Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Mileage Run Deals > Mileage Run Discussion
Reload this Page >

[PREM FARE GONE] UA: NCL-EWR 600 DKK (mistaken fare) DOT ruled; see wiki for link

Old Feb 11, 2015, 11:49 am
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: drewguy
If you've never gone through this process read this before posting!
Note: Please consider that with high probability, United is monitoring this thread, so please pay attention on what you post!

DOT Investigation UpdatesNews Media Updates:

-------

According to USA Today, Ben Mutzabaugh:
United is voiding the bookings of several thousand individuals who were attempting to take advantage of an error a third-party software provider made when it applied an incorrect currency exchange rate, despite United having properly filed its fares. Most of these bookings were for travel originating in the United Kingdom, and the level of bookings made with Danish Kroner as the local currency was significantly higher than normal during the limited period that customers made these bookings.
Note that United has also accidentally cancelled "legitimate" tickets paid for in USD, purchased in USD from LHR... Please check your other tickets if purchased today to ensure they were not unilaterally cancelled.

However, there is no chance at all that you can have your tickets re-instated if you complain to DOT on the basis of DOT rule 399.88:
399.88 Prohibition on post-purchase price increase.

(a) It is an unfair and deceptive practice within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. 41712 for any seller of scheduled air transportation within, to or from the United States, or of a tour (i.e., a combination of air transportation and ground or cruise accommodations), or tour component (e.g., a hotel stay) that includes scheduled air transportation within, to or from the United States, to increase the price of that air transportation, tour or tour component to a consumer, including but not limited to an increase in the price of the seat, an increase in the price for the carriage of passenger baggage, or an increase in an applicable fuel surcharge, after the air transportation has been purchased by the consumer, except in the case of an increase in a government-imposed tax or fee. A purchase is deemed to have occurred when the full amount agreed upon has been paid by the consumer.
Form for filing DOT complaint. File complaint as soon as your ticket is cancelled.

Link to PDF of enforcement bodies for European customers affected. File complaint as soon as your ticket is cancelled.


Tips for DOT Complaint:
  • File on DOT for every ticket number affected.
  • If you have one reservation with four people traveling (four tickets) file 4 DOT complaints, one per ticket.
  • If you have separate reservations, file a DOT complaint for each.
  • The DOT complaint website may take several minutes to load, depending on demand.
  • When you go to upload a file, be careful as it will reset all your radio buttons. So, if you want a copy of the complaint, make sure you double check that "Yes" is still selected before submitting, especially if you upload a file.

Template For Complaint:
United has unilaterally cancelled my ticket without my consent.

Facts:
1. The ticket was ticketed (had a ticket number).
2. I received a confirmation number, ticket number, and emails stating both
3. The ticket was paid for and my credit card charged.

United must reinstate the ticket within its original cabin. This trip is for travel TO the United States.

At no time during the booking process was any other fare than the Danish Krone equivalent displayed. As a reasonable, prudent consumer, I believed I was paying the price displayed to me on the website. United never sent or displayed the equivalent fare in any other currency.

Trip Details
Ticket #: 016XXXXXXXXXX
PNR: XXXXXX
Routing: LHR-EWR-LAX-HNL

Attachments: Attached is a document showing the ticket, routing, and providing proof that the reservation was ticketed.

Filename: Cancelled - UA Reservation - LHR-EWR-LAX-HNL - XXXXXX - 016XXXXXXXXXX.pdf

+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Relevant Law |
| http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/399.88 |
+-------------------------------------------------------+
399.88 Prohibition on post-purchase price increase.

(a) It is an unfair and deceptive practice within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. 41712 for any seller of scheduled air transportation within, to or from the United States, or of a tour (i.e., a combination of air transportation and ground or cruise accommodations), or tour component (e.g., a hotel stay) that includes scheduled air transportation within, to or from the United States, to increase the price of that air transportation, tour or tour component to a consumer, including but not limited to an increase in the price of the seat, an increase in the price for the carriage of passenger baggage, or an increase in an applicable fuel surcharge, after the air transportation has been purchased by the consumer, except in the case of an increase in a government-imposed tax or fee. A purchase is deemed to have occurred when the full amount agreed upon has been paid by the consumer.

+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Relevant FAQ |
| http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/rules/EAPP_2_FAQ.pdf |
+-------------------------------------------------------+
Does the prohibition on post-purchase price increases in section 399.88(a) apply in the situation where a carrier mistakenly offers an airfare due to a computer problem or human error and a consumer purchases the ticket at that fare before the carrier is able to fix the mistake?

