor while tending to the constant stream of demands of a toddler that I'm trying to keep quiet and distracted for the sake of all around me. Having my husband seated with me makes this all much easier. I would agree with those who posited that few people would want to sit in a window seat next to someone else's toddler for a cross country flight.

3. We were all booked under the same PNR.

4. I paid for the E+ fares with my Chase United Mileage Plus Explorer credit card (formerly Chase Continental One Pass credit card) so I doubt that Chase would be stepping up to bat for me on this one. As a total aside, I also found out 4 hours before my flight that my credit card information had been compromised so I also had to deal with cancelling my credit card while trying to figure out the seat snafu.

I am not optimistic that UA will send me any sort of reply generated by a human, nor do I anticipate my $79 to be refunded. I do see valid points made by those on both sides of the debate, but the bottom line is that UA now has an unhappy customer who is much less likely to book future flights with them.

I will keep you all posted in case any developments occur!

Dragonroll

Hi Dragonroll,

Thanks for the update. I understand how you feel and how the family feels. I traveled with my wife twice during pregnancy and it would be difficult for her to do anything or take care of the little one on a cross country flight. We had twins. So a little bigger at 5 months.

You do deserve your money back, and as far as the agent throwing his hands up, that's unproffesional and he should've called the gate agent to see if he could help out in some way, but of course, that would take a bit of effort.

Congrats on the pregnancy and Good Luck. UA has some great employees but a few bad apples and a terrible Shares system that sometimes adds stress to them.

Wirelessly posted (BB Curve: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-us; T-Mobile G2 Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

I like to look at it in more simple terms:
OP paid for E+ as a trio
UA accepted the payment for 3
UA changed the seating, and split the trio
UA should have rebooked as a trio and if not, refund all 3 since technically, if the OP only wanted 1 E+ seat, the OP would have paid for only 1.

From a technical perspective, the OP did accept the single E+ seat, but realistically, there wasn't much of an option for anything else. She could take a 3rd E- seat, but still she would not have a seat next to the family. At least with the E+ seat, she could use it as an incentive for the person swapping seats.

Again, all this could have been avoided if UA IT did its job in the first place.

Again, all this could have been avoided if UA IT did its job in the first place.

What job did they fail at here? It was an equipment change - it is obviously not possible to preserve the adjacent seating arrangements of every group of passengers.

Wirelessly posted (BB Curve: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-us; T-Mobile G2 Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Again, all this could have been avoided if UA IT did its job in the first place.

What job did they fail at here? It was an equipment change - it is obviously not possible to preserve the adjacent seating arrangements of every group of passengers.

The failure in the IT system is that it split up a premium paying PNR. Everyone in economy is still economy, but an extra $210 for those seats should also get some consideration during the aircraft swap. And if there weren't enough seats in E+, don't split the seating to 1 or 2 in E+ and the rest in E-. They should all be kept together, particularly if one of them is a minor and all 3 pax are on the same PNR.

We already know there's something screwy with the seat assignments, this is just another example.

I have a related question regarding economy plus seating. I booked my mother on a flight and paid for economy plus for both legs. A few weeks later, fares dropped and I booked her in business. The fare difference paid did not take into consideration the amounts she paid for economy plus, but now that she is not sitting in economy plus, I am assuming she should get a refund for those amounts. Seems logical to me, but wanted to see what the experts had to say. Thanks.

The failure in the IT system is that it split up a premium paying PNR. Everyone in economy is still economy, but an extra $210 for those seats should also get some consideration during the aircraft swap. And if there weren't enough seats in E+, don't split the seating to 1 or 2 in E+ and the rest in E-. They should all be kept together, particularly if one of them is a minor and all 3 pax are on the same PNR.

We already know there's something screwy with the seat assignments, this is just another example.

There's a finite number of seats to work with and a large number of conflicting variables - status level, paid vs. free E+ seats, family members with children, etc. Nearly everyone is going to be unhappy in some way with the seat allocations after an equipment swap like this, so I find it hard to just squarely point at this as an IT failure without any of us knowing what variables are actually considered. It's entirely possible that this is considered but the OP just lost out due to others being accommodated first.

Wirelessly posted (BB Curve: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-us; T-Mobile G2 Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)



The failure in the IT system is that it split up a premium paying PNR. Everyone in economy is still economy, but an extra $210 for those seats should also get some consideration during the aircraft swap. And if there weren't enough seats in E+, don't split the seating to 1 or 2 in E+ and the rest in E-. They should all be kept together, particularly if one of them is a minor and all 3 pax are on the same PNR.

We already know there's something screwy with the seat assignments, this is just another example.

easier said then done! and another great job by Shares

But does another really think COdbaUA had a person go over each and every seating assignment to make sure everyone was gonna be happy with the new assignments? Maybe COdbaUA should each and every passenger (PNR) and make sure the new arrangements are AOK.

That will usuallybe done at the airport if you didnt know somethingw as up beforehand. I guess the OP never checked the mobile link otherwise theres a good chance they would have caught the plane change

But it is a very good question under what circumstances should the non-refundable fee be refunded. Ive gone to concerts where we didnt sit togther had we it would ahve been teh nose bleed section, this way we had center front seats just not next to each other, no big deal we were going to be together after the concert anyway and during it who was going to be talking rather then listening

I think its much ado about nothing and the OP should have simply decided which of the parents will sit with the kid and which would sit in E+. It would be 1 thing if they were divided up over 2 different flights and not arriving within a reasonable time together. But all 3 were on the same flight , and had anything come up they could have dealt with it

Whenever a flight is downsized it causes a ton of headaches that no body wants not the Passengers, Airline or Employees.

the problem is like it or not when purchasing E+ its a non-refundable purchase and Unfortunately the only side that can CX is the Carrier, is that fair doesnt matter its what is agreed to when the purchase is made.

since the OP gave up the E+ on their own, (even under the conditions that were outside their control) I understand COdbaUA for not refunding it, its was the passenger who decdied not to use what was purchased

easier said then done! and another great job by Shares

But does another really think COdbaUA had a person go over each and every seating assignment to make sure everyone was gonna be happy with the new assignments? Maybe COdbaUA should each and every passenger (PNR) and make sure the new arrangements are AOK.

That will usuallybe done at the airport if you didnt know somethingw as up beforehand. I guess the OP never checked the mobile link otherwise theres a good chance they would have caught the plane change

But it is a very good question under what circumstances should the non-refundable fee be refunded. Ive gone to concerts where we didnt sit togther had we it would ahve been teh nose bleed section, this way we had center front seats just not next to each other, no big deal we were going to be together after the concert anyway and during it who was going to be talking rather then listening

I think its much ado about nothing and the OP should have simply decided which of the parents will sit with the kid and which would sit in E+. It would be 1 thing if they were divided up over 2 different flights and not arriving within a reasonable time together. But all 3 were on the same flight , and had anything come up they could have dealt with it

Whenever a flight is downsized it causes a ton of headaches that no body wants not the Passengers, Airline or Employees.

the problem is like it or not when purchasing E+ its a non-refundable purchase and Unfortunately the only side that can CX is the Carrier, is that fair doesnt matter its what is agreed to when the purchase is made.

since the OP gave up the E+ on their own, (even under the conditions that were outside their control) I understand COdbaUA for not refunding it, its was the passenger who decdied not to use what was purchased

As the OP said, it is getting a little hard to bend and do things on her own. Did you want her to sit alone next to the toddler? What if the toddler had an accident and she had to carry her? Do you want a 5 month Pregnant person picking up a toddler? Do you want her sitting alone? All she wanted was to sit next to her family. I have traveled with my 5 month pregnant wife with twins and a toddler for 5 hours, the toddler did start to act up, I had to help, and my wife couldn't reach down to her feet to get the baby bag.

Do people have no respect for a pregnant person anymore? Do people have no manners? This argument that she should just sit in her E+ seat and be happy is silly.

All she wanted was a refund and to sit in E- with her family. She bough E+ for the extra comfort for 3 people not 1. Since UA could not provide E+ for all 3 on the same PNR, they should allow a refund of all 3 and let her sit in E- which she did.

I have been there, done that. And no one really knows how the other person feels and what they can and cannot do. So instead of saying too bad, you got the E+ seat, be happy sit down, away from your crying toddler, UA should've stepped up, but I'm pretty sure with this terrible Shares system it was probably too much of a hassle for the agent to do.

I also got split up from my family recently, for no reason. NO seat change, no schedule change, no nothing, but good ole Shares split us all up. All 3. If I didn't check my reservation like a crazy man every day, I would've never noticed. Not everyone has time to check there reservation every day, twice a day.

I sympathize with both your desires to sit together and to receive a refund.

Economy plus fees are not refundable; policy is clearly stated at time of purchase. Likewise, specific equipment and specific seat assignments are never guaranteed -- on UA or any other airline. This is one reason why frequent fliers always check their reservations often not only in the months and weeks but especially in the days and hours prior to flight.

That the two seats were refunded shows, IMHO, that UA did the decent thing. That FAs assisted in reseating again shows UA's understanding. However, to expect either that FAs should get involved with refund issues or that GAs should handle such things after boarding occurs is to expect too much.

One can easily see how such last minute seat switches and refunds can make for tardy departures which not only cost UA $$ but also cause delays for passengers not only on the given flight but for passengers who are next to arrive into the given gate and for passengers later in the day should the delay not be able to be made up enroute.

The best thing to do is simply not buy into UAs E+ scheme which really amounts to nothing more than a grab for revenue and has only nominal benefit for the passenger -- viz. being able to deplane last and having some more leg space.

When three seats are not available together during online seat assignment, the best thing to do is not to reserve any online but rather to call and ask reservations to assign three together. Likely you would get them in E but on occasion an agent will reserve in E+ for no fee.

It is possible that you may receive a further refund, but I am not convinced that one is due. UA did provide what you paid for -- viz. an E+ seat. It was your choice not to take it.

She paid 79.00, what exactly do you think UA will give her? 50 off? They are better off giving her the 79.00 back.

Nope. Returning cash back is not the same as providing a coupon for dollars off future travel. If you don't understand that, talk to a local pizzeria owner.


I'm amazed at how many people are saying too bad, UA split the family, it's UA's fault. The same people saying too bad are the same ones who are mad about UA selling upgrades to others, while leaving Elites in the back.
I'm amazed how many people are linking the E+ purchase with the family being split.

This isn't like some airlines that charge a fee for assigned seats (and I am beginning to believe UA should). If OP was charged such a fee, then I could see OP's complaint about service not being rendered.

As the OP said, it is getting a little hard to bend and do things on her own. Did you want her to sit alone next to the toddler? What if the toddler had an accident and she had to carry her? Do you want a 5 month Pregnant person picking up a toddler? Do you want her sitting alone? All she wanted was to sit next to her family. I have traveled with my 5 month pregnant wife with twins and a toddler for 5 hours, the toddler did start to act up, I had to help, and my wife couldn't reach down to her feet to get the baby bag.

Do people have no respect for a pregnant person anymore? Do people have no manners? This argument that she should just sit in her E+ seat and be happy is silly.

All she wanted was a refund and to sit in E- with her family. She bough E+ for the extra comfort for 3 people not 1. Since UA could not provide E+ for all 3 on the same PNR, they should allow a refund of all 3 and let her sit in E- which she did.

I have been there, done that. And no one really knows how the other person feels and what they can and cannot do. So instead of saying too bad, you got the E+ seat, be happy sit down, away from your crying toddler, UA should've stepped up, but I'm pretty sure with this terrible Shares system it was probably too much of a hassle for the agent to do.

I also got split up from my family recently, for no reason. NO seat change, no schedule change, no nothing, but good ole Shares split us all up. All 3. If I didn't check my reservation like a crazy man every day, I would've never noticed. Not everyone has time to check there reservation every day, twice a day.

I understand that, its no different to me then when going to purchase tkts for say 4 people that only seats at the low fare are left, so either buy 3 and the 4th pay more or pick a different flight.

I understand she would have problems so she should have taken the E+ seat and left what I assume (can be wrong) hubby and kid to seat together in E-. And switch if need be like any other family that has been separated does.

