Oct 1, 2013, 3:03 pm
Last edit by: Ari
PLEASE READ FIRST: WIKIPOST and MODERATOR NOTE
MODERATOR NOTE:
Please note: Insensitive or attacking posts, discussion about other posters and their motives, and other off-topic posts/comments are not allowed, per FlyerTalk Rules.
--> If you have a question or comment about moderation, use the "Alert a Moderator" button
left of every post, or send a PM. Do not post such comments/questions on-thread. Thank you.
N.B. Please do not alter the above message.
--> If you have a question or comment about moderation, use the "Alert a Moderator" button
left of every post, or send a PM. Do not post such comments/questions on-thread. Thank you. N.B. Please do not alter the above message.
• • • • •
[Please post
NLY status updates and relevant Q&A here.]Plaintiff: George Lagen, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Defendant: United Continental Holdings, Inc. and United Airlines, Inc.
Filed In The United States District Court For The Northern District Of Illinois Eastern Division
Case No. 1:12-cv-04056
Filed: 05/24/2012
Judge Harry D. Leinenweber
Magistrate Judge Young B. Kim
Proposed class: All persons, as of midnight, December 31, 2011, who were members of the Million Mile Program under United Airlines’ Mileage Plus frequent flyer program.
Filings/rulings can be found on www.pacer.gov (requires registration)
12 June 2012 - Amended Class Action Complaint filed
Spring 2013 - Court denies United's request to close case
Spring 2013 - Plaintiff files for suit to become a class action, United asks Judge before he decides if there could be limited discovery (which typically happens after case becomes class-action). Judge allows it.
August 2013 - Depositions/Limited Discovery completed and transcripts were handed over to the court.
22 October 2013 - Pursuant to an order of the Court, both sides filed cross-motions for summary judgment:
Plaintiff contends that he is a United pre-merger Million Miler, that United promised Million Miler fliers certain lifetime benefits on its web site, including two regional upgrades every year and Premier Executive status, which provided certain delineated benefits (e.g., 100% mileage bonus). Plaintiff cites deposition testimony from United stating "lifetime" means: "as long as they were really able to fly … as long as someone is coming on a plane and alive and capable of flying." Plaintiff concludes by stating that United has breached its contract with its pre-merger Million Miler fliers by reducing the lifetime benefits they were promised.
United contends in its motion that Million Miler is part of the MileagePlus program, that United reserved the right to make any changes it wishes to the MileagePlus program, and that the changes it made that plaintiff now complains of are therefore contractually permissible. United does not admit, and does not address, the "lifetime" benefit statements that it made on its website.
23 January 2014 - Judge denies Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and grants United's cross-motion for summary judgment. Judgment entered in favor of United.
The Judge begins his Opinion with a quote from Job: “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” and then holds that Plaintiff has not produced any evidence that UA made him an offer to participate in a separate MM program.
The Court noted that: “The sum total of his evidence is vague references to ‘electronic and written correspondence’ from United, which, in both instances postdates his qualification as a Million Mile flyer and was not directed to him; and a 1997 Newsletter from United announcing the creation of the program he could not remember receiving. However the card he did receive from United, admitting him to MililionMile Flyer Program, shows that his new status is clearly a status within the Mileage Plus Frequent Flyer Program, as does the form letters United sent to applicants advising them of their admission to the MillionMile Flyer program. In fact, Plaintiff in his Complaint alleges that the MillionMile Flyer program was part of the Mileage Plus program. He has not produced any document that comes close to substantiating that the programs were separate and distinct."
Bottom line: The Court agreed with United's position that the Plaintiff had not proved the existence of a separate contract between itself and the Million Milers.
Full decision: http://media.wandr.me/MMerOpinion.pdf
20 February 2014
Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the trial court's decision. The record on appeal is due by March 13, 2014.
