Last edit by: canadiancow
Pertinent details/events/articles:
- https://goo.gl/ioL7Tx
- Original email sent to Mr. Wong, accusing him of abuse of MLL privileges: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/26733198-post38.html
- CBC article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ourt-1.4717202
- VFTW post: https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2018/06/22/man-has-airline-status-yanked-for-refunding-tickets-after-using-airport-lounges-now-hes-suing/
- FBT story Air Canada ‘Super Elite’ Sues Airline After Status is Revoked for Using Airport Lounges Without Flying
- TPG post: https://thepointsguy.com/news/air-canada-super-elite-traveler-sues-carrier-over-revoked-airline-status/
Super Elite suspended; lawsuit filed but amicably settled out of court
#496
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: Ice Cream Club, AC SE MM, Bonvoy Life Plat
Posts: 2,803
Since this is related: https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea...now-hes-suing/
#497
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: AC
Posts: 2,167
On a balance of probabilities (which is how it works in civil litigation), it was most likely the lawyer's call w/ the client's consent of course.
That said our very own prolific FlyerTalk poster is now unsuspended I see, so perhaps Mr. Wong can confirm or deny this.
That said our very own prolific FlyerTalk poster is now unsuspended I see, so perhaps Mr. Wong can confirm or deny this.
#498
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
It doesn't surprise me that the plaintiff decided to go to the press, at all as it is a good tactic to force Air Canada's hands and to paint them in a certain light. However, what surprises me is the plaintiff's choice (assuming it was his decision) to go to the CBC of all places. I would have chosen different news outlets, especially ones who typically cater to the upper class.
It sounds like to be that the reporter is simply stationed at the BC Supreme Court, which eventually allows him to get wind of this.
Last edited by garykung; Jun 22, 2018 at 4:25 pm Reason: Correction due to misinformation.
#499
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: Ice Cream Club, AC SE MM, Bonvoy Life Plat
Posts: 2,803
On a balance of probabilities (which is how it works in civil litigation), it was most likely the lawyer's call w/ the client's consent of course.
That said our very own prolific FlyerTalk poster is now unsuspended I see, so perhaps Mr. Wong can confirm or deny this.
That said our very own prolific FlyerTalk poster is now unsuspended I see, so perhaps Mr. Wong can confirm or deny this.
#500
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: YYZ most of the time
Programs: AC SE100K MM, Princess Elite
Posts: 3,921
Why should it be acceptable for them to make disparaging comments about me, but I can't make them about them?
#501
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
Since this is related: https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea...now-hes-suing/
Is it possible that the plaintiff did indeed seek access to the lounge merely for the pleasure of doing so, rather than having so many intended trips canceled at last minute? There exists lots of FT evidence to suggest easy access to free drinks was of interest to several members; the plaintiff included. Perhaps the airline's claims are not entirely without merit.
As an aside, "going airside without intent to fly" is an airline concern as an airport stakeholder, but is not their matter to enforce.
#502
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: トロント
Programs: IHG Gold
Posts: 4,820
The comments are quite typical due to the usual CBC viewer base. This article and this case references someone in the 1%, both undoubtedly in income and in flying patterns. Jealousy makes people green, and it's clear that the CBC audience is jealous with an axe to grind, not that it matters at all when it comes to the lawsuit at hand.
#503
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: YQB
Programs: AC SE
Posts: 2,139
Interesting final sentence: "However I suspect that Air Canada is within its rights to suspend elite benefits (though not to refuse refund) for tickets they believe were booked for the purpose of obtaining lounge access or going airside in an airport without intent to fly."
Is it possible that the plaintiff did indeed seek access to the lounge merely for the pleasure of doing so, rather than having so many intended trips canceled at last minute? There exists lots of FT evidence to suggest easy access to free drinks was of interest to several members; the plaintiff included. Perhaps the airline's claims are not entirely without merit.
As an aside, "going airside without intent to fly" is an airline concern as an airport stakeholder, but is not their matter to enforce.
Is it possible that the plaintiff did indeed seek access to the lounge merely for the pleasure of doing so, rather than having so many intended trips canceled at last minute? There exists lots of FT evidence to suggest easy access to free drinks was of interest to several members; the plaintiff included. Perhaps the airline's claims are not entirely without merit.