Also it may be benefical to make sure you are at checkin alot earlier going forward , just in case somethig like this pops up. The OP isnt the 1st person this has happened to OK maybe 1st pregnant person, Im sure its happened to others who due to their height has problems in E- or bad backs etc etc

I made all sorts of reservations for an award trip next week Sun-Thurs, I took care of everything that I can CX if I dont go. I still didnt get the tkt or book 1 night at a hotel since both would be non-refundable, it could when I decide 100% to go I wont have the flights or hotel available any longer. When a person Purchases something that is Non-Refundable its just that, and sometimes that no CXing is only on the buyers side, is that Right or Not doesnt matter read everything and make sure you understand what you are buying before you do

The main problem for UA is how do they know 100% that the OP indeed switched seats and never sat in E+,Im NOT calling the OP a liar! and UA may say if you didnt get there the very last min maybe we could have found a buyer for that seat and given the OP back their $79 even thou it was non-refundable.But UAnever had a chance due to the timing the OPs group got to checkin


Keep in mind I call this Carrier COdbaUA so Im far from a RahRah booster for UA, but at some time people have to start taking Responsibilty for things they do.

Yes I know an equipment change caused this and the OP didnt request that to be done! But had the OP checked way before getting to the airport they probably would have been able to see that occurred and taken care of things and gotten things how they wanted them to be. Maybe not we never will know

They should all be kept together, particularly if one of them is a minor and all 3 pax are on the same PNR.

In this case the minor with an adult were kept together, and the pregnant woman got E+. Seems like SHARES did it perfectly for once.

I know that if among my family of a heights of 5'10", 6'1", and 6'8", that if SHARES put two of us in E-, the tallest one gets E+, no question.

Hi OP here.

...

I am not optimistic that UA will send me any sort of reply generated by a human, nor do I anticipate my $79 to be refunded. I do see valid points made by those on both sides of the debate, but the bottom line is that UA now has an unhappy customer who is much less likely to book future flights with them.

I will keep you all posted in case any developments occur!

Dragonroll

I would keep trying-- the right CS agent should do the right thing if the argument is presented well (and succinctly). Despite what's going on with UA, I think this case it would make sense for UA to do the right thing.

Nope. Returning cash back is not the same as providing a coupon for dollars off future travel. If you don't understand that, talk to a local pizzeria owner.


I'm amazed how many people are linking the E+ purchase with the family being split.

This isn't like some airlines that charge a fee for assigned seats (and I am beginning to believe UA should). If OP was charged such a fee, then I could see OP's complaint about service not being rendered.

The service wasn't rendered. She was forced to handle this on the airplane. I just had a family member who coulnd't check in online, I made sure she got to the airport 2 hours before. She got there 2and half hours before and it took UA over an hour to fix the situations. After 30 minutes in line. She had to run to catch the flight.

She deserves a refund, plain and simple. Seat changes and people being split is hapenning way to often.

Again, amazed how many people still say, the hubby couldn't take care of the kid or she should be happy she got one seat in E+. Amazed! It sounds like respect has gone out the window. Opening a door, giving up your seat to the elderly, or telling a pregnant woman too bad sit alone away from your family. It was a 5 hour flight. Not a quick 1 hour flight.

Hi, OP again.

A quick clarification. When UA split our tickets, they left my toddler in E+ and the two adults in E-. That's a fat fail in their system, especially considering they have all our birth dates.

Dragonroll

Hi, OP again.

A quick clarification. When UA split our tickets, they left my toddler in E+ and the two adults in E-. That's a fat fail in their system, especially considering they have all our birth dates.

Dragonroll

Thanks again for the update. I can't wait to hear from all the people who are defending UA in this. That's even more reason to blame Shares and demand a refund!

Thanks again for the update. I can't wait to hear from all the people who are defending UA in this. That's even more reason to blame Shares and demand a refund!

No thats a GREAT reason to Bash Shares! but doesnt mean a refund is due

When UA split our tickets, they left my toddler in E+ and the two adults in E-.

Sticking to the letter of the law, perhaps you and hubby should have flow in E- and let the kid fly in E+ and see what would have happened??? Moving seats could have been contingent on a refund... ;)

Should have charged the person you swapped seats with and not involved United at all.

I think that there was about as much of a chance of that happening as there is that you will get a refund.

The title is misleading, the seat was not unused, it was voluntarily given up by you. It was your choice not to use it, not United's.

I've got an idea. Let me help the IT folks at COdbaUA. How about programming SHARES to have a similar re-seat algorithm Apollo had, and most all of these types of issues go away. Is Hewlett Packard up to the task?

Shares=Helter Skelter. Apollo=Prioritization.

The Horror!

I think a lot of the comments here are cr@p.

The OP paid $237 for 3 E+ seats together ($79 each). This is a completely separate transaction/contract/agreement from the purchase of the ticket that only guarantees transportation from A to B, so I don't know why anyone even brings that up.

UA did not deliver 3 E+ seats together. Period. IANAL, but it seems to me one can't partially deliver on a contract and pro-rate the consideration (or return thereof). Thus, UA owes them the full $237 -- at the very least as a customer service gesture.

But if that doesn't work, I would definitely file a DOT complaint and potentially seek redress with the credit card company first, and if that doesn't work, small claims court.

UA did not deliver 3 E+ seats together. Period. IANAL, but it seems to me one can't partially deliver on a contract and pro-rate the consideration (or return thereof). Thus, UA owes them the full $237 -- at the very least as a customer service gesture.

UA didn't promise 3 E+ seats together. Just because that is what OP expected doesn't mean it is what she's entitled to. Most customer-focused businesses, I mean those outside of airlines or telecom, would give her the refund. And they should IMO. But they don't have to, nor will they.

Thanks again for the update. I can't wait to hear from all the people who are defending UA in this. That's even more reason to blame Shares and demand a refund!

Not all situations are the same. And not all issues are the same. And only very handsome blonde people keep conflating issues and facts even after the error was pointed out to them. Judging from your posts, you are probably one of those.

The point has been made over and over - it is only the OP's fault that she didn't get what she wanted. There were ways to ensure guaranteed seating. But apparently, she felt that she was special and would get what she wanted without taking any of the proper steps to actually ensure that. She miscalculated. Under these circumstances, hard to blame UA for not giving the OP something she was not entitled to.

At the time of purchase, she could have called UA, and told them - I'll pay E+ fees for 3 if you agree to my conditions and leave notes on PNR to that effect - we are seated together, and if UA reassigns seating, all 3 are reassigned to E with full refund of E+ fees.

Even at the last minute, when she found out that the toddler was seated in E+ separately from parents, she could have said - UA, you seated a toddler in E+ away from parents. Please move him/her from E+ to E next to the parents and refund the E+ fee because UA made a mistake in the seat assignments. That would have worked. But instead, she ACCEPTED the seating assignment and BOARDED. After that, it's absolutely unreasonable to seek a refund for voluntary seat swaps.

Not all situations are the same. And not all issues are the same. And only very handsome blonde people keep conflating issues and facts even after the error was pointed out to them. Judging from your posts, you are probably one of those.

The point has been made over and over - it is only the OP's fault that she didn't get what she wanted. There were ways to ensure guaranteed seating. But apparently, she felt that she was special and would get what she wanted without taking any of the proper steps to actually ensure that. She miscalculated. Under these circumstances, hard to blame UA for not giving the OP something she was not entitled to.

At the time of purchase, she could have called UA, and told them - I'll pay E+ fees for 3 if you agree to my conditions and leave notes on PNR to that effect - we are seated together, and if UA reassigns seating, all 3 are reassigned to E with full refund of E+ fees.

Even at the last minute, when she found out that the toddler was seated in E+ separately from parents, she could have said - UA, you seated a toddler in E+ away from parents. Please move him/her from E+ to E next to the parents and refund the E+ fee because UA made a mistake in the seat assignments. That would have worked. But instead, she ACCEPTED the seating assignment and BOARDED. After that, it's absolutely unreasonable to seek a refund for voluntary seat swaps.

What exactly was pointed out to me? She paid for 3 E+ seats and never got it. She was split from her child. AGAIN, this hapenned to me also, but I check my reservations everyday, when I really shouldn't have to do that. I know how the system works, and it sucks. It splits people up often and changes seat assignments for no reason. This is the new UA. You can't expect someone to check there reservations on a daily basis. You think the agent didn't realize what had happened here? They threw there hands up and sent them to the gate.

She wanted to move back and get her refund, but I'm sure it was boarding as pre CO needs 45 minutes to board an aircraft these days. Instead of causing a scene she got on the plane and just switched with that person next to her family.

She paid for what she expected 3 E+ seats and was given only one, her childs. Is this not a shares issue? Why seat the child alone? She deserves a refund of that one seat!

UA didn't promise 3 E+ seats together. Just because that is what OP expected doesn't mean it is what she's entitled to. Most customer-focused businesses, I mean those outside of airlines or telecom, would give her the refund. And they should IMO. But they don't have to, nor will they.

Did she not buy 3 seats? Did she not choose 3 seats together? That is what she bought.

What exactly was pointed out to me? . .

It has been pointed out to you that the OP "problem" is her own fault.

the OP told us that she wanted to be seated together or to have full refund of E+ fees, which she could have achieved in several ways; BUT she did nothing to ensure that she gets what she wanted; AND she did everything to ensure that she has no right to refund. SO, why should UA give the OP refund?

The pregnant argument doesn't get you very far in this day and age. If women dont wont to be discriminated against in the work place they dont use this card. None i've worked with ever have.

The fact the OP threw it in (when obviously very able bodied) was a play on sympathy that worked on you.

You have absolutely no IDEA how she felt pregnant, seriously

You have absolutely no IDEA how she felt pregnant, seriously

Thank You. No one else has questioned that statement and I'm amazed.

I must be a flippin idiot. If I buy and reserve 3 E+ seats together, have confirmation thats what I booked, and I don't get them, I want a refund, an apology, a written letter from Smi/J himself telling me how incompetent he and his systems are and the fact the Houston Crew know nothing about how to run an airline.

There is no excuse. Pregnant, paraplegic, kids under 5, large family, nothing should stand in the way. I wouldn't care if they changed equipment 15 times, there is no excuse.

I want the same level of service I get when I buy a Concert, Sport Stadium, Play or Opera ticket. Planes are not General Admission and shouldn't be. They are not Mosh Pits.

I must be a flippin idiot. If I buy and reserve 3 E+ seats together, have confirmation thats what I booked, and I don't get them, I want a refund, an apology, a written letter from Smi/J himself telling me how incompetent he and his systems are and the fact the Houston Crew know nothing about how to run an airline.

There is no excuse. Pregnant, paraplegic, kids under 5, large family, nothing should stand in the way. I wouldn't care if they changed equipment 15 times, there is no excuse.

I want the same level of service I get when I buy a Concert, Sport Stadium, Play or Opera ticket. Planes are not General Admission and shouldn't be. They are not Mosh Pits.

And you'd buy a cheap economy ticket correct? Somehow i doubt they will care much.

Did she not buy 3 seats? Did she not choose 3 seats together? That is what she bought.


No, that's actually not what she bought. She bought 3 seats in a class of service. There is no guarantee they will be together. No airline will promise you this.

I know you don't like the answer but it doesn't change the fact it's true. A passenger buys a class of service, and the seat is a request, not a guarantee of a specific seat.

No thats a GREAT reason to Bash Shares! but doesnt mean a refund is due

+1

Sticking to the letter of the law, perhaps you and hubby should have flow in E- and let the kid fly in E+ and see what would have happened??? Moving seats could have been contingent on a refund... ;)

I like this. ^ :D

I must be a flippin idiot. If I buy and reserve 3 E+ seats together, have confirmation thats what I booked, and I don't get them, I want a refund, an apology, a written letter from Smi/J himself telling me how incompetent he and his systems are and the fact the Houston Crew know nothing about how to run an airline.

There is no excuse. Pregnant, paraplegic, kids under 5, large family, nothing should stand in the way. I wouldn't care if they changed equipment 15 times, there is no excuse.

I want the same level of service I get when I buy a Concert, Sport Stadium, Play or Opera ticket. Planes are not General Admission and shouldn't be. They are not Mosh Pits.

How is buying three E+ seats together any different than buying together three E-, J, or F seats?

Why is E+ so special?

As for buying tickets at events, usually there is no change of venue but when there is, rest assured your seats are not guaranteed. As for planes not being general admission, obviously you've never heard of south west airlines.

