Originally Posted by
jsloan
You might be correct that they would try to cut a deal. However, I don’t think United “knows they screwed up.” They attempted to push a ticket over to DL — it failed. It happens sometimes during iRROPS. This isn’t a case like a couple of others reported recently where a rogue agent said “we’ll reimburse you.” As nearly as I can tell, OP simply got frustrated and decided unilaterally to follow this course of action. And while it might cost more than $1600 to engage a local lawyer, they don’t need a lawyer. They probably have a designated employee that they send to handle cases like this — JAXPax has said that was his role earlier in his career at another carrier. Furthermore, it’s less about the $1600 than it is the precedent they’d set that anyone who felt they were wronged by UA could expect to go to small-claims court and receive a nuisance settlement. Sometimes you need to stand up for yourself to avoid being marked as an easy target.
That was my thought exactly...
I can't even say UA definitively screwed up, let alone to the point where they'd be liable to eat OP's alternate travel choices -- something they explicitly are not liable for. (There is a huge gap between "the customer service could have been better" & legal liability)
Plus if OP "sues first and asks questions later" that puts UA in the position of (potentially) being able to force OP to pay their costs -- either for local representation or for flying a corporate attorney in to represent pro hac vice (is that even a thing in small claims?) Unless they've complied with the Rule 3(Q) requirement to essentially put UA on formal notice and wait 60 days.
(I am not a lawyer but from my understanding in some states a lawyer *cannot* represent a corporate entity in small claims but an employee like
JAXPax may -- IIRC California is one example, while in others corporations *must* be represented by an attorney admitted to practice law in that jurisdiction for a small claims suit, IIRC Ohio is one example)