Originally Posted by
sbm12
I'm also not sure what the difference is between this case and finding $200 cash in a wallet. If that's what the points are worth and that's what the cash is worth what's the difference? You may not know exactly where to return them to but you know that they aren't yours and you know that there is a way to work towards getting them to the correct home. You don't have to complete the return (assuming you ultimately cannot) but moving in that direction is the right way to go.
I would attempt to return both to their rightful owner.
The only difference is that I'd make a little more effort in the case of the wallet because of the huge inconvenience it is for an individual if he/she doesn't get his ID, credit cards, etc. back. I'd be willing to invest more of my time to save someone else a large amount of time.
The owner may or may not care much about a small or moderate amount of cash inside, but I'd know he/she cared about everything else. I think my own empathy for the situation would drive me to reunite the wallet with its owner.
I'd feel a little empathy for someone having to hassle with a missing stay request, but my own level of vigor in the pursuit to reunite owner and points would be less. Probably a phone call or an email alerting the hotel to the problem, inviting them to take back the points and give them to the actual guest.
Originally Posted by Beckles
I would bet the folks who suggested you take the high road wouldn't do the things you mention either. Although I have seen them discussed here on FT, I don't believe most FT'ers resort to such questionable practices in general.
+1...Whenever someone starts a thread thinking they've found that "loophole" (buy/return schemes), the vast majority of responses strongly condemn the action. Usually it's someone newer to the forum...maybe a bit new to the mileage game.
Sign-up bonuses are a bit of a gray area because we're frequently bombarded with direct mail for additional cards with bonuses. A lot of people churn cards. I don't think that act is unethical in and of itself. The banks have enough data in their possession to control access to credit. It's their choice how they act upon it. If a consumer is providing false information to obtain credit, that's a different story - unethical and probably illegal.