And you'd buy a cheap economy ticket correct? Somehow i doubt they will care much.

Well, I would buy whatever fare came up on the website. I don't search for lowest fares. Cost matters less to me. The 8 of us that fly regularly, in which 4 of the 8 go on my CC, do not have a budget we have to work from.

Its all about getting to our destination on time and with a level of service that is expected. To me that includes protecting the seat assignment I booked, which also means, no PNR splitting so the seat of our travel partners flying on the same PNR is also protected. We travel in pairs.

+1



I like this. ^ :D



How is buying three E+ seats together any different than buying together three E-, J, or F seats?

Why is E+ so special?

As for buying tickets at events, usually there is no change of venue but when there is, rest assured your seats are not guaranteed. As for planes not being general admission, obviously you've never heard of south west airlines.

E+ was only used for this one example. The same holds true for other classes too.

So if the new venue was bigger, what would your expectations be? I know what mine would be and I also know what SHARES would do in that instance. I won't settle on this subject because I know how simple it would be to program an algorithm to solve the problem. It just means they don't care.

LOL about Southwest. Actually I experienced them 2 weeks ago for the first time since the mid 80's. My UA flight was delayed so two of us called WN, booked their flight and we were on our way and on time. It was seamless and we were off the ground before UA even knew we were missing from their flight.

The scrum was interesting. I had to ask what the procedure was. Column and Line number please. We just lowered our expectations and they were met. Middle seat on an hour and a half flight with a fair amount of leg room. I survived.

There's a finite number of seats to work with and a large number of conflicting variables - status level, paid vs. free E+ seats, family members with children, etc. Nearly everyone is going to be unhappy in some way with the seat allocations after an equipment swap like this, so I find it hard to just squarely point at this as an IT failure without any of us knowing what variables are actually considered. It's entirely possible that this is considered but the OP just lost out due to others being accommodated first.

While it is understandable that there may not be enough seats to go around, I find it unlikely that an algorithm placing E+ pax by status, then by group size, can't be put in place if they wanted to. I believe it is most likely an IT issue because the seat re-assignments are done automatically by a computer, which is written by programmers. There is certainly no human input done at the initial reseating. It's just the quality of the current system.

More telling, the OP later mentions the toddler was left in the sole E+ seat, which indicates to me the system doesn't really have much of an algorithm for anything.

easier said then done! and another great job by Shares

But does another really think COdbaUA had a person go over each and every seating assignment to make sure everyone was gonna be happy with the new assignments? Maybe COdbaUA should each and every passenger (PNR) and make sure the new arrangements are AOK.

That will usuallybe done at the airport if you didnt know somethingw as up beforehand. I guess the OP never checked the mobile link otherwise theres a good chance they would have caught the plane change

But it is a very good question under what circumstances should the non-refundable fee be refunded. Ive gone to concerts where we didnt sit togther had we it would ahve been teh nose bleed section, this way we had center front seats just not next to each other, no big deal we were going to be together after the concert anyway and during it who was going to be talking rather then listening

I think its much ado about nothing and the OP should have simply decided which of the parents will sit with the kid and which would sit in E+. It would be 1 thing if they were divided up over 2 different flights and not arriving within a reasonable time together. But all 3 were on the same flight , and had anything come up they could have dealt with it

Whenever a flight is downsized it causes a ton of headaches that no body wants not the Passengers, Airline or Employees.

the problem is like it or not when purchasing E+ its a non-refundable purchase and Unfortunately the only side that can CX is the Carrier, is that fair doesnt matter its what is agreed to when the purchase is made.

since the OP gave up the E+ on their own, (even under the conditions that were outside their control) I understand COdbaUA for not refunding it, its was the passenger who decdied not to use what was purchased

I don't disagree that it is easier said than done; but I do believe a proper system, with algorithms in place for conditional issues, should be part of the system. There's certainly no way an actual person can/should go through so many seat re-assignments, but again, that's when a well written/developed system can prove its worth.

The analogy of the concert is missing critical elements: to make it an apt comparison, you should note that you already payed for nose bleed seats, and then paid a PREMIUM for better seats closer to the stage AND selected seats together. When you got there, you were told the closer seats were not all available, and 2 out of 3 had to go sit way up in the nosebleed again, while only one of you can sit up close. Paying a premium on top of the base ticket would certainly imply additional service or offering on top of what is the standard fare.

While I don't think the OP should have accepted the E+ seating in the first place, there is a high likelihood that the GA, in hopes to close the flight, would have easily said, "There are no other seat options I can change from here, please change your seat on board" and pass it off to the FA to sort out. The OP did mention the GA refused to refund the third seat. This could mean a few things: there were no more seats available to downgrade to or the GA chose not to for some reason, or the OP wanted to keep the sole E+ seat but not pay for it. Without clarification from the OP or GA, we just don't know. Given the desire of the OP to sit with her family, I suspect it is one of the two other reasons. If that is the case, what recourse does the OP have other than to just take the seat, I don't think it was a voluntary acceptance of the seat then.

Lastly, I do think a little more sympathy should be acknowledged for the OP. She isn't just 1 of 3 regular, adult passengers. She is with a toddler and pregnant. Having a 2nd adult assist with the toddler is a world of difference; or the OP is trying to have the 2nd adult go through a lot of h3ll trying to handle a toddler by him/herself (and the surrounding passengers probably as well), or trying to play supermom if she wants to handle a toddler by herself and pregnant.

Lastly, I do think a little more sympathy should be acknowledged for the OP. She isn't just 1 of 3 regular, adult passengers. She is with a toddler and pregnant. Having a 2nd adult assist with the toddler is a world of difference; or the OP is trying to have the 2nd adult go through a lot of h3ll trying to handle a toddler by him/herself (and the surrounding passengers probably as well), or trying to play supermom if she wants to handle a toddler by herself and pregnant.

Please give me a brake, no way can Any Airlines Computer know what each passengers situation is. Its no different then a slot machine that slot has absolutly no idea if you were the person who was feeding it the past 2 hrs or if you just made your 1st bet on it, yester year when each slot was tied to itself it paid according to how itw as programed.Today they are all tied to 1 another and its possible for a slot to pay at all (highly unlikely but possible).

My pt is the computer cant see and say oh Ms XYZ who is pregnant or who just got out of surgery is sitting in 15A and 15 B & C are tied to her PNR so I will move others instead

Thats why a person Needs to get to check Flight Status say @ T-48 out and keep checking every so often as well as get to the Airport alot eariler if they have special needs. You cant simply show up and expect if things changed that they will hold up the flight and make things right. Not everyone can do that or wants to take the Resposibility into their own hands its alot easier to Bash the Carrier or Hotel, when thinsg hit the fan

Well, I would buy whatever fare came up on the website. I don't search for lowest fares. Cost matters less to me. The 8 of us that fly regularly, in which 4 of the 8 go on my CC, do not have a budget we have to work from.

Its all about getting to our destination on time and with a level of service that is expected. To me that includes protecting the seat assignment I booked, which also means, no PNR splitting so the seat of our travel partners flying on the same PNR is also protected. We travel in pairs.

Your error is the use of the words, "to me." It's what you'd like, but not what you contract for. What OP bought was 3 seats in E+, not three specific seats. Two of those seats were reassigned and, consistent with the t&c for E+, OP got a refund. One, she apparently abandoned for personal reasons and it's not refundable.

Your error is the use of the words, "to me." It's what you'd like, but not what you contract for. What OP bought was 3 seats in E+, not three specific seats. Two of those seats were reassigned and, consistent with the t&c for E+, OP got a refund. One, she apparently abandoned for personal reasons and it's not refundable.

Bingo!

Now if I was the OP I would still try and see if I could get a refund, nothing to lose by asking. Does CO owe it to her Nope, would it be nice if they refunded it or sent a voucher for said amount Yep. Would I say Shame Shame on you UA if they didnt give anything Nope

While I don't think the OP should have accepted the E+ seating in the first place, there is a high likelihood that the GA, in hopes to close the flight, would have easily said, "There are no other seat options I can change from here, please change your seat on board" and pass it off to the FA to sort out. The OP did mention the GA refused to refund the third seat. This could mean a few things: there were no more seats available to downgrade to or the GA chose not to for some reason, or the OP wanted to keep the sole E+ seat but not pay for it. Without clarification from the OP or GA, we just don't know. Given the desire of the OP to sit with her family, I suspect it is one of the two other reasons. If that is the case, what recourse does the OP have other than to just take the seat, I don't think it was a voluntary acceptance of the seat then.

I was thinking about the same thing except OP later on clarified the toddler was assigned by computer to be sitting in E+ alone. I wonder why OP didn't flight it right there with the GA or request GA document this in their travel record (that a refund was deemed reasonable except GA needed to close the flight for on-time departure thus the decision to coordinate with FA for exchanging seat with other passenger).

I believe once OP gave in at the gate (was the E+ seat then reassigned from the toddler to OP?), then it became voluntary and OP has little chance to recover E+ charge unless UA steps up to extend a goodwill gesture.

What OP bought was 3 seats in E+, not three specific seats. Two of those seats were reassigned and, consistent with the t&c for E+, OP got a refund. One, she apparently abandoned for personal reasons and it's not refundable.

I am startled by the lack of sympathy for the OP's predicament in some of the replies here.

First of all, as the OP subsequently clarified, only the toddler was left in E+, which is obviously an unacceptable result. And people are pouncing on the OP because she didn't make a stink at the gate (in the face of unhelpful gate agents)? So we are rewarding/encouraging people to throw tantrums to get the airline to do the right thing here?

Second, who cares about the E+ terms and conditions? This is an unusual situation, created by UA's change of planes (and the subsequent error in leaving a toddler by him/herself), and UA should be able to figure out the right thing to do is to refund the E+ fee. It's called customer service. That restaurant doesn't have to remove the charge for your meal that was served cold, but they do it anyway because they want you to come back.

Lastly I am puzzled by the viewpoint that UA can treat each passenger on a PNR as if this is not a party travelling together, especially when there has been an upsell to E+. If they cancelled two of the three tickets entirely (with refund, of course), would folks here still be saying the third passenger (the toddler!) had an obligation to still travel, and if he/she chose not to, then they had voluntarily given up their right to the value of their ticket?

Your error is the use of the words, "to me." It's what you'd like, but not what you contract for. What OP bought was 3 seats in E+, not three specific seats. Two of those seats were reassigned and, consistent with the t&c for E+, OP got a refund. One, she apparently abandoned for personal reasons and it's not refundable.

So forgetting about what the COC says, am I understanding you to say if you and your family book 3 adjoining seats, got seat assignments for those 3 seats, and when you showed up for the flight you three were now strewn about the plane and not sitting together, you would be fine with that?

I think OP did everything right and it was an unfortunate situation. UA is correct on principle - she did voluntarily refuse the E+ seat so technically they don't owe her a refund. But it would have been a nice gesture for them to give it to her anyway,

I am startled by the lack of sympathy for the OP's predicament in some of the replies here.

...

Second, who cares about the E+ terms and conditions? This is an unusual situation, created by UA's change of planes (and the subsequent error in leaving a toddler by him/herself), and UA should be able to figure out the right thing to do is to refund the E+ fee. It's called customer service. That restaurant doesn't have to remove the charge for your meal that was served cold, but they do it anyway because they want you to come back.

Yes, it is unusual. Yes, it's an issue of customer service. Yes, UA should do the right thing and refund the fee. That said, there have been too many reports to count of UA doing exactly the opposite of that: not do the right thing, screw up, and provide consistently bad customer service. This is just another data point.

I won't speak for others, but I am in fact sympathetic to the OP's situation. Unfortunately, I just don't think she will get a refund from UA. The terms and conditions are that the seats aren't guaranteed. We can say it should be overridden in this special situation, but I doubt UA will make that happen. Still, like others have said, OP can ask and hope for the best.

I think OP did everything right and it was an unfortunate situation. UA is correct on principle - she did voluntarily refuse the E+ seat so technically they don't owe her a refund. But it would have been a nice gesture for them to give it to her anyway,

Exactly. Legally, UA is not at fault. It would be a nice gesture, but UA probably won't go the extra mile to do it.