As an aside, "going airside without intent to fly" is an airline concern as an airport stakeholder, but is not their matter to enforce.
#504
Join Date: May 2012
Location: BKK/SIN/YYZ/YUL
Programs: DL, AC, Bonvoy, Accor, Hilton
Posts: 2,920
Your argument is based upon the assumption that a company should word its agreements in a strict draconian manner such that there is no room for accommodation or common sense, or a means to cut some slack when it is needed. Keep in mind that the frequent flyer program is a benefits scheme extended to Air Canada customers for which those customers are not directly charged. It is also a social contract where there is an expectation that both parties will be reasonable in the interpretation of the rules and in the use of the program.
I have no doubt that the plaintiff used the AC FF program to its fullest and this in turn generated significant costs to the airline. Your position is that it was allowed and that if AC was unhappy, it should change its rules. My view is that if AC tightens its rules, then everyone suffers because of a few people like the Eric Wongs of the world. I say no to collective punishment and that AC should instead target the people causing the issues and get rid of them; By getting rid of people like the plaintiff, the airline need not penalize the thousands of other customers who need the easy application of rules, and who do not play the system.
A loss will have no impact on customer service. It will however, most likely result in tougher program rules such that others will see benefits reduced, all thanks to Mr, Wong.
It doesn't surprise me that the plaintiff decided to go to the press, at all as it is a good tactic to force Air Canada's hands and to paint them in a certain light. However, what surprises me is the plaintiff's choice (assuming it was his decision) to go to the CBC of all places. I would have chosen different news outlets, especially ones who typically cater to the upper class.
As I mentioned upthread, jealously can turn people very green, not that Canadians are or are "not" a racist bunch. We are a diverse group of people, and racists exist in our own country too, even if we don't particularly like admitting it.
As I mentioned upthread, jealously can turn people very green, not that Canadians are or are "not" a racist bunch. We are a diverse group of people, and racists exist in our own country too, even if we don't particularly like admitting it.
1. They can't be bothered to engage in such stupidity;
2. They have enough income that they do not need to chase upgrades, or points.
Playing the FF point games is a waste of time for those who have full lives or who have the money As such, the upper class people you reference, most likely are oblivious to this event.
Last edited by Transpacificflyer; Jun 22, 2018 at 2:11 pm
#505
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YVR - MILLS Waypoint (It's the third house on the left)
Programs: AC*SE100K, wood level status in various other programs
Posts: 6,232
Do you really believe that "upper class" people have time to chase coupons and play the system as the plaintiff has,m let alone have anything in common with an IT services contractor? Upper class and the wealthy do not play EYW, nor do they add segments to flights just to earn mile. Here's why;....
Any "upper class" people I have flown with fly private. It truly is the only way to fly, but a total red herring with regard to this thread topic.
#506
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YVR - MILLS Waypoint (It's the third house on the left)
Programs: AC*SE100K, wood level status in various other programs
Posts: 6,232
"After January 20, 2016, Air Canada corporate security has engaged in
surveillance and monitoring of the Plaintiff's online and offline activities, kept
records of such activities which are made available to Air Canada staff and
persons unknown to the Plaintiff in an effort to unfairly characterize the Plaintiff
as a person deserving of restrictive treatment and to retroactively justify their
high-handed actions taken against the Plaintiff to that date."
#507
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
Technically, one can indeed play the "rules" to get the most out of a scheme. This does not mean that it is morally or ethically correct.
I have no doubt that the plaintiff used the AC FF program to its fullest and this in turn generated significant costs to the airline. Your position is that it was allowed and that if AC was unhappy, it should change its rules. My view is that if AC tightens its rules, then everyone suffers because of a few people like the Eric Wongs of the world. I say no to collective punishment and that AC should instead target the people causing the issues and get rid of them; By getting rid of people like the plaintiff, the airline need not penalize the thousands of other customers who need the easy application of rules, and who do not play the system.
A loss will have no impact on customer service. It will however, most likely result in tougher program rules such that others will see benefits reduced, all thanks to Mr, Wong.