Appeal docs available at:
- http://media.wandr.me/UAL-MM-Appeal-filed-2-20-14.pdf
- http://media.wandr.me/UAL-MM-letter-of-appeal.pdf
8 September 2014
Oral arguments were heard by a three judge panel. Links to the original MP3 of the Court's recording and also some transcription can be found around post 2350 and for several more following that.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/23496499-post2361.html
22 December 2014
Affirmed over a dissent.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2014/D12-22/C:14-1375:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1474449:S:0
Million Miler Sues United [Judgment for UA Jan 2014] Judgment Affirmed Dec 2014
Sep 21, 2013, 4:15 pm
#1816
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Benicia CA
Programs: Alaska MVP Gold 75K, AA 3.8MM, UA 1.1MM, enjoying the retired life
Posts: 31,849
Isn't that everyone on UA, though, and not just million milers? I don't see that they're just targeting million milers when it comes to upgrade policy. Now, if you want to look at the loss of regional upgrades and 100% bonus miles that came with lifetime Premier Executive status, those are premeger UA million miler benefits I'd like restored.
Sep 22, 2013, 11:57 am
#1817
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
Isn't that everyone on UA, though, and not just million milers? I don't see that they're just targeting million milers when it comes to upgrade policy. Now, if you want to look at the loss of regional upgrades and 100% bonus miles that came with lifetime Premier Executive status, those are premeger UA million miler benefits I'd like restored.
Sep 22, 2013, 2:39 pm
#1818
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 5,696
The future trend is for CPUs to be even more scarce and probably only viable for GS and perhaps 1Ks IMHO.
Expecting satisfaction from this suit (thread topic) is another bad stock to wish on too
Sep 22, 2013, 3:49 pm
#1819
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,645
I appreciate the effort that is being made on my behalf in this suit, as a Million Mile + traveler who offered my loyalty to United virtually exclusively for 16 years.
I am, however, not awaiting an outcome.
I punish United every day in the marketplace, by withholding my loyalty from them.
When I started flying them in 1992, I was a deep discount economy flyer. Now, in 2013, about 90% of my travel is paid first class. United would have 100% share of that if they had continued to earn my loyalty.
Instead, I fly the airline that is most convenient, with the best service and the best fare for my purposes. That usually means Delta or American. If United is the clear winner, I fly them. They lose all ties, since they don't deserve to win.
By the way, I'm not loyal to American, or Delta, or Virgin America, or Eva, or Asiana, or Singapore, or Lufthansa either. Earn my business, earn my money, every time I fly. No more goodwill.
The airlines have made a carefully considered decision that they can retain many of the benefits to them of customer loyalty, while reducing the costs of providing them, mostly as the result of reduced competition. Good for them.
I'm just one tiny little irrelevant data point. My choice is meaningless to the airlines, but meaningful to me.
I hope the litigants clean United's clock, though I have no idea what the outcome will be. Hopefully they will get enough media attention to give them a good hard kick in the tender zone.
I am, however, not awaiting an outcome.
I punish United every day in the marketplace, by withholding my loyalty from them.
When I started flying them in 1992, I was a deep discount economy flyer. Now, in 2013, about 90% of my travel is paid first class. United would have 100% share of that if they had continued to earn my loyalty.
Instead, I fly the airline that is most convenient, with the best service and the best fare for my purposes. That usually means Delta or American. If United is the clear winner, I fly them. They lose all ties, since they don't deserve to win.
By the way, I'm not loyal to American, or Delta, or Virgin America, or Eva, or Asiana, or Singapore, or Lufthansa either. Earn my business, earn my money, every time I fly. No more goodwill.
The airlines have made a carefully considered decision that they can retain many of the benefits to them of customer loyalty, while reducing the costs of providing them, mostly as the result of reduced competition. Good for them.
I'm just one tiny little irrelevant data point. My choice is meaningless to the airlines, but meaningful to me.
I hope the litigants clean United's clock, though I have no idea what the outcome will be. Hopefully they will get enough media attention to give them a good hard kick in the tender zone.
