SamuelS

The CTA and Canadian Government haven't exactly excelled at the rollout or enforcement of the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, and air carriers have certainly been able to get away with a lot given that the backlog for CTA arbitration of filed APPR complaints reached an 18 month wait to even be reviewed such was the number of complaints and lack of resources for enforcement.

But specific to United, it is disappointing and a little disturbing that United takes it's obligations under the APPR with such a cavalier and disorganized approach.

With the decision a few years back to terminate all the long-standing in-house UA CS staff in Canada at the various airports, the outsourcing has obliterated any real kind of assistance at Canadian UA served airports. In YYC recently, I had an extended tarmac delay which ultimately led to flight cancellation, exacerbated by the lack of availability of any of the "on call" MX technicians from the third party contractor UA is using, to come out to aircraft to diagnose a warning check list indicator.

A Supervisor from the third party handling contractor that UA uses for the CS and gate ops came up to make an announcement that as no one was trained in ticketing or reservations, no one would be helping anyone today with any rebooking, and folks should go home, call United Reservations, then come back tomorrow.

When a Large Carrier cancels a flight with no suitable alternative within 9 hours, there is an obligation to offer rebooking on other carriers - even those they do not have any agreement with - where such options exist. However even upon contacting UA Res, I was advised that without exception this could not happen with telephone res and rebooking on other carriers would only happen at the airport. Which is absurd and not even possible given what I just outlined above. Escalating to a Supervisor, they advised that they were only familiar with EU Regs but nothing specific for Canada, and ultimately rebooking assistance onto another carrier was refused.

United has this page which I guess is their attempt to satisfy their obligation to inform passengers of their rights. But there is zero guidance on how to actually submit an APPR claim, no contact method, the only contacts are for ticket refunds.

Despite sending my claim to Houston Refunds with proof of transmission, United has failed to settle the claim or indeed to respond at all as required within the 30-day timeline for APPR claims.

There appear to be virtually no processes, internal support framework, or oversight at all at United to make even a half baked attempt to comply with their obligations under Canada's APPR.

kiloohm

I am in the exact same boat as you, I have a claim to make and it seems that United is completely ignoring it.

The flight with issue occurred on May 3. On May 15th, I filled an online customer feedback form asking for compensation (total delay FSD-ORD-YYZ) was 10 hours. On June 6th, I sent a follow-up request referencing the first case. I also sent an email to 1K voice. I haven’t received any feedback for any of these communications.

I am travelling to Denver today so I will try again in person but not sure what else to do.

mahasamatman

Same here. Flight delays and cancellations in early May and still no response from Customer Care. Though technically, they have until tomorrow to respond.

The right place to file a complaint is https://rppa-appr.ca/eng/compensatio...-cancellations.

WineCountryUA

No front line personal with be able to do anything. These are handled by backoffice personal.

kiloohm

I figured as such but this was the recommendation of the customer service agent in YYZ. Since they are an outpost and have very limited capabilities, she suggested that I ask for a status update on this claim once I reach DEN.

jsloan

I would not be surprised if UA were willing to litigate this particular type of case — a Canadian arrival rather than a Canadian departure. Whereas EC.261 exempted flights to the EC by non-Community carriers, APPR attempts to punish a US company due to operations within the US. It’s not clear that the APPR is actually legal, and it wouldn’t surprise me if UA wanted to prove as much.

kiloohm

The notice posted at http://www.united.com/ual/en/us/fly/...er-rights.html

States the following with emphasis from me:

This Notice contains important information about your rights established under Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR), as amended, for travel from and to Canada operated by United Airlines and its United Express (UAX) partners (United).

So they acknowledge that the regulation requires them to provide compensation also for flights going to Canada.

it makes sense as this is a round trip journey and ticket was purchased in Canada and the fact that this is a US carrier doesn’t exclude them from the local rules and regulations in the operating country.

kiloohm

The APPR does not have any jurisdiction for operations within the US. The impacted flights were operated by UA from the US to Canada.

jsloan

It may make sense to you. It does not make sense to me. There’s a reason that EC.261 was written to exclude flights to Europe — either the legislators didn’t feel that they had legal standing or they didn’t think the laws would be able to be enforced.

(FWIW, I oppose APPR, EC.261, and all similar regulations, although at least APPR does not provide a financial incentive to airlines to fly broken planes, as EC.261 does). Anyway, just because UA has put a notice up on their website does not mean that they immediately agree to pay all claims.

Regardless, what you or I think is irrelevant. Either they will pay your claim, or they will refuse, and if they refuse to pay, then you can sue and a court will decide. At the moment, you’ve done all that you can, and running around Denver looking for someone to give you a status update is a waste of your time. There’s an entire department that deals with this kind of compensation, and they don’t have representatives at airports — they’re back-office staff in either Chicago or Houston, most likely.

Oh, sure it tries to. If you fly AUS-ORD-YYZ, and you misconnect at ORD due to a delay from AUS, you’re really going to argue that APPR doesn’t apply? And those are operations within the US.

Heck, even the decision to operate, or not to operate, ORD-YYZ is made within the US.

Just because Canada’s parliament passed a law does not mean that it is enforceable.

stevendorechester

It's enforceable in Canada. I' m pretty sure that if the US decided to pass such a law it would be the same in the US. US laws are not strict enough. For example I have never understood why IDB compensation does not apply on flights inbound to the US.

While I do not support any compensation for delays except in limited circumstances ( no airline should be forced to pay compensation when a decision is made on safety) I do support laws that require airlines to pay compensation for denied boarding and not only for oversales but for any reason where the passenger is not at fault.

What I do support are clear rules that require airlines to reroute on the available flight on any airline on the case of IROPs within the airline's control. In the long run this saves airlines money anyway. For example if DL rebooks on AA one day and the opposit the next day instead of putting people in a hotel until their next flight, then it cancels each other out. If one airline is spending more because they have more IROPS then it's up to managers to have have as many IROPS.

jsloan

And if UA refuses to pay? Do you expect the Mounties to block the runway and seize a UA jet?

Sovereignty is a funny thing. The US might get away with violating other countries' sovereignty in a way that Canada might not. It isn't just, but it's true.

Presumably because there are legitimate questions about whether or not the US actually has jurisdiction.

What other reasons might there be? Anyway, oversales are sadly a thing of the past. They were very much win/win -- customers got lower fares and airlines got higher profits -- until he who shall not be named came along. UA's "don't oversell the plane" policy is likely a prime contributor to their refusal to offer discount fares in advance. I'd estimate the lack of overbooking has cost me $5-10K in lost vouchers (cumulatively) and probably another $5K in higher airfares.

Each regulation that requires the airlines to give compensation for something reaches into my pocket. Hence, why I'm opposed. (Don't get me wrong -- I pray for delays on flights covered by these rules. I want to hit the delay jackpot too! But if I were in charge, they'd be a thing of the past).

So your assertion is that the airlines are too incompetent to do this calculation for themselves? The reason that this doesn't actually happen is, of course, that you're incorrect: it's cheaper to pay for a hotel stay and keep somebody on your airline than it is to put them onto another airline.

lsquare

Yep, and I can list cases where the US has lost to Canada via the NAFTA tribunal, and yet, the US still played hardball with Canada. Eventually, they signed a deal and Canada ended litigation against the US. Life isn't always fair...