Section 399.88(a) states that it is an unfair and deceptive practice for any seller of scheduled air transportation within, to, or from the United States, or of a tour or tour component that includes scheduled air transportation within, to, or from the United States, to increase the price of that air transportation to a consumer after the air transportation has been purchased by the consumer, except in the case of a government-imposed tax or fee and only if the passenger is advised of a possible increase before purchasing a ticket. A purchase occurs when the full amount agreed upon has been paid by the consumer. Therefore, if a consumer purchases a fare and that consumer receives confirmation (such as a confirmation email and/or the purchase appears on their credit card statement or online account summary) of their purchase, then the seller of air transportation cannot increase the price of that air transportation to that consumer, even when the fare is a mistake.
-----
Tips for retrieving your ticket number:
  1. paste(right click copy link location first) following link into your web browser
  2. change XXXXXX next to COPNR= for your reservation number and LASTNAME next to LN= for you SURNAME
  3. go to the webpage address you have just created

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/app...NRCD=2/11/2015


Originally Posted by MatthewLAX
Originally Posted by MatthewLAX View Post
R E L A X

Breathe deep.

Congrats on all who got in.

Now comes the fun part.

1. Discovery - mistake fare is posted on FT. Novices frantically checks how much vacation time they have and if the dates of availability mesh with their schedules. Experienced FTers just book it and worry about contacting spouses or their boss later. Word spreads like wildfire.

2. Excitement - Tickets purchased, confirmation emails received and dates of travel shared with other FTers. Discussions of what to see and do and where to stay crop up in other threads. Novices contact source to change seats or inquire about upgrades, Seasoned FTers sit back and enjoy reading the discussion threads.

3. Stress Stage 1 - Concern over paper ticket delivery - Novices Frantically check otheFedEx website every few hours, constant monitoring of driveway for FedEx truck. Seasoned FT veterans sit back and relax.

4. Glee and happiness - Paper tickets in hand, vacation request submitted, spouses finally informed, hotel reservations made and bragging to friends and co-workers begins. Both novices and experts get very excited.

5. Stress Stage 2 - Rumors of fare not being honored, discussion threads about the airline and ticketing agency ensue. Rumors crop up like crabgrass at this stage. Many FTers begin to worry excessively about whether or not the trip will happen. Novices make non-refundable and financial committments to their trip. Seasoned FTers make mixed drinks (and maybe a sandwich) and is patient.

6. Reality Check - Accurate information is obtained - usually takes place a week to 10 days after mistake fare is published. Confirmed information from the source as to whether or not tickets will be honored.

7a. Pure Joy (Icelandair style- Fare is Honored) - Lots of happy people, FT threads on shared information regarding hotels, restaurants, tours, etc. Jealousy from others sets in. First "FT guinea pigs" embark, post confirmation threads that all is ok.


7b Hostile Feelings (Copa Airlines Style - fare is not honored) - Many angry and disappointed FTers. Refunds are issued. Novices have multiple discussion threads of lawsuits and hostile correspondence, FT pros mutter "c'est la vie" and look for the next fare mistake.

8a Success (Honored) - Trip Report thread becomes very active


Freedom of Information Act Request
File #2015-147, Office of the Secretary of Transportation - Receipt acknowledged 3/13/15

http://www.dot.gov/individuals/foia/office-secretary-foia-information

Relevant excerpt from my request on 2/24/15. There no need for multiple requests for the same thing, though feel free to request more or different information obviously. I'll post any updates as I get them.

"Under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S. C. subsection 552, I am requesting access to any and all records of correspondence, including electronic, between anyone working for, or on the behalf of, United Airlines and its subsidiaries, and with anyone working for, or on the behalf of, the Department of Transportation; specifically this would include only the date range beginning on February 11th, 2015 through and including February 24th, 2015.

In addition, I am requesting access to any and all internal records and correspondence in relation to coming to the decision made on February 23rd, 2015 regarding the Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings Determination Regarding United Airlines Mistaken Fare, with the exception of any of the consumer submitted complaints via phone, email, website, or letter. Specifically, this would be any records beginning on February 11th, 2015 through and including February 24th, 2015."
Print Wikipost

[PREM FARE GONE] UA: NCL-EWR 600 DKK (mistaken fare) DOT ruled; see wiki for link

Old Feb 19, 2015, 1:12 pm
  #4606  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: ECP
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 1,658
Website manipulation is a tough one for UA ... anyone who actually was in Denmark or even VPN'd through Denmark therefore holds valid tickets by that doctrine since no manipulation was required for them.
DC777Fan is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 1:12 pm
  #4607  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: AA Plat, Bonvoy Gold
Posts: 425
Originally Posted by dieuwer2
I don't see why United would not honor this "sale".
Yes, people payed a low amount of Danish Krone, but the fare was filed for the correct amount of dollars. Therefore, it is not a "fare mistake".
If anything, it is an exchange rate mistake and thus United should lay its claim at the exchange rate provider. Let the provider eat the loss.
Devil's advocate: why don't the passengers have to lay their claim at the exchange rate provider?