Sep 23, 2013, 5:18 am
#1820
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
Just point out that someone keep saying that pmUA MMers should not get their LIFETIME benefits in this thread while someone feels he/she entitles compensations for some minor issues. The same person also claims that he/she entitles to take advantage of the UA 4 miles tickets while pmUA MMs should not get their HARD EARNED PROMISED LIFETIME BENEFITS. It's very interesting to see the double standard.
I never said you shouldn't get your lifetime benefits. I think it is more a question of those benefits changing over time.
I never asked for compensation from American. In fact I specifically asked for no compensation.
Yes, I feel once there is an agreement to buy/sell things people are entitled to the benefit of the bargain. Same goes for the people who bought tickets for $5/$10.
It's not a double standard. Buying an airline ticket is fundamentally different than getting something for free with the purchase of an airline ticket. Also, finally when you get around to reading the title of the thread, you'll notice that it talks about a lawsuit, so it is not really a question of what "should" you get but of what is legally enforceable. These can be two very different things.
Sep 23, 2013, 12:37 pm
#1821
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
How rude and condescending.
If they can change over time, they are not lifetime benefits.
English 101.
I have seen this same ridiculous argument repeatedly.
The Million Miler and frequent flier benefits are NOT free. I paid for them with my loyalty and fares paid resulting from that loyalty. I had a choice of carriers in most cases and chose United in no small part because of those benefits. Without them, my business would have gone elsewhere and those United benefits would have cost me nothing and been non-existent. Those frequent flier benefits are every bit as part of the fare as a seat and a "free" soft drink on board the aircraft.
United recognized this. There is a reason UA commenced a frequent flier program within weeks of American launching theirs.
True.
The only difference is that some of us are aware of what legally compensable damages exist here and some clearly are not.
I never said you shouldn't get your lifetime benefits. I think it is more a question of those benefits changing over time.
English 101.
Buying an airline ticket is fundamentally different than getting something for free with the purchase of an airline ticket.
The Million Miler and frequent flier benefits are NOT free. I paid for them with my loyalty and fares paid resulting from that loyalty. I had a choice of carriers in most cases and chose United in no small part because of those benefits. Without them, my business would have gone elsewhere and those United benefits would have cost me nothing and been non-existent. Those frequent flier benefits are every bit as part of the fare as a seat and a "free" soft drink on board the aircraft.
United recognized this. There is a reason UA commenced a frequent flier program within weeks of American launching theirs.
Also, finally when you get around to reading the title of the thread, you'll notice that it talks about a lawsuit, so it is not really a question of what "should" you get but of what is legally enforceable. These can be two very different things.
The only difference is that some of us are aware of what legally compensable damages exist here and some clearly are not.
Sep 23, 2013, 1:02 pm
#1822
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,243
Just like those old lounges, Premier Executive status doesn't exist anymore either. The delivery of the benefits most definitely can be changed to fit what is being offered at any given point in the future. That happens in loyalty programs the world over. There's no need for the condescending "English 101" response to what is a totally legitimate practical issue that needs to be addressed whenever a company is acquired or merges with another, resulting in a new set of products and services.
Sep 23, 2013, 1:35 pm
#1823
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
So what should lifetime Presidents Club members, or lifetime Red Carpet Club members have received - should (somehow) Continental and United be maintaining separate clubs solely for these members as they cannot be changed?
Just like those old lounges, Premier Executive status doesn't exist anymore either. The delivery of the benefits most definitely can be changed to fit what is being offered at any given point in the future. That happens in loyalty programs the world over. There's no need for the condescending "English 101" response to what is a totally legitimate practical issue that needs to be addressed whenever a company is acquired or merges with another, resulting in a new set of products and services.
Just like those old lounges, Premier Executive status doesn't exist anymore either. The delivery of the benefits most definitely can be changed to fit what is being offered at any given point in the future. That happens in loyalty programs the world over. There's no need for the condescending "English 101" response to what is a totally legitimate practical issue that needs to be addressed whenever a company is acquired or merges with another, resulting in a new set of products and services.
That IS English 101.
