Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Minor Denied Boarding

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 26, 2005, 5:25 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Petaluma, CA, USA
Programs: DL FO MM,
Posts: 102
Minor Denied Boarding

Hello, all.

Long time lurker, don't post often.

I don't fly UA, so I need your help and advice.

Two family members (ages 17 and 15) flying Denver to Montrose, CO were involuntarily denied boarding last Friday (7/22). Overnight accomodations were sleeping mats on the floor of a group room in Denver. No meals or shower facilities were offered. They were accomodated on the first flight next day. The reason for the denied boarding given was "weight and balance" issues (due, I suppose to the very high temperatures in Montrose.

Any thoughts? Do you think UA owes any compensation?

Appreciate any and all replies.

Regards,
Guloxi
guloxi is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 5:28 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Yes, UA definitely owes under the IDB rules.

They should have been given a hotel and food until the next day. Should have gotten a $600 voucher if they were delayed more than 6 hours, which sounds like the case.

Call UA and raise hell. I would.
Superguy is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:15 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London, UK
Programs: UA 1k, *W Plat., AA Gold, Hertz PC
Posts: 108
Seems very strange that United would DB minors instead of adults. Even stranger that they wouldn't provide accomodation. I would be very upset if this happened to anyone I know.

J
jmilliken is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:21 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Suburbia :rolleyes:
Programs: UA, HA, CO
Posts: 975
I would definitely go after some compensation in this case. Sleeping mats in a group room is definitely unacceptable for the minors, and I'm also trying to figure out why they were IDB, versus any other adults.

Write a letter outlining the situation and the horrific accomodations that were given.

asu-ua772
asu-ua772 is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:25 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: We got lucky9876coins
Programs: Life IS good !!! ®
Posts: 3,180
Wow. Were these registered with UA as unaccompanied minors? If so, there is even more reason to raise hell. Not only should they each get the $600 Travel Credit, they should also get a written apology and maybe even a free domestic ticket as this would be a serious breach of UA rules.

If not, they should still demand their $600 TC and maybe even a little more since they did not get fed or given a hotel room for the night.

Unless this was a weather cancellation.... You mention that they slept on a mat on the floor of a group room in Denver, this almost sounds like weather cancellations in Denver. Was this the case? Were they the only pax IDBd or was the entire flight canceled? If flight was canceled, was it because of weather or something else?
dcgators is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:31 pm
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by dcgators
Wow. Were these registered with UA as unaccompanied minors? If so, there is even more reason to raise hell. Not only should they each get the $600 Travel Credit, they should also get a written apology and maybe even a free domestic ticket as this would be a serious breach of UA rules.

If not, they should still demand their $600 TC and maybe even a little more since they did not get fed or given a hotel room for the night.

Unless this was a weather cancellation.... You mention that they slept on a mat on the floor of a group room in Denver, this almost sounds like weather cancellations in Denver. Was this the case? Were they the only pax IDBd or was the entire flight canceled? If flight was canceled, was it because of weather or something else?
Wasn't weather. The OP said:

"The reason for the denied boarding given was "weight and balance" issues (due, I suppose to the very high temperatures in Montrose.)"

Doesn't matter what he theorized ... weight and balance isn't weather.

The GA's probably did what they did because they thought they could get away with it. They knew that an adult wouldn't stand for that, but a kid probably would just go with it.

They'd probably have to report the IDB to DOT too. I'd really cause a ruckus with DOT if UA didn't satisfy me after they were notified.
Superguy is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:32 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: We got lucky9876coins
Programs: Life IS good !!! ®
Posts: 3,180
Never mind. I checked on the flights from DEN to MTJ on 7/22/05 and there were no cancellations.

Sounds like someone at UX (SKYWEST) has some splainin to do.
dcgators is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:34 pm
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Programs: Bar Alliance Gold
Posts: 16,271
Even if it was weather-related, I would think IM regulations would prevent them from being accomodated as they were...
SEA_Tigger is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:37 pm
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,682
Originally Posted by Superguy
Wasn't weather. The OP said:

"The reason for the denied boarding given was "weight and balance" issues (due, I suppose to the very high temperatures in Montrose.)"

Doesn't matter what he theorized ... weight and balance isn't weather.
Not necessarily. If it is hot enough, aircraft have to be lighter to achieve the same performance. They need longer runway distances to take off and land, and more distance to climb over obstacles. So in some cases, too hot = weight issues. This is especially true at high-elevation airports with shorter runways and high obstacles like mountains in the vicinity (which I believe describes Montrose).

Bear96 is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:38 pm
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,067
Originally Posted by Superguy
Yes, UA definitely owes under the IDB rules.

They should have been given a hotel and food until the next day. Should have gotten a $600 voucher if they were delayed more than 6 hours, which sounds like the case.

Call UA and raise hell. I would.
Wrong. You described VDB compensation. They're entitled to IDB compensation, which is 2 x the fare paid (one-way) up to $400 in cash. If UA wants to settle up with a higher amount in voucher, and that's acceptable to them, fine. But IDBs are paid out in cash.

Contact UA, be polite yet assertive, and tell them the two pax were IDB'ed, and ask how do you go about getting your check.
channa is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:39 pm
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: MileagePlus Premier Gold
Posts: 11,522
Note that the OP posted about travel from DEN to MTJ, not the other way around, so weight and balance shouldn't affect MTJ operations since they plane is landing at MTJ, not taking off from MTJ. Is that right?

Last edited by UnitedSkies; Jul 26, 2005 at 6:41 pm
UnitedSkies is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:39 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: We got lucky9876coins
Programs: Life IS good !!! ®
Posts: 3,180
Originally Posted by Superguy
"The reason for the denied boarding given was "weight and balance" issues (due, I suppose to the very high temperatures in Montrose.)".
Thanks Superguy. I realized that after I posted my response.

Hello McFly (dcgators)! READ the post ...

Let UA know this immediately. There is no reason to leave minors traveling alone off a flight and in an airport sleeping room overnight.
dcgators is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:42 pm
  #13  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by channa
Wrong. You described VDB compensation. They're entitled to IDB compensation, which is 2 x the fare paid (one-way) up to $400 in cash. If UA wants to settle up with a higher amount in voucher, and that's acceptable to them, fine. But IDBs are paid out in cash.
Where'd that come from? I've never heard of that.

I got IDB'd in FRA and was offered $600 plus hotel and food. I took two SWU's and a free upgrade instead though.
Superguy is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:44 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: We got lucky9876coins
Programs: Life IS good !!! ®
Posts: 3,180
Originally Posted by SEA_Tigger
Even if it was weather-related, I would think IM regulations would prevent them from being accomodated as they were...
I agree IF they were Unaccompanied Minors.

But honestly, even if they weren't Unaccompanied Minors, I tend to believe that a good GA should not let 2 minors be stranded overnight without any assistance.
dcgators is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2005, 6:46 pm
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,067
Originally Posted by Superguy
Where'd that come from? I've never heard of that.

I got IDB'd in FRA and was offered $600 plus hotel and food. I took two SWU's and a free upgrade instead though.

It's U.S. law. FRA is not U.S., so that wouldn't apply. EU laws would in FRA, and they're even more generous.
channa is offline  


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.