And before you say the airlines chose the exchange rate provider, can't you say that the passengers did too when they chose to buy in Kroners instead of Pounds?
dml105 is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 1:12 pm
  #4608  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,407
Regarding booking the fare in DKK, I'd think the main issue is how it plays with the DOT or a judge, not how it plays with a more sophisticated FT audience.

An argument from UA that the fare shouldn't be honored because those booking knew it was too low to be legitimate and were playing games by booking in DKK (obviously this does not apply to all) and these are not the sort of people the rules were meant to protect could sound appealing to someone who otherwise favors corporations over individual plaintiffs or who is not very familiar with booking airline tickets online.

The DOT is certainly concerned that "individuals are purchasing these tickets in bad faith and not on the mistaken belief that a good deal is now available". http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/24377477-post4481.html It's just not clear what they'll do about the concern.
richarddd is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 1:17 pm
  #4609  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: LON, BRU, AMS
Programs: FB Gold
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by dieuwer2
I don't see why United would not honor this "sale".
Yes, people payed a low amount of Danish Krone, but the fare was filed for the correct amount of dollars. Therefore, it is not a "fare mistake".
If anything, it is an exchange rate mistake and thus United should lay its claim at the exchange rate provider. Let the provider eat the loss.
Makes sense but I'd be willing to bet the provider had some clause in their contract with UA which would limit their liability in such instances. Ergo, the stink remains at UA's doorstep.
Steve_Kenyon is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 1:29 pm
  #4610  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,765
Originally Posted by janetdoe
There are people who spent $1500+ on this UA fare. They are mostly people who figured out they could get from London to Sydney the long way with a layover in the USA... but that definitely goes toward your point.
LHR to ROR in biz was $1500. No gymnastics required. Is that an unreasonably low price? I find that one harder to say the customer should have known better.
largeeyes is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:04 pm
  #4611  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Originally Posted by SCSA
That was far from obligue, and in the awards ticket case they PUBLICLY stated it was "manipulation"

They're not claiming it because they have lawyers better than you and know it's not their strongest point.

Stop using mental gymnastics to try to scare people.
Lawyers better than me were quoted in the Bloomberg article saying that the case turned on user conduct.
dilanesp is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:15 pm
  #4612  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 110
Originally Posted by dilanesp
Lawyers better than me were quoted in the Bloomberg article saying that the case turned on user conduct.
I totally agree they are better lawyers however I am guessing there understanding of the case is probably limited to the explanation (including bias either way) that the reporter gave to them.
exitcontrol is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:16 pm
  #4613  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Londinium
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 929
A better lawyer who didn't disclose in the article that she represents the airline industry. Her clients aren't exactly looking for her to defend consumers in a case like this.
SCSA is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:42 pm
  #4614  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: FRA
Programs: MR Gold, IHG Gold AMB
Posts: 262
Originally Posted by dilanesp
That is not a canard. The statement "most people set the website to DKK for the purpose of taking advantage of the mistake fare which they knew could not be obtained in other currency" is a true statement. You can come in here with your obfuscation and rationalization time and time again, but it will still be true, and if you tried to give the claims you are making here as testimony in court, any good lawyer would make you extremely sorry you ever went there.
I don't believe it can get more absurd than that. You are essentially accusing people of being intelligent entities, acting in a non-random way and selecting the most beneficial option for them. Do you think we should select random website to book our flights, select random point of sale, dates, departure and arrival airports and then pay? Otherwise it is "website manipulation"?

If you choose to book on wideroe.com instead of united.com, because the fares were lower there intelligent choice detected, ticket voided!

Or if you select RGN as your departure airport website manipulation, ticket voided!

If you select a different date than initially searched for just because the new one is much cheaper obvious website manipulation, ticket voided!

Yes, usually much less people book on wideroe, of fly from RGN, or fly on e.g. June 8th, or select DKK as their billing currency but when it is beneficial, obviously more do. So what?!
elva is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:44 pm
  #4615  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 519
[QUOTE=bostontraveler;24379917]
Originally Posted by dilanesp
Hans, it is no canard. I am going to tell the truth.

If you booked this ticket, and you didn't live in Denmark, YOU BOOKED THIS TICKET IN DKK BECAUSE YOU WANTED THE MISTAKE FARE. Period. That is an absolutely true statement. If I asked such a purchaser that exact wording a deposition, and the purchaser said "no", the purchaser would be committing perjury.

Seriously, "but I could have been doing it for all sorts of legitimate reasons!" is not an argument. It's not anything. Who gives a hoot what you COULD have been doing it for? The only important fact is the ACTUAL reason it was done. And we KNOW that actual reason, at least in most cases.


You must be an attorney. Or a blogger for UA.