Please give me a brake, no way can Any Airlines Computer know what each passengers situation is. Its no different then a slot machine that slot has absolutly no idea if you were the person who was feeding it the past 2 hrs or if you just made your 1st bet on it, yester year when each slot was tied to itself it paid according to how itw as programed.Today they are all tied to 1 another and its possible for a slot to pay at all (highly unlikely but possible).

My pt is the computer cant see and say oh Ms XYZ who is pregnant or who just got out of surgery is sitting in 15A and 15 B & C are tied to her PNR so I will move others instead

Thats why a person Needs to get to check Flight Status say @ T-48 out and keep checking every so often as well as get to the Airport alot eariler if they have special needs. You cant simply show up and expect if things changed that they will hold up the flight and make things right. Not everyone can do that or wants to take the Resposibility into their own hands its alot easier to Bash the Carrier or Hotel, when thinsg hit the fan

Wow Craz. She talked to the gate agent who probably told her, too bad flight is full, have the FA's deal with it. So now it's the responsibitly of the passenger too check 48 hours before. Are we in the old days where we have to call and re confirm our flights? The great Shares, which you love to defend here, needs to do better. They had 3 seats together, they should get 3 seats again. Why not? If it's in E- then it's in E-. But the OP tried to get 3 seats together but of course no one helped and basically told her to take her seat.

Also, to the posters who have no sympathy for a pregnant woman, I'm really amazed. You are defending gate agents who I'm pretty sure told her to let the FA's handle. The OP did all the things right, the OP bought the tickets early enough to choose 3 seats together. If I couldn't travel together with my pregnant wife and 2 year old, then I would book a different airline.

The posts from some people are truly disturbing. Too bad, she's pregnant be happy you got a seat. Truly distrubing.

Question, how long does it take to do a refund on shares? I'm guessing that was probably another reason, along with the 45 minutes that CO needs to board an airplane.

So forgetting about what the COC says, am I understanding you to say if you and your family book 3 adjoining seats, got seat assignments for those 3 seats, and when you showed up for the flight you three were now strewn about the plane and not sitting together, you would be fine with that?

Honestly, they will never know how it feels unless it happens to them, on top of that add a 5 month pregnant person in the mix. These people will do anything to defend this situation. No use in responding to them anymore.

I am startled by the lack of sympathy for the OP's predicament in some of the replies here.

First of all, as the OP subsequently clarified, only the toddler was left in E+, which is obviously an unacceptable result. And people are pouncing on the OP because she didn't make a stink at the gate (in the face of unhelpful gate agents)? So we are rewarding/encouraging people to throw tantrums to get the airline to do the right thing here?

Second, who cares about the E+ terms and conditions? This is an unusual situation, created by UA's change of planes (and the subsequent error in leaving a toddler by him/herself), and UA should be able to figure out the right thing to do is to refund the E+ fee. It's called customer service. That restaurant doesn't have to remove the charge for your meal that was served cold, but they do it anyway because they want you to come back.

Lastly I am puzzled by the viewpoint that UA can treat each passenger on a PNR as if this is not a party travelling together, especially when there has been an upsell to E+. If they cancelled two of the three tickets entirely (with refund, of course), would folks here still be saying the third passenger (the toddler!) had an obligation to still travel, and if he/she chose not to, then they had voluntarily given up their right to the value of their ticket?

I'm pretty sure the gate agent gave her the flight is sold, please have the FA's on board assist line. People actually defending what happened is awful. I'm still amazed. I did the same thing, and I would not allow my wife to carry my toddler at 5 months pregnant. They split us up, but of course, I knew of the issues with auto seat changes, so I checked every day for 3 months. That is foolish and no traveler should have to do that.

Please give me a brake, no way can Any Airlines Computer know what each passengers situation is. Its no different then a slot machine that slot has absolutly no idea if you were the person who was feeding it the past 2 hrs or if you just made your 1st bet on it, yester year when each slot was tied to itself it paid according to how itw as programed.Today they are all tied to 1 another and its possible for a slot to pay at all (highly unlikely but possible).

My pt is the computer cant see and say oh Ms XYZ who is pregnant or who just got out of surgery is sitting in 15A and 15 B & C are tied to her PNR so I will move others instead

Thats why a person Needs to get to check Flight Status say @ T-48 out and keep checking every so often as well as get to the Airport alot eariler if they have special needs. You cant simply show up and expect if things changed that they will hold up the flight and make things right. Not everyone can do that or wants to take the Resposibility into their own hands its alot easier to Bash the Carrier or Hotel, when thinsg hit the fan

Also, the airline computer knew everyones age, but the airline's computer which you defend split the kid up. How do you really defend that? 2 adults get split from the child. The airline computer could and should not allow this to happen! The great Shares has brought a great airline down and issues like this is what's causing people to go away from UA.

Please give me a brake, no way can Any Airlines Computer know what each passengers situation is. Its no different then a slot machine that slot has absolutly no idea if you were the person who was feeding it the past 2 hrs or if you just made your 1st bet on it, yester year when each slot was tied to itself it paid according to how itw as programed.Today they are all tied to 1 another and its possible for a slot to pay at all (highly unlikely but possible).

My pt is the computer cant see and say oh Ms XYZ who is pregnant or who just got out of surgery is sitting in 15A and 15 B & C are tied to her PNR so I will move others instead

Thats why a person Needs to get to check Flight Status say @ T-48 out and keep checking every so often as well as get to the Airport alot eariler if they have special needs. You cant simply show up and expect if things changed that they will hold up the flight and make things right. Not everyone can do that or wants to take the Resposibility into their own hands its alot easier to Bash the Carrier or Hotel, when thinsg hit the fan

Craz, you're missing the main point here. It isn't her being pregnant as a symbolic fail of the reservation/IT system. It is the fact that when you book a toddler's ticket, it has to be in conjunction with an Adult ticket. Why is UA's system able to book and charge a person and a toddler during the time of booking (in fact, the only way to book it), but an equipment change, and that all important requirement is disconnected? The system is designed to take money from the customer, but it is not designed for service recovery?

Most of us on FT are a pretty sophisticated bunch of travelers; battle hardened and adept with dealing with IRROPS thanks to the knowledge we all share here. However, that doesn't apply to the rest of the customers. We're the unique and insightful minority. Most of my friends that travel have no clue about checking often for the seat assignments, or being proactive with their reservation. To them, they bought a ticket, selected their seats, and know they need to be at the airport at a certain time, and that's about it. Why should the burden be on the passenger to proactively check if the aircraft has been up/down gauged? That's in the realm of frequent flyers and aviation geeks.

I was thinking about the same thing except OP later on clarified the toddler was assigned by computer to be sitting in E+ alone. I wonder why OP didn't flight it right there with the GA or request GA document this in their travel record (that a refund was deemed reasonable except GA needed to close the flight for on-time departure thus the decision to coordinate with FA for exchanging seat with other passenger).

I believe once OP gave in at the gate (was the E+ seat then reassigned from the toddler to OP?), then it became voluntary and OP has little chance to recover E+ charge unless UA steps up to extend a goodwill gesture.

Given that the GA isn't here to explain his/her actions, we won't know the full story. Given the OP's input, I suspect she did try something (not sure exactly what), and appears she ultimately accepted the fact she has to take the sole E+ seat. Whether there was another seat in E- is not known (at least I didn't read it), and like I said before, the GA's motivation is not necessarily aligned with the OP's.

I want the same level of service I get when I buy a Concert, Sport Stadium, Play or Opera ticket. Planes are not General Admission and shouldn't be. They are not Mosh Pits.

Well, except they are.

It seems the disagreement here is mainly people not arguing about the same question.

- Is OP *ENTITLED* to a refund?
- What's the best way for OP to GET a refund?
- Will the OP *GET* a refund?
- IF the OP does not get a refund, is that an ETHICAL decision?
- IF the OP does not get a refund, is that a good BUSINESS decision?

OP is clearly not ENTITLED to a refund. The $79 fee gets one passenger one seat in E+, with a refund due if that passenger is not seated in E+. Buying three E+ seats at the same time doesn't add a guarantee that the seats will be together - as discovered in this incident. OP is thus only ENTITLED to a refund of the two seats that did not end up in E+.

The best way to get a refund is to call UA customer service, calmly and quickly explain the situation, and hope you get a service-oriented CS agent.

I expect the odds that you find a CS agent who is willing and able to do that are low.

I would consider not offering a refund in this situation to be an unethical decision. United markets seating ASSIGNMENTS, not seating requests. If UA is only offering seating requests, then they should market it as such. When the airline offers a customer the ability to purchase 3 tickets and assign seats to those tickets such that the three customers are sitting together, the customer has a reasonable expectation that that's what they are going to get, even if that's not exactly what the small print says.

I would also consider this a poor business decision, but maybe my style of doing business is not the same as everyone else's. A business should attempt to find the product that serves the needs of the customer. Clearly the customer tried to buy the product that best served their needs, then the business told them they couldn't have the product they wanted, and in that case it's wise to accommodate the customer. Failure to do so make the customer think that keeping their money is more important than giving them what they want to buy, and customers who start to think that about your business won't be customers for long.


To the OP: Call CS a few times and see if they will process your refund. If not, you can try emailing CS, and if that doesn't work, you can try PMing UA Insider here. Be concise and explain that you spent $279 for your family to sit together in E+, and while you are aware of the policy on E+ seats, because UA changed planes on you you were not able to use what you paid for and a refund of the remaining $79 seat would be appreciated.


If you have no luck, vote with your feet: Don't fly UA again, *AND* cancel your UA credit card. Unfortunately sometimes the only way to make businesses aware of their own poor business decisions (in this case, writing terms and conditions that simply say customers don't get refunds instead of creating a reasonable policy/process to handle refunds of purchased supplemental services not provided due to irrops etc) is to make them feel the business consequences of those decisions.

So forgetting about what the COC says, am I understanding you to say if you and your family book 3 adjoining seats, got seat assignments for those 3 seats, and when you showed up for the flight you three were now strewn about the plane and not sitting together, you would be fine with that?

No. You clearly didn't read what I wrote. It's not necessary to mischaracterize someone's position when you disagree with it.

The answer is that no pax is guaranteed a specific seat (to the extent that they are even guaranteed boarding at all). Indeed families are split up every day for all manner of reasons.

OP maintains that because she is pregnant and wanted to be with her family when reseating was necessitated by the aircraft change, that she is entitled to a refund of the premium she paid for an E+ seat. She's not.

That has nothing to do with whether she can find a seat in E- with her family. That, in fact, happened. She made a personal choice.

UA didn't promise 3 E+ seats together. Just because that is what OP expected doesn't mean it is what she's entitled to. And what exactly do you base that on? There is certainly an argument that the E+ seats were purchased together and thus formed a single contract, unless you can point to language that specifically says that's not the case.

Additionally, I think there's a reasonable chance a judge (in SCC, for example) or regulator (e.g., DOT) would view this as effectively an involuntary "downgrade" in that the OP had little choice but to take the seat in E-.

It's certainly not black and white.

Lastly, I don't think this is the same as the more simple issue of 3 passengers being split apart. In that case, I agree that the COC says specific seat assignments aren't guaranteed. This case is different -- OP paid extra for 3 E+ seats and did not receive 3 E+ seats. If she had, even if they were split apart, it would have been much easier to arrange a swap on the plane to get the family together, all in E+.

I would also consider this a poor business decision, but maybe my style of doing business is not the same as everyone else's. A business should attempt to find the product that serves the needs of the customer. Clearly the customer tried to buy the product that best served their needs, then the business told them they couldn't have the product they wanted, and in that case it's wise to accommodate the customer. Failure to do so make the customer think that keeping their money is more important than giving them what they want to buy, and customers who start to think that about your business won't be customers for long.

Your style of doing business won't work for United, much less any other airline. There is a reason why they get away with reducing benefits and increasing fees: because they can. They aren't really in the customer service business; they are just trying to get someone from point A to point B safely. If any of these airlines thought they could get an advantage by offering terrific service they would.

Lastly, I don't think this is the same as the more simple issue of 3 passengers being split apart. In that case, I agree that the COC says specific seat assignments aren't guaranteed. This case is different -- OP paid extra for 3 E+ seats and did not receive 3 E+ seats. If she had, even if they were split apart, it would have been much easier to arrange a swap on the plane to get the family together, all in E+.

