[OFFER DEAD, MR accounts frozen, some bonuses clawed back] 100k Amex Plat (USA)
Aug 25, 2016, 11:58 am
#901
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Denver CO
Posts: 3,682
If a big part of your minimum spend was MS, I would expect your MRs to be taken back and you would have little to argue on getting them back as the T&Cs specifically disallow those purchases to meet the minimum spend. There's a lot of different facts flying around with returns, delays, etc. But someone who did not have $3,000 of organic spend for items that were not returned doesn't have a leg to stand on, and I see no basis on which they would survive a challenge.
Aug 25, 2016, 12:06 pm
#902
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Miami, Mpls & London
Programs: AA & Marriott Perpetual Platinum; DL & HH Gold
Posts: 48,959
Improbable, because Citi and Chase have cloned this benefit with higher amounts and more liberal requirements. I think both of them will follow if American Express ends this gimmick, but I don't think American Express will do that until the Centurion lounge network is built out.
Aug 25, 2016, 12:08 pm
#903
Join Date: Oct 2014
Programs: Hilton Diamond, IHG Platinum, Bonvoy Silver, BA, AA, FlyingBlue, IberiaPlus,Wyndham Rewards
Posts: 141
If a big part of your minimum spend was MS, I would expect your MRs to be taken back and you would have little to argue on getting them back as the T&Cs specifically disallow those purchases to meet the minimum spend. There's a lot of different facts flying around with returns, delays, etc. But someone who did not have $3,000 of organic spend for items that were not returned doesn't have a leg to stand on, and I see no basis on which they would survive a challenge.
Aug 25, 2016, 12:13 pm
#904
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: SFO
Posts: 3,881
Based on the dp's, I'm heavily leaning toward cutting my losses and cancelling for the prorated AF refund pre 9/1. I met the requirement using almost exclusively ms (serve). So yeah...not looking good. My bonus would post, if at all, in late September. The card bennies are nice, but its not unthinkable that they'll shut down the airline fee credit/gc situation come 2017. I travel for leisure, so lounge access is not a must-have.
Anyone see any reason for me to hang in?
Anyone see any reason for me to hang in?
Aug 25, 2016, 12:20 pm
#905
Join Date: Oct 2014
Programs: Hilton Diamond, IHG Platinum, Bonvoy Silver, BA, AA, FlyingBlue, IberiaPlus,Wyndham Rewards
Posts: 141
Improbable, because Citi and Chase have cloned this benefit with higher amounts and more liberal requirements. I think both of them will follow if American Express ends this gimmick, but I don't think American Express will do that until the Centurion lounge network is built out.
Aug 25, 2016, 12:26 pm
#906
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 283
If a big part of your minimum spend was MS, I would expect your MRs to be taken back and you would have little to argue on getting them back as the T&Cs specifically disallow those purchases to meet the minimum spend. There's a lot of different facts flying around with returns, delays, etc. But someone who did not have $3,000 of organic spend for items that were not returned doesn't have a leg to stand on, and I see no basis on which they would survive a challenge.
Aug 25, 2016, 12:43 pm
#907
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 53
200 airline fee credit
Hi, so is there a consensus as to whether the 200 fee credit would reduce the total spend or not? I did all my spending organically but if I subtract the 200 credit I am a little below $3000. That said I did check with amex online reps periodically about how much spending I have met, and every time (including this last one) they gave me a number that was not offset by the credit. I saved the chat screenshot. Also T&C did not mention anywhere that such credits would work against the spend.
My points posted about a month ago and they are still in my account. Am I safe? Thanks to anyone who can offer advice.
My points posted about a month ago and they are still in my account. Am I safe? Thanks to anyone who can offer advice.
Aug 25, 2016, 2:11 pm
#908
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: LHR
Programs: AA
Posts: 773
Hi, so is there a consensus as to whether the 200 fee credit would reduce the total spend or not? I did all my spending organically but if I subtract the 200 credit I am a little below $3000. That said I did check with amex online reps periodically about how much spending I have met, and every time (including this last one) they gave me a number that was not offset by the credit. I saved the chat screenshot. Also T&C did not mention anywhere that such credits would work against the spend.
My points posted about a month ago and they are still in my account. Am I safe? Thanks to anyone who can offer advice.
My points posted about a month ago and they are still in my account. Am I safe? Thanks to anyone who can offer advice.
Aug 25, 2016, 2:54 pm
#910
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: BOS, MHT
Programs: AA ltg, B6, DL, UA, AS, SPG/Marriott Plt, HH, Hyatt
Posts: 10,052
Based on the dp's, I'm heavily leaning toward cutting my losses and cancelling for the prorated AF refund pre 9/1. I met the requirement using almost exclusively ms (serve). So yeah...not looking good. My bonus would post, if at all, in late September. The card bennies are nice, but its not unthinkable that they'll shut down the airline fee credit/gc situation come 2017. I travel for leisure, so lounge access is not a must-have.
Anyone see any reason for me to hang in?
Anyone see any reason for me to hang in?
Aug 25, 2016, 2:55 pm
#911
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 53
Aug 25, 2016, 3:10 pm
#912
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,767
If a big part of your minimum spend was MS, I would expect your MRs to be taken back and you would have little to argue on getting them back as the T&Cs specifically disallow those purchases to meet the minimum spend. There's a lot of different facts flying around with returns, delays, etc. But someone who did not have $3,000 of organic spend for items that were not returned doesn't have a leg to stand on, and I see no basis on which they would survive a challenge.
You obviously have not read the lengthy FR thread. AMEX has the ability to see what you purchased in great details. If they choose to enforce the language in T&Cs, they sure can point out the nature of each and every single purchase if it is challenged in court, despite it would cost AMEX some money because that takes up manpower.
Last edited by Happy; Aug 25, 2016 at 3:15 pm
Aug 25, 2016, 3:24 pm
#914
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,767
When I started reading this thread again a few days ago, it was my first time even hearing about CFPB lol. But the process is quite simple. Just go to http://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/ , and follow the prompts to fill out a complaint under the credit card option.
Be mindful of the world limit though. I drafted a thesis in advance but the actual CFPB word-box couldn't take even half of that. So I had to edit the crap out of it.
Be mindful of the world limit though. I drafted a thesis in advance but the actual CFPB word-box couldn't take even half of that. So I had to edit the crap out of it.
Aug 25, 2016, 3:26 pm
#915
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 283
It would be tough to argue one's case if the spend is all MS.
You obviously have not read the lengthy FR thread. AMEX has the ability to see what you purchased in great details. If they choose to enforce the language in T&Cs, they sure can point out the nature of each and every single purchase if it is challenged in court, despite it would cost AMEX some money because that takes up manpower.
You obviously have not read the lengthy FR thread. AMEX has the ability to see what you purchased in great details. If they choose to enforce the language in T&Cs, they sure can point out the nature of each and every single purchase if it is challenged in court, despite it would cost AMEX some money because that takes up manpower.
I'm saying that at a bare minimum that they are obliged to do so if they want to enforce that part of the terms of conditions (which I admit they are entitled to do). Based on what we've seen, I don't think they've done that. In other words, they need to devote more manpower rather than whatever roughshod method they used to weed people out here.