I have no doubt that the plaintiff used the AC FF program to its fullest and this in turn generated significant costs to the airline. Your position is that it was allowed and that if AC was unhappy, it should change its rules. My view is that if AC tightens its rules, then everyone suffers because of a few people like the Eric Wongs of the world. I say no to collective punishment and that AC should instead target the people causing the issues and get rid of them; By getting rid of people like the plaintiff, the airline need not penalize the thousands of other customers who need the easy application of rules, and who do not play the system.
A loss will have no impact on customer service. It will however, most likely result in tougher program rules such that others will see benefits reduced, all thanks to Mr, Wong.
It's not that the rules were being exploited, it's likely the blatancy while doing so that caught the eye of the airlines.
#508
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,346
Actually, it does not sound like the Plaintiff went to the media.
Per my observation of CBC's style, CBC should have contacted either or both Plaintiff's lawyer and AC for comments. Indeed, the CBC's reporting confirm contact with AC, but not Plaintiff's lawyer. It sounds like to be that the reporter is simply stationed at the BC Supreme Court, which eventually allows him to get wind of this.
Per my observation of CBC's style, CBC should have contacted either or both Plaintiff's lawyer and AC for comments. Indeed, the CBC's reporting confirm contact with AC, but not Plaintiff's lawyer. It sounds like to be that the reporter is simply stationed at the BC Supreme Court, which eventually allows him to get wind of this.
Originally Posted by CBC
"It's not as if he was seen with explosives or something like that, but they treat everything as if it's a threat to security," says Wong's lawyer, Don Sorochan.
Do you really believe that "upper class" people have time to chase coupons and play the system as the plaintiff has, let alone have anything in common with an IT services contractor? Upper class and the wealthy do not play EYW, nor do they add segments to flights just to earn miles because;
1. They can't be bothered to engage in such stupidity;
2. They have enough income that they do not need to chase upgrades, or points.
Playing the FF point games is a waste of time for those who have full lives or who have the money As such, the upper class people you reference, most likely are oblivious to this event.
1. They can't be bothered to engage in such stupidity;
2. They have enough income that they do not need to chase upgrades, or points.
Playing the FF point games is a waste of time for those who have full lives or who have the money As such, the upper class people you reference, most likely are oblivious to this event.
Likewise, just because I buy $800 r/t Europe J mistake fares doesn't mean I can't afford regular sales or full price (not to be confused with full fare) J tickets.
Playing the points game is fun. It's a challenge. It's not about saving $50.
#509
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: トロント
Programs: IHG Gold
Posts: 4,820
I kind of believe the humiliation part Mr. Wong has suffered - being experienced first hand.
Back in the days it only took 20k status miles to get A3 *G. Upon presenting my A3 *G card to YVR DOM MLL, the check in agent showed my card to her co-worker and made a comment that "it only takes 20k miles" to get this. Her coworker showed sign of disbelieve and disgust.
I do hope Mr. Wong win.
Back in the days it only took 20k status miles to get A3 *G. Upon presenting my A3 *G card to YVR DOM MLL, the check in agent showed my card to her co-worker and made a comment that "it only takes 20k miles" to get this. Her coworker showed sign of disbelieve and disgust.
I do hope Mr. Wong win.
#510
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,804
Technically, one can indeed play the "rules" to get the most out of a scheme. This does not mean that it is morally or ethically correct. Tax lawyers and accountants do this and we end up with people who legally park assets in offshore jurisdictions to minimize their tax liabilities. The result is that people who don't resort to such schemes shoulder the brunt of paying taxes. Retailers provide generous conditions for the return of products . There are some people who use clothes or products , but then return them for a refund. The result is higher costs for other consumers who do not take advantage of the "rules". And then we have the people who exploit the loopholes and rules of the Air Canada FF program. Behaviour like the plaintiff's results in a cost to the airline. This cost is passed on to other customers, most of whom are not FF.
Comparing that with parking assets in offshore holes in order not to pay taxes is in a different league altogether, and it is usually illegal too BTW. Even comparing with returning used clothes for refund after having worn them is in a different league.
But to me, what takes the cake is coming up with an expectation of "moral or ethical" behavior on the customer side, when in truth no such rule exists o the business side, and the whole relationship is heavily biased in favor of the business. Whose only "ethical" obligations apparently are to their shareholders. If any such obligations, of course. (Just look at the thread about customer information finding their ways to places where they should not, for instance. May not be illegal unfortunately, but ethical?)