She paid for 3 seats and 3 upgrades, and got 3 seats and 1 upgrade. She was given a refund for the 2 seats that weren't upgraded and gave away the upgrade she did receive. It doesn't seem very compelling.

She paid for 3 seats and 3 upgrades, and got 3 seats and 1 upgrade. She was given a refund for the 2 seats that weren't upgraded and gave away the upgrade she did receive. It doesn't seem very compelling.

She was forced to give up her childs seat. The child was split from the two. The child was forced to move back. UA upgraded the child and downgraded the 2 adults. Again, she was forced to give it up as her CHILD was in the E+ seat.

The refund is deserved as UA screwed up by splitting this family and sticking the child in E+.

What defense do you have? Did you want the child to sit alone?

Wow Craz. She talked to the gate agent who probably told her, too bad flight is full, have the FA's deal with it. So now it's the responsibitly of the passenger too check 48 hours before. Are we in the old days where we have to call and re confirm our flights? The great Shares, which you love to defend here, needs to do better. They had 3 seats together, they should get 3 seats again. Why not? If it's in E- then it's in E-. But the OP tried to get 3 seats together but of course no one helped and basically told her to take her seat.

Also, to the posters who have no sympathy for a pregnant woman, I'm really amazed. You are defending gate agents who I'm pretty sure told her to let the FA's handle. The OP did all the things right, the OP bought the tickets early enough to choose 3 seats together. If I couldn't travel together with my pregnant wife and 2 year old, then I would book a different airline.

The posts from some people are truly disturbing. Too bad, she's pregnant be happy you got a seat. Truly distrubing.

Question, how long does it take to do a refund on shares? I'm guessing that was probably another reason, along with the 45 minutes that CO needs to board an airplane.

whatever it is that you are drinking or smoking it keep far away from me!

I probably have BASHED COdbaUA and Shares more then my share (no pun intended) here on FT, and Im anything but a Rah Rah person for COdbaUA. But at the same time I will stand up for COdbaUA when they are right in my eyes. Im the type of person who can be a say a Registered Demorcatic and vote straight Republican in an election if I feel they are the better choice. Its not since Im this I MUST vote this way.

the same with COdbaUA I BASH them more then I stick up for them but they arent doing 100% everything wrong and the merge has brought some very good things to bear for as a PMUA 1K then PMUA gave me (eg no more *net blocking) and yes many lousy things as well. IMO both computer systems STUNK!

"when she talked to the gate agent she probably..." "probably " doesnt cut it if you werent there and the OP didnt quote the GAs words dont try and make up what took place!!!!! The OP got to the gate she said well into the boarding process with I believe she said was a Full flight. I dont know of any GA that will STOP Everything and deboard everyone so that a person can pick and chose where theyd now like to sit. Everyone previously its eems to teh OP arrival at the gate had their new seating assignments = the OP gets what is left and most likely had no choice at that stage, no different then anyone who never got any assigned seats and shows up late at teh airport they get whatever is left over. When theres an equipment change its not simply taking everyone from plane a and put them into the exact same row and seats on plane b, many times some of the rows dont even exist on the new plane
Im shocked that you and so mnay others couldnt care that the OP arrived after the flight was turned over to teh gate and by the time they got to the gate it seems boarding was under way for awhile already. Personally had the OP said they got to the airport 2 hrs before the flight I could hear and accept many of your pts, it seems from the OPs own words they got there with just enough time to get their bags checked in. When cut off time is say 30 mins to drop the bags that doesnt mean you can show up on 1st get on line 30 mins before your flight.It means getting there well in advance of 30 mins since you have to factor in waiting on a long line and you need to have dropped off (or used the kyosk) by 30 mins before

The OP it seems played it very close and just made it in time to drop the bags but theres still Security and getting to the gate, so if Everything is AOK then by playing it as close as the OP did you can just slip thru. But Unfortunately for the OP there was an equipment change so they rolled the dice and it came up craps and now everyone says Shame Shame UA, I say the OP rolled the dice and this time she lost, dont want to lose (I dont blame anyone who doesnt want to play the game that I have it down to a science and we can slide straight thru).

all sorts of stuff hits the fan to ALL Carriers everyday, be it its so Hot they cant take off with the plane weighing over ____, so bags or people or both will have to be left behind to equipment changes WX,MX,ATC etc etc

snip
The answer is that no pax is guaranteed a specific seat (to the extent that they are even guaranteed boarding at all). Indeed families are split up every day for all manner of reasons.


Here's what I would say. Until 3/3 and in ALL my years of flying, only ONCE have I had an instance that I did not sit next to my family or business partners when our seats had been assigned. The once was on a F9 flight and I have not flown them since.

I personally feel seat assignments are sacrosanct in this business and any disappointment leads me to take my business elsewhere, which is what I am doing with UAL.

You guys can feel the way you want to, and even tout the CoC, but I won't settle. I spent way to much time as Domestic Gold, spend way too much time on an airplane and pay too high a price for my tickets not to get what I pay for and expect. "Nuf said on this subject. It's a level of service I expect and pay for.

She was forced to give up her childs seat. The child was split from the two. The child was forced to move back. UA upgraded the child and downgraded the 2 adults. Again, she was forced to give it up as her CHILD was in the E+ seat.

The refund is deserved as UA screwed up by splitting this family and sticking the child in E+.

What defense do you have? Did you want the child to sit alone?

Uhm... she could have sat in the seat. She's pregnant and probably could use the extra leg room to stretch out.

When something isn't taken care of at the gate, who knows what could have happened. Maybe she sold the E+ seat to another passenger in E-. Maybe she had a friend on the flight that she let sit up there. I mean, these are unlikely but there are a number of things that she could have done before boarding to eliminate any doubt.

She was forced to give up her childs seat. The child was split from the two. The child was forced to move back. UA upgraded the child and downgraded the 2 adults. Again, she was forced to give it up as her CHILD was in the E+ seat.

The refund is deserved as UA screwed up by splitting this family and sticking the child in E+.

What defense do you have? Did you want the child to sit alone?

So you are saying that the parents were too stupid to realize instead of the child sitting alone, one of them should instead sit alone, and the other adult could sit with the child? You realize they could do that, right, that the chile was not forced to sit by it's own?

Sad part is with the deal they are making out of this non issue, they probably would have done that to prove a point.

Hello everyone, OP again.

Further clarification on my arrival time to the airport:
I arrived about 2 hours prior to departure time. Given that I had an issue with the seating and had bags that needed to be checked, I waited on the ridiculously long line for check-in with bags to be checked (normally I curbside check my bags but skipped this as I knew that the skycaps could not do anything re: my seating issue). My (misguided) hope was that the ticket agent would help me out. By the time I reached the kiosk, it was 45 minutes to departure time. The ticket agent threw his hands up in the air and said he could not do anything and informed me that I should try to figure it out with the gate agent. So I was passed off to the next person.

Interaction with the gate agent:
By the time of my arrival to the gate, most of the plane had boarded, so I had to try to get the situation resolved under relative duress. Since most of the plane was already on board, I did not request anything unreasonable such as restoring my 3 E+ seats. I explained to the gate agent that the computer system had kept my toddler in the lone E+ seat while my husband and I were downgraded to economy and that this was not an acceptable situation to me. She said that she would refund the 2 seats that were reassigned to economy but that she could not do anything about the E+ seat. She told me that I could just have the toddler sit in E- with an adult and have the other adult sit in E+. In other words, in her eyes, the seats were interchangeable amongst the three passengers on the PNR. I then explained that I was pregnant and that I wanted the three of us sitting together to care for my toddler and it was at this point she essentially waved me away and told me she could not help me and to just contact customer service. My impression was that she just wanted to close out the flight (mind you, there were still at least 5 other passengers that boarded after me, I was not the last party to board) and she did not want to attempt being reasonable.
After the FA helped with the seating shuffle and suggested that I go back to the GA to request a refund for the E+ seat I was no longer able to use, I knew that I needed some communication between the GA and FA to happen in order to confirm the new seats because on paper (or in the computer system), it looked like we just kept the E+ seat. When I went back to the GA she was getting ready to go and looked at me like I had two heads when I explained the seat shuffle and renewed request for a E+ seat refund. She said "I can't help you, get back on the plane."
Again, because of the long lines, all this happened relatively last minute (despite my arrival 2 hours prior to departure time) so the entire interaction with the GA at the start to when we finally all got seated in E- literally took place in the span of 5 minutes or less. There really wasn't a lot of time to argue my point because: (1) the GA immediately shut down any requests made by me and acted pretty much as a road block; and (2) I didn't want to delay the flight. I wanted to get to my destination and start my vacation already!

At this point, I have called UA customer service, which was more of a customer service for reservations, and they directed me to the "refunds" portion of their website to request a refund of the E+ seat. I asked the agent if there was a telephone number instead that I could use to speak to an agent int he refund department to explain the situation rather than sending my request to UA webform purgatory. He told me that they only work with online requests and that there is no number to call for refund requests. I have also filed a detailed complaint with the DOT Aviation Consumer Protection Division.

Now that my eyes have been opened to the rising tide of complaints about UA from both before and after the merger with CO, I am much more inclined to abandon this s(t)inking ship.

Thanks again for all the continued input, FT community!

Dragonroll

Well, I would buy whatever fare came up on the website. I don't search for lowest fares. Cost matters less to me. The 8 of us that fly regularly, in which 4 of the 8 go on my CC, do not have a budget we have to work from.

Its all about getting to our destination on time and with a level of service that is expected. To me that includes protecting the seat assignment I booked, which also means, no PNR splitting so the seat of our travel partners flying on the same PNR is also protected. We travel in pairs.

You may not have a budget -- but don't you have any ethical qualms about spending money that need not be spent?

In my unit we have a quite high budget, significantly larger than we would ever need. Any person who purchased travel at other than the lowest fare available to accomplish the goal -- viz. safe transport in the time frame allowed would likely be allowed to resign. Quite like a person who purchased supplies or inventory at other than the lowest price for like quality would be. And I think that's quite the way it should be. Exceptions for honest mistakes, but knowingly doing this: tisk, tisk!

Depending upon one's organization spending funds blindly yields: lower profits and returns to owners; other important areas (customer service, workforce training, scholarships, philanthropy) under funded; high taxes, higher deficit, and greater governtal debt. Besides, the number one rule of doing business with an airline: never give them any revenue that one can avoid.

Uhm... she could have sat in the seat. She's pregnant and probably could use the extra leg room to stretch out.

When something isn't taken care of at the gate, who knows what could have happened. Maybe she sold the E+ seat to another passenger in E-. Maybe she had a friend on the flight that she let sit up there. I mean, these are unlikely but there are a number of things that she could have done before boarding to eliminate any doubt.

Uhm, have you traveled with a pregnant wife and child? Probably not. I have, and I understand what it means to sit together. They purchased 3 tickets together for a reason! They have seat assignments for a reason. Why not just fly Southwest? If your seat assignments are going to be changed, in this case aircraft change, but since 3/3 i've seen seat changes, and I've seen my own family displaced for no reason.

whatever it is that you are drinking or smoking it keep far away from me!

I probably have BASHED COdbaUA and Shares more then my share (no pun intended) here on FT, and Im anything but a Rah Rah person for COdbaUA. But at the same time I will stand up for COdbaUA when they are right in my eyes. Im the type of person who can be a say a Registered Demorcatic and vote straight Republican in an election if I feel they are the better choice. Its not since Im this I MUST vote this way.

the same with COdbaUA I BASH them more then I stick up for them but they arent doing 100% everything wrong and the merge has brought some very good things to bear for as a PMUA 1K then PMUA gave me (eg no more *net blocking) and yes many lousy things as well. IMO both computer systems STUNK!

