Originally Posted by
MSPeconomist
On each flight, did the GA really ask for volunteers and make compensation offers for VDBs? If not, it's another DOT violation.
What is the specific requirement the GA does it? Could be done via email or at checkin.
Originally Posted by
MSPeconomist
OP should look at the UA CoC statements about IDBs very carefully. UA is required to have policies and to follow them regarding priority order for IDBs. Most carriers have language to protect hardship cases from IDBs, where hardship can include unaccompanied minors, young children, lap infants, the handicapped, the very elderly, etc. If one of these applies to you, it's a further violation of DOT regulations.
OP is not a hardship case in UA CoC:
Passengers who are Qualified Individuals with Disabilities, unaccompanied minors under the age of 18 years, or minors between the ages of 12 and 17 who use the unaccompanied minor service, will be the last to be involuntarily denied boarding if it is determined by UA that such denial would constitute a hardship.
Originally Posted by
WR Cage
In reviewing the original post, I do note one item that may trip up the claim for IDB. Specifically the OP makes numerous mentions of requiring to be seated together. While in most circumstances this is not a problem, on the ERJ145 the seats are 1X2. MEM-IAH is chock full of RJ145 with one daily CR7. The problem for the OP is they might have gotten a BP with seats, but they weren't together. If so, then the OP was not IDB but rather removed themselves from the flight. Under this scenario the OP does not have an IDB claim.
Also the oxygen mask issue, extras only available in a few seats on the RJs.
We're missing a lot of details, particularly with regard to the second DB and the OP's demands of UA agents at various points. Too hard to predict what UA will say, will have to wait and see if the OP follows up after UA's response.