Diplomatico

Absolutely not. This appears to be either an IT issue (length of name won't fit IT parameters) and/or a policy issue that differs between two different organizations: United and VISA. It has nothing to do with discrimination as purported by the OP and it's very unlikely that it has anything to do with Chase.

mia

Chase has the ability to solve this very predictable problem. Blaming VISA or United Airlines is a low level gambit to end the discussion, There are individuals at Chase and United with the authority to authorize exceptions to any policy. Unless there is an actual lawsuit I doubt we will know why Chase failed to act in this specific instance, but I daresay that if a lawsuit reached the discovery phase it would turn out that others with the same problem have been treated differently. I wouldn't characterize this as discrimination, just incompetent customer service.

copaflyer

Incompetent customer service or discrimination but the results are the same. If my wife kept her maidien last name then this would not be an issue except maybe about is trying to pull a scam over chase on not being married. It was Chases choice to allow transfers to spouses, credit card users so they should be able to accept these situations. I am willing for a Chase rep to reach out to me to resolve this issue asap..

Yes my wife could have extended her miles other ways but chose not to as transfering miles to her account through chase is an acceptable way except the discrimination she is facing.

If IT only allows a certain amount of characters for last names but at least one last names exceeds that limit espically because of a factor of being directly disriminated against then it is an issue that needs to be addressed.

My wifes last name is a combination of her last name with my last name. Based on her race and where she was born. The miles expired after 18 months ago but would have been extended and used if chase allowed the transfer to go through.

By Chase not allowing the transfer to go through based on not allowing my wifes last name to match the legal last name in her passport/united that is discrimination. IT rules are not an excuse for discrimination.

MDJennings

How is her chosen last name (after marrying you) based on her race and where she was born? By all means, file a lawsuit and get laughed at. In order for you to win something like that, you would have to show that everyone with the same naming convention as your wife was treated the same way. I'll tell you right now that my secretary doesn't have that issue and it's merely due to a max text string length issue. In other words: a programming oversight.

Probably because they offer the very best perks package for his situation, so he couldn't change.

copaflyer

The programming oversight was brought to their attention 18 months ago and they still stand by it.

If that is the case I should not have to change based on discrimination against my wife.

garykung

Allow me illustrate you it is unlikely the case.

The current law (Equal Credit Opportunity Act) only protects discrimination against credit transactions. The law does not cover anything beyond that, but your agreement governs that instead.

So you can't claim discrimination because it is not an activity the law designed to protect.

moe8555

The moment that EO/legal decided to pay no heed to this customer's very legitimate issue, it by definition moves from the realm of poor customer service to discrimination. In essence, they have chosen to adopt an official policy of treating certain customers (with lengthy last names) in a different manner than others. And of course, I highly doubt any of this appears in the fine print or T&Cs, which could even push the matter into different territory altogether.

copaflyer

Based on her race and where she was born is the deciding factor in how her new last name is created after marrying me. There is no hyphen, although women or men in that situation may face the same issue with chase.

If you do not think it is discrimination and just poor customer service then why would Chase choose not to do anything and brush it off? What would you accept in this situation?

mia

Did you work on this problem by telephone or in writing? It sounds as if you were not dealing with someone who had the authority to solve the problem. When dealing with mass market businesses you need to have a large block of free time, a high level of patience and courtesy, and you must stay focused on the objective: transfer points from UR account to UA account. Don't mention any side issues, such as "why" you want to transfer the points. Simply ask each person if they have the authority to transfer the points when the name is an incomplete match.

NDN

I am not a lawyer, but I am not sure this would qualify as illegal discrimination. It's certainly discrimination in that if affects her based on a protected class. However, I don't know that there is any law that governs this. Points transfers are not a public accommodation. The transaction isn't a credit transaction either.

As for whether I would accept it, I think I agree with you. I would NOT accept this behavior. However, I believe Chase allows it to continue because it has no process to rectify the issue, which is that internal controls block this edge case.

jags86

Actually it looks like Chase is discriminating against you. You have too long a last name. Chase discriminates against people with last names over XYZ characters. I don't believe there is any law that governs discrimination for too many characters in a last name.

I might suggest you and your wife change your last names to something short like Smith, Patel, Perez, Uhaal, Chung, Zulu, or Rainbow. I would avoid names that aren't legal words, for example like when Prince became "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince" and just used that funny symbol. I would also avoid names that can only be pronounced in the Koisan clicking language as I do not believe they can be properly spelled using unicode text.

Happy

He has escalated this grievance all the way to the Executive Office if you read his first few posts - even got a canned reply that Chase takes discrimination claim very serious. Only to be told there is NO discrimination, with the same refusal to accommodate him. So the miles in his wife's account expired.

I seriously doubt he only has verbal communication with the Executive Office. If so, that is a very rare happening. In fact, right in his FIRST post, he mentioned he got a letter from the Executive Office which basically told him to pound sand.

That is yet another crazy thing to me - if the goal was to transfer enough into the wife's account - so 1) extended the life of the miles, 2) had enough miles to book an award which presumably would not be a big award, the way it looks to me anyway. When the attempt failed, he chose to let those miles expired instead of using other mechanism to extend the balance for another 18 months.... Just does not seem a logical approach to me.

Then, now 18 months later, he decided to go thru the same process again, presumably there are some miles in her account are again at risk of expiring... Why not just using one of the gazillion method to just extend the miles literally perpetually, then slowly build up the balance enough to redeem whatever a basic award they can use, and be done with it?

I honestly dont see just HOW he could put up with all the crappy treatments he claimed have been so far, 18 months later, he wants to go thru the SAMEA PROCESS again... Unless he decides this is his Crusade, then all the bests to him as he would need to invest a lot of work and time to ever make a progress.

We all agree Chase could not care less in this as we have witnessed in many other areas, such as the merchant code is not the category the merchant actually does business in, Chase basically tell you to pound sand. That is nothing new or surprising any more. Yet, why would a person is so angry on Chase that he has to put up with all the rubbish, while still stay with Chase, and earn the currency that he could NOT transfer to where he prefers.... I dont get it.

FriscoHeavy

Dude -- Just drop the whole discrimination thing. It has NOTHING to do with race or religion. You didn't have to change her name to the way you did (adding both of your names together). That is something you chose to do and while I support it, this is NOT discrimination. Take your business elsewhere to a company that will support the full length of her name.

Move on, bud.

NDN

No, it actually is discrimination--it's just not illegal discrimination. Discrimination isn't about intent, but result.

mia

Mentioning discrimination when contacting the Executive Office was counterproductive. It put them on the defensive, to demonstrate that Chase didn't do anything wrong, rather than solving the problem.