"when she talked to the gate agent she probably..." "probably " doesnt cut it if you werent there and the OP didnt quote the GAs words dont try and make up what took place!!!!! The OP got to the gate she said well into the boarding process with I believe she said was a Full flight. I dont know of any GA that will STOP Everything and deboard everyone so that a person can pick and chose where theyd now like to sit. Everyone previously its eems to teh OP arrival at the gate had their new seating assignments = the OP gets what is left and most likely had no choice at that stage, no different then anyone who never got any assigned seats and shows up late at teh airport they get whatever is left over. When theres an equipment change its not simply taking everyone from plane a and put them into the exact same row and seats on plane b, many times some of the rows dont even exist on the new plane
Im shocked that you and so mnay others couldnt care that the OP arrived after the flight was turned over to teh gate and by the time they got to the gate it seems boarding was under way for awhile already. Personally had the OP said they got to the airport 2 hrs before the flight I could hear and accept many of your pts, it seems from the OPs own words they got there with just enough time to get their bags checked in. When cut off time is say 30 mins to drop the bags that doesnt mean you can show up on 1st get on line 30 mins before your flight.It means getting there well in advance of 30 mins since you have to factor in waiting on a long line and you need to have dropped off (or used the kyosk) by 30 mins before

The OP it seems played it very close and just made it in time to drop the bags but theres still Security and getting to the gate, so if Everything is AOK then by playing it as close as the OP did you can just slip thru. But Unfortunately for the OP there was an equipment change so they rolled the dice and it came up craps and now everyone says Shame Shame UA, I say the OP rolled the dice and this time she lost, dont want to lose (I dont blame anyone who doesnt want to play the game that I have it down to a science and we can slide straight thru).

all sorts of stuff hits the fan to ALL Carriers everyday, be it its so Hot they cant take off with the plane weighing over ____, so bags or people or both will have to be left behind to equipment changes WX,MX,ATC etc etc

We'll, if you would read the OP's post below, you will see she did arrive 2 hours before. How much earlier did you want her to arrive? With all the issues Shares is having, it takes longer to check in. Again, I've been thru that. Saw a family member who could not check in online, for no reason, 2 people same PNR, one could check in the other couldn't. It took 4 Employees, 2 supervisors to get her checked in at the airport. It took an hour. 1 hour for 1 person. The system sucks and the system split a family. The gate agent could care less. The gate agent could easily of refunded the E+ purchase for the CHILD, which UA split, and asked the person in the E- seat in the back to move up for free and let the mother sit with her family. This is what should've hapened. I'm pretty sure, Shares made giving a refund nearly impossible for the gate agent.

Let's stop putting the blame on the OP, let's stop asking people to check there reservations on a daily basis for 3 months. Let's stop saying the OP should've got to the airport earlier. 2 hours is plenty of time. Let's stop trying to defend a useless computer system.

I loved UA, still love UA, my hometown airline, I live a few blocks away from ORD. My wife is a former UA FA. But in this case they were wrong. The OP 100% deserves a refund. The issues have drove me away, to AA and WN. I've had 7 reservations affected in someway since 3/3. Seat assignemnts changed, can't check in, split pnr's, etc. I had probably 2 in my 13 years of flying UA, mostly 1K years.

Again, to everyone, this has happened to me and unless you are traveling with your wife, who's pregnant, in my case twins, along with a toddler, you will never understand how this feels. Traveling should be fun, and UA has not made it fun for me or my family recently.

We'll, if you would read the OP's post below, you will see she did arrive 2 hours before. How much earlier did you want her to arrive?

In an airport I'm familiar with, with no checked bags and with my boarding pass in hand, I can get to the airport with less than 1 hour before departure and expect to get through the priority line to my gate with time to spare. If I was a non status passenger, either with bags, or had a seating problem that I needed to talk to an agent, I would likely be at the airport much earlier. Unexpected things happen, but I would prepare time for things that I know will take some effort to resolve. OP did not need to check her seats three months out in advance. Checking her reservation a day or two before the flight is advised.

The gate agent could easily of refunded the E+ purchase for the CHILD, which UA split, and asked the person in the E- seat in the back to move up for free and let the mother sit with her family. This is what should've hapened. I'm pretty sure, Shares made giving a refund nearly impossible for the gate agent.

UA likely saw the E+ seat as ancillary revenue. UA sold the seat to the OP, and, I would assume, didn't want to give it away for free, which is what they essentially would've done if they refunded the money to the OP and upgraded the person for free.

I loved UA, still love UA, my hometown airline, I live a few blocks away from ORD. My wife is a former UA FA. But in this case they were wrong. The OP 100% deserves a refund. The issues have drove me away, to AA and WN. I've had 7 reservations affected in someway since 3/3. Seat assignemnts changed, can't check in, split pnr's, etc. I had probably 2 in my 13 years of flying UA, mostly 1K years.

Again, to everyone, this has happened to me and unless you are traveling with your wife, who's pregnant, in my case twins, along with a toddler, you will never understand how this feels. Traveling should be fun, and UA has not made it fun for me or my family recently.

Like you say, with good customer service, the OP should be able to get the refund. UA has been quite lacking in that department lately. They likely care more about the revenue from that E+ seat than about acquiring OP's loyalty. Sad, but that's the situation. I've been an AA flyer for a long time, without too much experience on UA. Post 3/3, I have been on exactly two UA r/t flights, both of which had major cancellations and delays. No fun at all. I'm looking forward to my AA flight tomorrow, on which my upgrade has already cleared. I am slightly worried about my girlfriend having to take a UA flight. She gets very frustrated in the face of delays.

Anyway, I'm not so sure OP really deserves a refund in this case. Still, she certainly has a good case for one, and a good CSR should be able to help. Unfortunately with UA, I doubt that will happen.

Also, please stop pulling out the "this has happened to me" card. You've said that multiple times and we get it. But not everyone will act the same in the same situation. I always do the best to make my girlfriend happy and comfortable and my wife to be may or may not care so much to be sitting next to me (although my current girlfriend insists on spending as much time with me as possible, including sitting with me on flights, even when I'm in Y and I offer to book her in F or J). I know some women that are incredibly stubborn and insist on doing everything themselves.

IMO UA's refusal to refund the third seat was absolutely wrong. Maybe legally justifiable (and even that is questionable), but clearly unfair in their treatment of the customer, when it was United that changed the equipment, separated the party, and kicked two of the three of them out of the upgraded seating they paid for.

United is selling E+ as an "upgrade" these days, and they need to take it seriously once they've taken the passenger's money.

For the people here saying that the OP got what she paid for because UA refunded the E+ upsell for 2/3 of the seats: If you paid extra to fly in C or F on a long-haul flight, and UA downgauged the equipment, and downgraded you to Y, and "handled" the situation by simply refunding you the fare difference between your F/C fare and a Y fare, would you consider this to be a fair resolution, and agree that you "got what you paid for," because hey, UA refunded the fare difference. Or would you be expecting some additional compensation from UA for the involuntary downgrade?

UA and the OP made a deal: pay 3x extra $$ for 3x extra legroom seats. UA insisted on unilaterally backing out of the deal for 2/3 of the seats, giving back the extra money and taking back the legroom. And yet, UA refused to let the OP back out of the deal for the remaining 1 seat and give back the extra legroom to get back the money, even though it was UA's decision to break the agreement for the first 2 seats that caused the problem in the first place. In what universe is that a reasonable way to act? This goes well beyond "not good customer service"--what UA did is completely unfair. They actually, knowingly, screwed a customer over.

OP, did you pay by credit card? I would just dispute the charge, explaining to the CC company exactly what happened. There's a 99% chance that they will take your side, even if the robots at United CS will not.

We'll, if you would read the OP's post below, you will see she did arrive 2 hours before. How much earlier did you want her to arrive? With all the issues Shares is having, it takes longer to check in. Again, I've been thru that. Saw a family member who could not check in online, for no reason, 2 people same PNR, one could check in the other couldn't. It took 4 Employees, 2 supervisors to get her checked in at the airport. It took an hour. 1 hour for 1 person. The system sucks and the system split a family. The gate agent could care less. The gate agent could easily of refunded the E+ purchase for the CHILD, which UA split, and asked the person in the E- seat in the back to move up for free and let the mother sit with her family. This is what should've hapened. I'm pretty sure, Shares made giving a refund nearly impossible for the gate agent.

Let's stop putting the blame on the OP, let's stop asking people to check there reservations on a daily basis for 3 months. Let's stop saying the OP should've got to the airport earlier. 2 hours is plenty of time. Let's stop trying to defend a useless computer system.

I loved UA, still love UA, my hometown airline, I live a few blocks away from ORD. My wife is a former UA FA. But in this case they were wrong. The OP 100% deserves a refund. The issues have drove me away, to AA and WN. I've had 7 reservations affected in someway since 3/3. Seat assignemnts changed, can't check in, split pnr's, etc. I had probably 2 in my 13 years of flying UA, mostly 1K years.

Again, to everyone, this has happened to me and unless you are traveling with your wife, who's pregnant, in my case twins, along with a toddler, you will never understand how this feels. Traveling should be fun, and UA has not made it fun for me or my family recently.

with AA @ LAX I arrived apx 90 mins before my flight had 1 bag to check and as a Plat was on the Elite line. End result by the time I got to place my bag on the counter it was 2 mins after the cut off , end result having to wait apx 6 hrs for the next flight No DYKWIA or a War Dance, I knew nothing was gonna get my bag onto my tkted flight and they wouldnt let me go and put the bag on another flight.

Now had the agents not been small talking for 10-15 mins with each person I would have made it. Compensation was Zippo, didnt even ask.

Theres a story how Virgin Australia made this guy move since he ended up being next to 2 UM boys, and its their policy no men next to UM (dont know if just boys or girls also) Who knows how long he had that seat assigned for and it was a completely full flight; http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/seat-swap-outcry-moves-virgin-to-think-again-20120810-23y7q.html

For the people here saying that the OP got what she paid for because UA refunded the E+ upsell for 2/3 of the seats: If you paid extra to fly in C or F on a long-haul flight, and UA downgauged the equipment, and downgraded you to Y, and "handled" the situation by simply refunding you the fare difference between your F/C fare and a Y fare, would you consider this to be a fair resolution, and agree that you "got what you paid for," because hey, UA refunded the fare difference. Or would you be expecting some additional compensation from UA for the involuntary downgrade?

Actually, no, I don't expect additional compensation other than the fare difference. Sure, maybe some bonus miles or a voucher would be nice, but they're not obligated to. I'd probably be annoyed at the downgrade if I really wanted to be in J or F, but I wouldn't expect extra compensation. Equipment swaps happen often, and the airline is supposed to seat you in the same class of service or refund you the fare difference. UA can switch you from a two class 767 with new lie flat J seats to a two class 757 with old recliner F seats, and not give any refund. UA refunded the two seats that were involuntarily downgraded, and did nothing for the third seat that was given up. OP did not actually make 1 purchase for 3 E+ seats; she made 3 purchases for 1 E+ seat each. E+ seats are sold individually, for each passenger. You can upgrade 2/3 people in a PNR, and UA can downgrade 2/3 giving the refund for just those downgrades.

You may not have a budget -- but don't you have any ethical qualms about spending money that need not be spent?

In my unit we have a quite high budget, significantly larger than we would ever need. Any person who purchased travel at other than the lowest fare available to accomplish the goal -- viz. safe transport in the time frame allowed would likely be allowed to resign. Quite like a person who purchased supplies or inventory at other than the lowest price for like quality would be. And I think that's quite the way it should be. Exceptions for honest mistakes, but knowingly doing this: tisk, tisk!

Depending upon one's organization spending funds blindly yields: lower profits and returns to owners; other important areas (customer service, workforce training, scholarships, philanthropy) under funded; high taxes, higher deficit, and greater governtal debt. Besides, the number one rule of doing business with an airline: never give them any revenue that one can avoid.

I don't over-spend, I search by schedule and of course the system gives me the lowest fare for those segments. I don't search by fare class. That does not matter to me. So as long as the system is giving me the best fare for the flights I want to take and at the time of booking, I'm hopefully being diligent enough.

Let's stop putting the blame on the OP, let's stop asking people to check there reservations on a daily basis for 3 months. Let's stop saying the OP should've got to the airport earlier. 2 hours is plenty of time.

Apparently, in this case, it was not.

Though the assumption that arriving earlier would have significantly changed things is probably misguided a bit.

E+ was only used for this one example. The same holds true for other classes too.

So if the new venue was bigger, what would your expectations be? I know what mine would be and I also know what SHARES would do in that instance. I won't settle on this subject because I know how simple it would be to program an algorithm to solve the problem. It just means they don't care.