Sep 23, 2013, 1:38 pm
#1824
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,243
Many, many changes have occurred in this simple set of products alone. Have specific lifetime promised benefits been denied in this case?
Moving back to the MM benefits, are you proposing that MM fliers be stripped of all CPU benefits since that's a benefit now afforded to Premier Gold passengers that didn't exist when they earned the benefit?
Sep 23, 2013, 1:47 pm
#1825
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
Really? Sure, the headline benefits are the same (sound familiar?) but there are plenty of differences. What about lounges that closed after the purchase of the lifetime membership? There's a tangible benefit that's now gone. What about frequently changing benefits such as the inclusion (or indeed the quality) of alcohol What about changes in the opening hours? What about access to partner lounges? Indeed, what about new lounges that opened after purchase - should lifetime members be entitled to use those?
Many, many changes have occurred in this simple set of products alone. Have specific lifetime promised benefits been denied in this case?
Moving back to the MM benefits, are you proposing that MM fliers be stripped of all CPU benefits since that's a benefit now afforded to Premier Gold passengers that didn't exist when they earned the benefit?
Many, many changes have occurred in this simple set of products alone. Have specific lifetime promised benefits been denied in this case?
Moving back to the MM benefits, are you proposing that MM fliers be stripped of all CPU benefits since that's a benefit now afforded to Premier Gold passengers that didn't exist when they earned the benefit?
As to the CPU "benefit", however, at 0 for 17 this year for me, it is not much of a benefit for a Gold anyway.
Sep 23, 2013, 1:54 pm
#1826
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: US
Programs: AA/UA/DL
Posts: 2,773
Really? Sure, the headline benefits are the same (sound familiar?) but there are plenty of differences. What about lounges that closed after the purchase of the lifetime membership? There's a tangible benefit that's now gone. What about frequently changing benefits such as the inclusion (or indeed the quality) of alcohol What about changes in the opening hours? What about access to partner lounges? Indeed, what about new lounges that opened after purchase - should lifetime members be entitled to use those?
Moreover, the merged airlines still use the name of United and we were PROMISED LIFETIME BENEFITS under the name of
UNITED AIRLINES.
A wife changes her name won't change the LIFETIME PROMISE between the husband and wife.
Sep 23, 2013, 1:54 pm
#1827
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DCA
Programs: UA Gold
Posts: 1,653
So you are OK with MM flyers not being eligible for CPUs?
Sep 23, 2013, 2:01 pm
#1828
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,243
If that's nonsense then there may be a bigger hole in the argument than you realise
Sep 23, 2013, 2:03 pm
#1829
Used to be MBS PremExec
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Saginaw, MI (MBS)
Programs: UA 1K 1.9MM, Marriott Titanium w/Lifetime Plat, Hilton LIfetime ♢, National Exec, Amex Plat
Posts: 5,722
Sep 23, 2013, 2:05 pm
#1830
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
Post noted, no comment.
There is a question of whether or not you were promised benefits generally or specific benefits. Cases succeed and fail on such linguistic turns.
Post noted, no comment.
It's not a question of what's true, but what can you prove. Do you have any evidence that supports these assertions? When I buy a ticket, FF miles are never mentioned in the fare.
If you read my posts I point the CR-1s/RPUs as clearly defined damages. Of course class action attorneys can't eat CR-1s if you get my drift.
Post noted, no comment.
The Million Miler and frequent flier benefits are NOT free. I paid for them with my loyalty and fares paid resulting from that loyalty. I had a choice of carriers in most cases and chose United in no small part because of those benefits. Without them, my business would have gone elsewhere and those United benefits would have cost me nothing and been non-existent. Those frequent flier benefits are every bit as part of the fare as a seat and a "free" soft drink on board the aircraft.
United recognized this. There is a reason UA commenced a frequent flier program within weeks of American launching theirs.
United recognized this. There is a reason UA commenced a frequent flier program within weeks of American launching theirs.
If you read my posts I point the CR-1s/RPUs as clearly defined damages. Of course class action attorneys can't eat CR-1s if you get my drift.