Originally Posted by
davidbridgman
I believe the law in the regard is indeed that state law can offer more protection than federal law, but not less. You're right, but it's not relevant to this situation.
That shows a misunderstanding of established constitutional law on the supremacy clause, the commerce clause and application to DOT regulations. The DOT regulations pre-empt state law on the same topic - that is why states cannot regulate airline advertising because DOT has established rules on that subject. The airlines successfully argued that it would be burdensome to comply with more restrictive advertising regulations in 50 states.
However where DOT has not established rules, i.e. mileage programs, state contract law would apply. Many people have successfully sued airlines in small claims court to collect damages for breach of contract, tort, etc. None of these suits were pre-empted by federal law.
Originally Posted by
davidbridgman
What it means is that if the DOT determines that this falls within the realm of a mistake fare, that UA has no mistake defense in contract law at any level. So you can throw any state law stuff out the window with regard to defenses based in contract. I mean, could it be any more clear that the DOT intended to preempt a mistake defense? The question is whether DOT mistake rule applies to ISSUED AND CONFIRMED award tickets the same way it applies to revenue tickets. I don't think anyone disputes that DOT has no control over FF programs or awards prior to the confirmed ticket being issued.
I can't fathom anyone arguing with a straight face that it's crystal clear that UA can void these tickets legally. This whole scenario has the makings of a law school exam question.
Your last 2 sentences are correct. Your first two are not. I think the DOT rules you cited are intended to protect consumers from price hikes on tickets that they purchased for cash, not miles which are not a currency as airline rules specifically state that they own the mileage program. But you'd have to go back to the regulatory history of the rule and also to see how DOT has applied the rule in administrative proceedings. You've done none of that here.
I think it is a good law school hypothetical for class discussion but not an exam question. Preemption would be discussed in conlaw, whereas unilateral mistake would be covered in contract law. @:-)
Originally Posted by
Jesperss
Love all the e-Lawyers here.
Hopefully not the same ones that were all over the AA/Cartera case.
Was all over that too though somewhat less sympathetic to Cartera. They ended up making a fairly decent settlement offer (was it 2500 or 5000 miles per purchase) which no doubt warded off most of the threatened litigation.
Originally Posted by
flyinghigh77
my biggest hope actually is that both united and continental have stated in one of the country's top 3 newspapers that they will honor any mistake fare, no matter what. if they break that promise how credible is the new united, especially given all the other customer trouble they are having right now?
But this is not a mistake fare, it is a computer glitch that resulted in contradictory information being displayed on the screen for those who redeemed mileage for an award ticket.
And I don't think this can hurt United's credibility any more than the other heinous things that have been done since the merger... most people don't care about this stuff except for a few hardcore FT junkies.