LOL about Southwest. Actually I experienced them 2 weeks ago for the first time since the mid 80's. My UA flight was delayed so two of us called WN, booked their flight and we were on our way and on time. It was seamless and we were off the ground before UA even knew we were missing from their flight.

The scrum was interesting. I had to ask what the procedure was. Column and Line number please. We just lowered our expectations and they were met. Middle seat on an hour and a half flight with a fair amount of leg room. I survived.

Ok, so if you buy three E- minus seats together and are split up, you should be refunded the fare paid? If you buy three J seats together and are split up, you should be paid the difference between a J and Y fare? If you buy three F seats together and are split up, you should be paid the difference between F and J?

Do we know if OP's replacement plane was bigger or had more E+ seats?

So you have experienced general admission seating despite your earlier assertion. When someone states the opposite of what one knows to be true, what term do we use to describe that someone?

Uhm, have you traveled with a pregnant wife and child? Probably not. I have, and I understand what it means to sit together. They purchased 3 tickets together for a reason! They have seat assignments for a reason. Why not just fly Southwest? If your seat assignments are going to be changed, in this case aircraft change, but since 3/3 i've seen seat changes, and I've seen my own family displaced for no reason.

I was only addressing your point that the child did not have to sit alone, that there was another option (mom in E+, dad and child in E-) that would result in the child not sitting alone. Being pregnant doesn't entitle one to a refund when a non-pregnant woman in a similar situation wouldn't be.

I'm sorry your family has been displaced, but I don't think it's "for no reason." Equipment changes and accommodating passengers from cancelled flights gets messy and not everyone is going to get to sit where they want.

My only issue is there's a lot with UA to complain about. To me, this isn't one of those times because it could have been taken care of beforehand. If I have a major ticketing issue you better believe I'm going to get to the airport before the minimum suggested arrival time.

She was forced to give up her childs seat. The child was split from the two. The child was forced to move back. UA upgraded the child and downgraded the 2 adults. Again, she was forced to give it up as her CHILD was in the E+ seat. . .

She wasn't forced to do anything.

If she pointed out to GA that UA assigned a toddler to seat separately, that it was UA's mistake, and that the toddler should be reseated with the parents, and that the E+ fee should be refunded, the GA would probably just do what she asked.

Instead of doing that, she BOARDED with the assigned seating (I'm guessing the GA suggested that one of the parents move to E+, and that the toddler move to E- to sit with the other parent, and she agreed), but changed her mind AFTER she boarded, gave E+ to another pax, and then asked for a refund. Sorry, but no refund is due under these circumstances.

I'm the last person to defend UA, but UA was right in this situation, and the OP was wrong. After you board with the assigned seating, you cannot ask for a refund of the E+ seat you decided to give out to another pax.

She wasn't forced to do anything.

If she pointed out to GA that UA assigned a toddler to seat separately, that it was UA's mistake, and that the toddler should be reseated with the parents, and that the E+ fee should be refunded, the GA would probably just do what she asked.

Instead of doing that, she BOARDED with the assigned seating (I'm guessing the GA suggested that one of the parents move to E+, and that the toddler move to E- to sit with the other parent, and she agreed), but changed her mind AFTER she boarded, gave E+ to another pax, and then asked for a refund. Sorry, but no refund is due under these circumstances.

I'm the last person to defend UA, but UA was right in this situation, and the OP was wrong. After you board with the assigned seating, you cannot ask for a refund of the E+ seat you decided to give out to another pax.

+1. This should end this debate right here. If I buy something, I can use it or try to return it. I certainly can't give it to someone else and then ask for a refund. No excuse for how UA handled OPs seat assignments but welcome to the club On most airlines, you unlucky if you lose you seat assignment. In UA your lucky if you actually keep an advance assignment UA should be ashamed

+1. This should end this debate right here. If I buy something, I can use it or try to return it. I certainly can't give it to someone else and then ask for a refund.But the OP gave it to someone else under duress because it was the only viable option she had without missing the flight and probably causing the entire plane to be delayed while they pulled her bags. She can certainly ask for a refund.

Ok, so if you buy three E- minus seats together and are split up, you should be refunded the fare paid? If you buy three J seats together and are split up, you should be paid the difference between a J and Y fare? If you buy three F seats together and are split up, you should be paid the difference between F and J?That's not what happened. If I bought 3 J seats together, and they tried to downgrade or IDB both of them, I would be entitled to do what is necessary to keep the passengers in the same cabin. So IDB all of us and pay us the compensation, or downgrade all of us and pay us that compensation.

OP did not actually make 1 purchase for 3 E+ seats; she made 3 purchases for 1 E+ seat each. E+ seats are sold individually, for each passenger.Are you just making this up? :confused: Or is it based on something in the agreement. The passengers are all in one record, so it is one purchase.

You can upgrade 2/3 people in a PNR, and UA can downgrade 2/3 giving the refund for just those downgrades.No, you can't upgrade two of three passengers in a PNR. The record has to be split before you can do this. When the passengers are together in a PNR it's an ALL OR NOTHING situation.

I'm not an expert in contract law, but I find it difficult to believe one party has the right to unilaterally honor only part of the contract even if it returns some of the consideration. That definitely sounds like a breach of contract to me.

UA made its bed by offering E+ to passengers for a fee, now it needs to lie in it.

. . . I'm not an expert in contract law, but I find it difficult to believe one party has the right to unilaterally honor only part of the contract even if it returns some of the consideration. That definitely sounds like a breach of contract to me. . .

You are having trouble because you probably never took time to actually read the T&C. Within the purchased class of service, UA doesn't promise any particular seats or adjacent seats. UA lets you pick seats with an understanding that the seats can be reassigned. UA doesn't seem to even have guaranteed seating (I was actually very surprised to find this out; on US, PP's & CP's can get guaranteed seating for 24hr advance booking in Y). Hope this helps.

You are having trouble because you probably never took time to actually read the T&C. Within the purchased class of service, UA doesn't promise any particular seats or adjacent seats. UA lets you pick seats with an understanding that the seats can be reassigned. UA doesn't seem to even have guaranteed seating (I was actually very surprised to find this out; on US, PP's & CP's can get guaranteed seating for 24hr advance booking in Y). Hope this helps.

Ah, but UA does call them seating ASSIGNMENTS, not seating requests.

You can't market something and then substantially weasel out of it with fine print.

Also, the T&C is a contract of adhesion, which is far less enforceable than a negotiated then we both sign contract.

While I still think UA isn't OBLIGATED to refund the 3rd seat, it's poor business to downgrade part of a PNR then not give the purchaser the option to seat the whole party in one cabin and refund them the difference.

. . .You can't market something and then substantially weasel out of it with fine print. . .


LOL. Are you kidding? Companies do that all the time, and arbitrators and courts back them up.

You points could be valid if they haven't been tested. But they have, and consumer loses unless there are other issues involved (unclean hands, fraud, etc).

Also, the OP could negotiate but didn't even attempt to, which is not going to play out with your contract by adhesion argument. You have to actually try.

Also, the OP could negotiate but didn't even attempt to, which is not going to play out with your contract by adhesion argument. You have to actually try.

Why isn't everyone able to grasp this? You can't just give away your upgraded seat once on board and then expect a refund.

Why isn't everyone able to grasp this? You can't just give away your upgraded seat once on board and then expect a refund.

That's what I've been telling people all along.

Uhm, have you traveled with a pregnant wife and child? Probably not. I have, and I understand what it means to sit together. They purchased 3 tickets together for a reason! They have seat assignments for a reason. Why not just fly Southwest? If your seat assignments are going to be changed, in this case aircraft change, but since 3/3 i've seen seat changes, and I've seen my own family displaced for no reason.

I've read every post on this thread and finally, based on the above comment, had to post.

Please stop portraying pregnant women as helpless. Please. They are not. She was 5 months pregnant and by her own admission, not even big yet. So what? If she is able to care for her child at home, she is certainly able to care for her child who is confined to a space the size of a chair on an airplane. Even better, her husband can do it while she relaxes up in E+.

I have traveled while pregnant. I have traveled while pregnant with a toddler. I have traveled while 38.5 weeks pregnant, with a toddler, by myself. We are a not helpless victims who require special accomodations.

Now, with all of that being said, I agree with you that UA should refund the seat. Not because she's entitled to the refund (technically she is not because she gave up her seat) but because it would've been the right thing to do, in terms of customer service/retention.

I have not read every single post so my apologies if already brought up. If the person that ultimately got the E+ seat was elite and had somehow ended up in E- then UA would not really have been out anything by refunding the fee. If they were not elite then they technically were not entitled to the seat without paying the fee. So the OP paid the fee for the other person. As she had already boarded with her E+ assignment then swapped with the other person if she wants the money it is between her and the person she swapped with. Sorry, but no refund entitled to OP. and being pregnant has absolutely no bearing on her case. Can't have it both ways.

Why does it matter if she boarded?

People seem to be acting like there was another option.

There wasn't.

She asked the GA for a refund. The GA said there was nothing they could do and PAX had to board.

What was PAX supposed to do, not board at all?

Then the very same people would be arguing that she has no right to a refund of her airfare since she refused to use the seat she paid for.


UA refused to refund her when she asked, so now she has no right to ask is just silly.

Why does it matter if she boarded?

People seem to be acting like there was another option.

There wasn't.

She asked the GA for a refund. The GA said there was nothing they could do and PAX had to board.

What was PAX supposed to do, not board at all?

Then the very same people would be arguing that she has no right to a refund of her airfare since she refused to use the seat she paid for.


UA refused to refund her when she asked, so now she has no right to ask is just silly.

I see nothing in the original post about her asking to move to E- to sit next to he family. Only that the wanted a refund of the E+ fee for the seat she had a boarding pass for. Probably told the seat next to her family was occupied. The swap was made after she boarded then she asked the FA to get her a refund of the Fee. Sorry. At that point not entitled. And the fee states if you downgrade yourself, which is what she did regardless of the fact her spouse and child were downgraded and got refunds, you are not entitled to a refund of the fee. If she wants the money she needed to do the swap before everyone boarded and still probably would not have gotten it as still considered a self downgrade. Seating is not guaranteed, especially with equipment swap. And families sitting together is not guaranteed.

Why does it matter if she boarded?

People seem to be acting like there was another option.

There wasn't.

She asked the GA for a refund. The GA said there was nothing they could do and PAX had to board.

What was PAX supposed to do, not board at all?

Then the very same people would be arguing that she has no right to a refund of her airfare since she refused to use the seat she paid for.


UA refused to refund her when she asked, so now she has no right to ask is just silly.

The other option was to sit in the E+ seat. The other parents and child could have the E- seats.

The other option was to sit in the E+ seat. The other parents and child could have the E- seats.

That's not another option, that's the original option.

PAX had two options: Accept seating assignments currently given or not board plane.

PAX *NEVER* had an option to "demand" a refund prior to boarding the aircraft, as the airline personnel at the time refused. You can't hold it against PAX for boarding the aircraft without a refund when the airline refused to put her back in a E- seat.

There is NO information in the original post about why they could not be seated together in E-, nothing. So anything we post is pure speculation. All it says is could only get refunded for the 2 seats that were reassigned to E- due to the equipment change and no refund for the E+ seat that had a boarding pass. That is the frustrating thing about this and many other threads. The amount of speculation as to what happened is amazing. Why was she not allowed to move to E- with her family? WE DON'T KNOW! Was E- full? WE DON'T KNOW! Was it only that the seat next to family was occupied? WE DON'T KNOW! The only fact we know is she boarded with her E+ boarding pass, traded seats with the person next to her family with the help of the FA's and then demanded a refund of the E+ fee because she was no longer sitting in E+. This is a self downgrade and is NOT entitled to a refund of the E+ fee. So unless the OP can come back and post exactly why she was not able to change into the seat next to her family we will never know the situation. And even if she was able to change there ahead of time and get an E- boarding pass it is a self downgrade and is NOT entitled to a refund.

I see nothing in the original post about her asking to move to E- to sit next to he family. Only that the wanted a refund of the E+ fee for the seat she had a boarding pass for.

Except that isn't entirely true. She wanted a refund for the E+ which the toddler was assigned. Mom and dad were moved to E- while the toddler was the one left with an E+ BP.

Except that isn't entirely true. She wanted a refund for the E+ which the toddler was assigned. Mom and dad were moved to E- while the toddler was the one left with an E+ BP.