I would say more precisely, "You booked this ticket in DKK because you wanted the fare". Why the need for the adjective? That's what I did. And that's what I do every day in Europe when I look for an expensive product. Cross-border comparisons seem to be otherworldly to some people here...it is, in fact, an EXTREMELY common practice.
You are inferring that people know this was a mistake. The only reference point they have is price. This fare was extremely low, so high probability of being a mistake, but you can never be certain until you have more information. My point being, that I don't care if it is a mistake or not, I care about the price. There has been many times that I purchased tickets "to good to be true", but since airline didn't complain, I don't know if it was a mistake or not.
eloraculo is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:46 pm
  #4616  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Programs: Hertz Platinum, Delta Platinum, UA 1k
Posts: 12
Originally Posted by SCSA
A better lawyer who didn't disclose in the article that she represents the airline industry. Her clients aren't exactly looking for her to defend consumers in a case like this.
Exactly! A lawyer that represents a major Gulf based airline that recently had a major "mistake fare." It's in that lawyer's best interests to claim passengers "manipulated" the system to get this deal. That allegation is simply not true.
solotraveler is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:48 pm
  #4617  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Originally Posted by SCSA
A better lawyer who didn't disclose in the article that she represents the airline industry. Her clients aren't exactly looking for her to defend consumers in a case like this.
The thing is, that still refutes SCSA's point and makes mine, which is that whatever United says publicly, its lawyers are making a user conduct argument.
dilanesp is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:51 pm
  #4618  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2
How about this novel ideal. Instead of pretending to be an attorney, pretending to know which side UA or DOT will take, and instead of having a kindergarten-esque style sandbox fight over who is right or wrong in this situation, people post relevant information. Knowing if someone has heard anything DIRECTLY from UA or DOT, received any further word about their trip, or first-hand experienced whether this works or not (for people that booked tickets that are coming up soon) would be a lot more helpful than talking about ethics and who is really right or wrong. Everyone has an opinion, but nobody really cares for them.
ChicagoTravel84 is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:56 pm
  #4619  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Programs: Hertz Platinum, Delta Platinum, UA 1k
Posts: 12
Originally Posted by ChicagoTravel84
How about this novel ideal. Instead of pretending to be an attorney, pretending to know which side UA or DOT will take, and instead of having a kindergarten-esque style sandbox fight over who is right or wrong in this situation, people post relevant information. Knowing if someone has heard anything DIRECTLY from UA or DOT, received any further word about their trip, or first-hand experienced whether this works or not (for people that booked tickets that are coming up soon) would be a lot more helpful than talking about ethics and who is really right or wrong. Everyone has an opinion, but nobody really cares for them.
I recently submitted a claim with the DOT about a booking that was cancelled by the OTA after it was ticketed. The OTA said the fare was a "mistake fare" and that they would not be able to honor it. It took about 4 weeks to get the issue resolved but once the DOT got hold of the case they asked the OTA to reinstate the reservation. I flew and everything turned out ok.

Regarding this case -- considering the large number of complaints - I don't expect a ruling anytime soon.
solotraveler is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2015, 2:59 pm
  #4620  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SAN
Programs: UA 1MM/1K, HH Diamond
Posts: 6,824
Originally Posted by elva
I don't believe it can get more absurd than that. You are essentially accusing people of being intelligent entities, acting in a non-random way and selecting the most beneficial option for them. Do you think we should select random website to book our flights, select random point of sale, dates, departure and arrival airports and then pay? Otherwise it is "website manipulation"?

If you choose to book on wideroe.com instead of united.com, because the fares were lower there intelligent choice detected, ticket voided!

Or if you select RGN as your departure airport website manipulation, ticket voided!

If you select a different date than initially searched for just because the new one is much cheaper obvious website manipulation, ticket voided!

Yes, usually much less people book on wideroe, of fly from RGN, or fly on e.g. June 8th, or select DKK as their billing currency but when it is beneficial, obviously more do. So what?!
Neither here nor there, but when you try to buy a ticket from A to B, both of which are in country 1, from the UA website in country 2, at the very end you get this message:

The fare and payment options below are based on selected flights, traveler information and a COUNTRY 2 billing address. Have a billing address in another country? Select your billing address country. Any change made may result in a different fare and available payment options.
Putting aside the loaded term "manipulation," it seems to me UA can easily argue that unless your billing address actually is in Denmark, you shouldn't have had access to the DKK fare in the first place. Yes, I know things are "complicated" in Europe; and yes, I know many people have done this in the past without a hitch, so why does UA allow it if it's not "consistent" with their fare rules. But the fact one has gotten away with something doesn't make it UA's obligation to honor. I think this will get UA out of the vast majority of the tickets on this basis. That said, I don't think they have a leg to stand on with respect to folks with Danish billing addresses.

It will be interesting to see how things shake out...
as219 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.