OP: "I asked them to communicate with the gate agent so that I could get a refund on the economy plus seat that I was no longer using; they stated that they could not do so but that I could run back to the gate to clarify the seat change to the agent and request a refund."

Do you think if the flight attendants and other passengers were not so kind to accommodate her request for a seat change, and that she remained in E+, she would be entitled to a refund? Her decision put someone in E+ who likely wouldn't have been eligible to sit there (likely at the expense of a low-level elite) so that passenger benefitted, and she benefitted by getting to sit with her family. It may not have been as easy to get a passenger to move to accommodate her request if she didn't have a E+ to give away because this person probably had a window or aisle seat.

Except that isn't entirely true. She wanted a refund for the E+ which the toddler was assigned. Mom and dad were moved to E- while the toddler was the one left with an E+ BP.

Of Mom, Dad and toddler it is irrelevant. True UA should not have left the toddler seated alone but parents can work that out. Still same 3 seats no matter which family member sits where. Mom made a choice. Sit with family instead of getting the extra room she paid for. So again, pregnancy is irrelevant. No matter how you spin it they are not entitled to a refund of the 3rd E+ seat.

Of Mom, Dad and toddler it is irrelevant. True UA should not have left the toddler seated alone but parents can work that out. Still same 3 seats no matter which family member sits where. Mom made a choice. Sit with family instead of getting the extra room she paid for. So again, pregnancy is irrelevant. No matter how you spin it they are not entitled to a refund of the 3rd E+ seat.


Contrarily I see this one point as being pivotal in my view of the situation.

If it was mom or dad with the E+ then I think UA has no obligation to refund the money but should as a CS gesture (which we all know is entirely lacking these days).

Considering that UA themselves put mom and dad in the back I believe they are entitled to a full refund.

Contrarily I see this one point as being pivotal in my view of the situation.

If it was mom or dad with the E+ then I think UA has no obligation to refund the money but should as a CS gesture (which we all know is entirely lacking these days).

Considering that UA themselves put mom and dad in the back I believe they are entitled to a full refund.

Let's just agree to disagree. We will never convince the other of each others viewpoint.

I've read every post on this thread and finally, based on the above comment, had to post.

Please stop portraying pregnant women as helpless. Please. They are not. She was 5 months pregnant and by her own admission, not even big yet. So what? If she is able to care for her child at home, she is certainly able to care for her child who is confined to a space the size of a chair on an airplane. Even better, her husband can do it while she relaxes up in E+.

I have traveled while pregnant. I have traveled while pregnant with a toddler. I have traveled while 38.5 weeks pregnant, with a toddler, by myself. We are a not helpless victims who require special accomodations.

Now, with all of that being said, I agree with you that UA should refund the seat. Not because she's entitled to the refund (technically she is not because she gave up her seat) but because it would've been the right thing to do, in terms of customer service/retention.

^ Thank you so much. Agree 100%.

But the OP gave it to someone else under duress because it was the only viable option she had without missing the flight and probably causing the entire plane to be delayed while they pulled her bags.

She could've done exactly what you said, if the seating arrangement was really that important to her. My girlfriend refuses to fly without me if we're traveling together, and I'm positive she would rather miss the flight and take the next one than sit apart from me. If that's the case, then so be it.

You can upgrade 2/3 people in a PNR, and UA can downgrade 2/3 giving the refund for just those downgrades.No, you can't upgrade two of three passengers in a PNR. The record has to be split before you can do this. When the passengers are together in a PNR it's an ALL OR NOTHING situation

Incorrect. I just did a sample booking for 2 passengers where I was able to select E+ for one and E- for the other. Please get your facts right.[/QUOTE]

OP did not actually make 1 purchase for 3 E+ seats; she made 3 purchases for 1 E+ seat each. E+ seats are sold individually, for each passenger.
Are you just making this up? :confused: Or is it based on something in the agreement. The passengers are all in one record, so it is one purchase.

Others have defended me here. In addition, as I have just said, passengers on the same PNR can individually select seats, and the E+ fee is billed for each person who chooses an upgrade.

I have some thoughts here:

1) If I were the OP in this situation I would want a refund. I paid extra for something that I wanted, to sit together with my family in better seats, and I didn't get it, and I only got a partial refund. I would feel entitled to the refund, not in a legal sense, but in my expectation of what should be refunded in the marketplace.

2) Back when I traveled with kids, it sometimes happened that we would get to the gate with BPs that weren't together. Sometimes the gate agent would fix the problem. Other times, the gate agent would send us onto the plane and tell us to see if the FA could help. They always did. I reject the argument of those that point out that the OP accepted the E+ boarding pass and therefore gave up her right to complain. Her first priority was to sit together (it doesn't matter to the rest of us why), and her second priority was to deal with the economics of the situation.

3) Unlike others who have expressed an opinion, I think the OP will get her refund. The gate agent was trying to get everyone on the plane, and didn't turn down her request for the refund in the first place because he didn't think she deserved it; he/she turned it down because he didn't have another appropriate seat to give her (YES, I'm just speculating here.) When she talked to the FA about the refund, she wasn't told no, she was told to go talk to the GA, and was allowed off the plane, which is rare. When she approached the GA, who wanted to get the plane out, she wasn't told no way, she was told to contact customer service.

4) Airfares seem historically low and incredibly cheap to me. Airlines have added these fees for competitive reasons related to the internet. They have to provide something for those fees. In this case UA couldn't and didn't.

4) Airfares seem historically low and incredibly cheap to me. Airlines have added these fees for competitive reasons related to the internet. They have to provide something for those fees. In this case UA couldn't and didn't.

Well, they could and did; they charged for 1 upgrade and gave her the upgrade. She later gave her purchased upgrade to another passenger to exchange for his seat which allowed her to sit with her family. E+ proved to be a pretty good bargaining chip in a situation where there was no guarantee that they would be able to sit together.

I've read every post on this thread and finally, based on the above comment, had to post.

Please stop portraying pregnant women as helpless. Please. They are not. She was 5 months pregnant and by her own admission, not even big yet. So what? If she is able to care for her child at home, she is certainly able to care for her child who is confined to a space the size of a chair on an airplane. Even better, her husband can do it while she relaxes up in E+.

I have traveled while pregnant. I have traveled while pregnant with a toddler. I have traveled while 38.5 weeks pregnant, with a toddler, by myself. We are a not helpless victims who require special accomodations.

Now, with all of that being said, I agree with you that UA should refund the seat. Not because she's entitled to the refund (technically she is not because she gave up her seat) but because it would've been the right thing to do, in terms of customer service/retention.

No one called you helpless or any other woman helpless. Its about respect and I was raised with to respect My wife 100 pounds pregnant with twins at 5 months could not carry our 2 year old. Not even at home! My wife made it full term and without help from myself and family those kids would've never made full term. So you still cant say without knowing. Either way time to take this offline and close it up.

Well, they could and did; they charged for 1 upgrade and gave her the upgrade. She later gave her purchased upgrade to another passenger to exchange for his seat which allowed her to sit with her family. E+ proved to be a pretty good bargaining chip in a situation where there was no guarantee that they would be able to sit together.

You are correct that she received a bargaining chip. But she didn't pay for a bargaining chip. She paid (she thought) for better seats for her family.

You are correct that she received a bargaining chip. But she didn't pay for a bargaining chip. She paid (she thought) for better seats for her family.

How would you feel if her family was split up in E+? They were all upgraded but did not get to sit together as they had requested when booking online. No refund, right? Now what if they traded those E+ seats to get a row in E- where they all get to sit together. No refund? How I see it, they are not guaranteed to sit together whether in E+ or E-, so I don't see why it makes a difference if one sits there and 2 don't if they aren't guaranteed to sit next to one another. Again, I do think UA should refund the passenger as a nice gesture, but I don't think they are totally in the wrong here.

Well, they could and did; they charged for 1 upgrade and gave her the upgrade. She later gave her purchased upgrade to another passenger to exchange for his seat which allowed her to sit with her family. E+ proved to be a pretty good bargaining chip in a situation where there was no guarantee that they would be able to sit together.


Not really. They gave the toddler the upgrade. She later gave the toddler's purchased upgrade to another passenger which allowed the toddler to sit with the family. ;)

Effectively this is the scenario.

Not really. They gave the toddler the upgrade. She later gave the toddler's purchased upgrade to another passenger which allowed the toddler to sit with the family. ;)

Effectively this is the scenario.

So had she, and not the toddler, been upgraded you'd say no refund?

That's not what happened. If I bought 3 J seats together, and they tried to downgrade or IDB both of them, I would be entitled to do what is necessary to keep the passengers in the same cabin. So IDB all of us and pay us the compensation, or downgrade all of us and pay us that compensation.

Yes it is what happened. Three E+ seats were purchased.

The notion that UA should compensate all 3 pax when just two were downgraded is ludicrous.

Yes it is what happened. Three E+ seats were purchased.

The notion that UA should compensate all 3 pax when just two were downgraded is ludicrous.

United has every right to change every customer's seat assignment 5 minutes before boarding, downgrade every customer in F and E+, and inform customers who don't like this that they can choose not to take the flight (and receive no compensation, other than for involuntary downgrades), or take their seat.

But it's extremely poor business to do so.

This kind of behaviour will lead to some "families have a right to sit together" law making it through Congress, with the same negative results for the airlines as the tarmac delay law has.

Seat assignments are scarce for general members these days. There are many flights where you can't find 3 seats next to each other unless you pay for Economy Plus.

If passengers call customer service, they'll be advised to pay for E+ if they want to sit together and there isn't a group of 3 seats together. I do not think passengers who are willing to pay $357, or whatever it costs for 3 E+ seats these days, are being unreasonable when they ask to just keep their assignments and sit together. Yes, United has the right to reseat them, but why would UA want to do that?

So had she, and not the toddler, been upgraded you'd say no refund?

I think she'd have less of a case if it were one of the parents who remained in E+, however the refund would be the right thing from a PR standpoint. That the kid, who clearly should not have been separated from the parents, remained in E+ indicates that the entire system is FUBAR and, IMO, is a no-brainer on the refund.

Case #1
How would you feel if her family was split up in E+? They were all upgraded but did not get to sit together as they had requested when booking online. No refund, right?
I agree.


Case #2
Now what if they traded those E+ seats to get a row in E- where they all get to sit together. No refund?

Again I agree.


How I see it, they are not guaranteed to sit together whether in E+ or E-, so I don't see why it makes a difference if one sits there and 2 don't if they aren't guaranteed to sit next to one another. Again, I do think UA should refund the passenger as a nice gesture, but I don't think they are totally in the wrong here.
And again I agree.

But let me try to distinguish Case OP from Case #1 and Case #2, and why I would ask for a refund and think I deserved one in Case OP and not the other 2. In Case #1 I would be disappointed but wouldn't feel cheated, in that I still would be getting the better seats I paid for. And as I expressed in my post yesterday, if it was important to me to sit together, I would have asked people in E+ to switch, and would have expected that I would be successful, as I always was when I had kids. (I was on a flight last year by myself, and was asked to move twice to accomodate others, and I did so.)
Case #2 seems unlikely to me, but if it happened, it was entirely at the choice of the person who paid the money. For the OP, the party was split and given a partial refund. That, to me, is a glitch in the system and should not happen. As an early poster speculated, I originally imagined that this situation happened because the passengers were on different PNRs. The OP later said that they were all on the same PNR. Yes, seats aren't guaranteed, but if you sell seats at a premium, there is some expectation and responsibility to deliver something close to what the customers wants.
I fully understand why the Gate Agent felt he or she didn't have time to deal with this. But I expect that Customer Service will see the problem and give the refund. I could be wrong.

In this long thread I've not heard any speculation about why a party of three
was split up (and I mean the price basis) when the plane change occurred. I can't believe that there weren't single PNRs who could and should have been downgraded instead.

Well, it looks like the gods of the UA computer system have granted me a refund on the E+ seat...just got my computer-generated email from the UA refund department today informing me of the credit to my credit card. I must say that I am pleasantly surprised.

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful comments and suggestions on my seating snafu!

Dragonroll

Awesome. UA did the right thing. Congrat UA

Congrats dragonroll! I'm happy UA decided to put the customer first for once.