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
Jan 20, 2013, 6:02 pm
#751
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 123
Whatever
It exists in name. Only. Trademark (in legal talk). Exists as much as Jaguar and Range Rover exist.
PM Contracts are null and void after the merger. And there were never actual "contracts" with flyers. Only given privileges and a whole bunch of small letters including "this is subject to change whenever".
Change happened. Live with it or move on.
It exists in name. Only. Trademark (in legal talk). Exists as much as Jaguar and Range Rover exist.
PM Contracts are null and void after the merger. And there were never actual "contracts" with flyers. Only given privileges and a whole bunch of small letters including "this is subject to change whenever".
Change happened. Live with it or move on.
A company's contracts do not become null & void simply because it merged.
Jan 20, 2013, 6:04 pm
#752
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,358
Whatever
It exists in name. Only. Trademark (in legal talk). Exists as much as Jaguar and Range Rover exist.
PM Contracts are null and void after the merger. And there were never actual "contracts" with flyers. Only given privileges and a whole bunch of small letters including "this is subject to change whenever".
Change happened. Live with it or move on.
-
Moreover, if your statements were correct, there would not be four class actions in the courts naming UA as a defendant for breaching agreements with customers.
-
Last edited by dgcpaphd; Jan 20, 2013 at 6:09 pm
Jan 20, 2013, 6:09 pm
#753
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
well lets hope its successful!
perhaps someone can do the same with Air Canada its got 10 years of broken promises!
perhaps someone can do the same with Air Canada its got 10 years of broken promises!
Jan 20, 2013, 6:46 pm
#754
Moderator: Mileage Run, United Airlines; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The City/Honolulu
Programs: UA 3MM; Hyatt Glob*****; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,473
Let's try something:
Substitute "PanAm" or "TWA" for "United" in this thread. And then talk about "broken promises".
The "United" that made those promises, exists as much as "PanAm" and "TWA" exist.
A name
Different legal entity now. (United Continental Holdings)
Move on.
Substitute "PanAm" or "TWA" for "United" in this thread. And then talk about "broken promises".
The "United" that made those promises, exists as much as "PanAm" and "TWA" exist.
A name
Different legal entity now. (United Continental Holdings)
Move on.
Jan 20, 2013, 7:58 pm
#755
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: MRY
Programs: UA Platinum 2MM(BIS)
Posts: 181
"Continental’s Infinite Elite members (the limited few of you that earned this back in the early 90’s) will be grandfathered in and given lifetime Premier 1K status, but without the GPUs."
Jan 20, 2013, 8:19 pm
#756
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
Whatever
It exists in name. Only. Trademark (in legal talk). Exists as much as Jaguar and Range Rover exist.
PM Contracts are null and void after the merger. And there were never actual "contracts" with flyers. Only given privileges and a whole bunch of small letters including "this is subject to change whenever".
Change happened. Live with it or move on.
It exists in name. Only. Trademark (in legal talk). Exists as much as Jaguar and Range Rover exist.
PM Contracts are null and void after the merger. And there were never actual "contracts" with flyers. Only given privileges and a whole bunch of small letters including "this is subject to change whenever".
Change happened. Live with it or move on.
Jan 20, 2013, 9:38 pm
#757
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ORD
Programs: AA EXP,2MM, DL Gold,Starwood PLT
Posts: 3,876
Whatever
It exists in name. Only. Trademark (in legal talk). Exists as much as Jaguar and Range Rover exist.
PM Contracts are null and void after the merger. And there were never actual "contracts" with flyers. Only given privileges and a whole bunch of small letters including "this is subject to change whenever".
Change happened. Live with it or move on.
It exists in name. Only. Trademark (in legal talk). Exists as much as Jaguar and Range Rover exist.
PM Contracts are null and void after the merger. And there were never actual "contracts" with flyers. Only given privileges and a whole bunch of small letters including "this is subject to change whenever".
Change happened. Live with it or move on.
Jan 20, 2013, 9:42 pm
#758
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,631
It was always a contract. Once you sold me a bill of goods and I bought them, it was a contract, no matter what the "we can F you without notice and you will thank us and go away" language that may be deep down in the print. These programs are billion dollar profit centers for the industry. It is a contract. Otherwise, it is nothing more than an amusement game where the claw will never ever ever catch a stuffed animal.
And more, why are mileage program liabilities accounting liabilities/expenses if they are really phony and can be eliminated at once for whatever reason?
Last edited by iluv2fly; Jan 20, 2013 at 9:57 pm Reason: merge
Jan 20, 2013, 10:54 pm
#759
Join Date: Jun 2012
Programs: UA
Posts: 56
It was always a contract. Once you sold me a bill of goods and I bought them, it was a contract, no matter what the "we can F you without notice and you will thank us and go away" language that may be deep down in the print. These programs are billion dollar profit centers for the industry. It is a contract. Otherwise, it is nothing more than an amusement game where the claw will never ever ever catch a stuffed animal.
Since when is a bonus program / miles program considered a 'bill of goods'?
quick hypothetical question:
If all airlines were to eliminate their FFP overnight, would you stop flying?
Jan 20, 2013, 11:18 pm
#760
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ORD
Programs: AA EXP,2MM, DL Gold,Starwood PLT
Posts: 3,876
I always assumed the 'contract' or the 'bill of goods' was to transport people from point A to point B.
Since when is a bonus program / miles program considered a 'bill of goods'?
quick hypothetical question:
If all airlines were to eliminate their FFP overnight, would you stop flying?
Since when is a bonus program / miles program considered a 'bill of goods'?
quick hypothetical question:
If all airlines were to eliminate their FFP overnight, would you stop flying?
Jan 20, 2013, 11:57 pm
#761
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago USA
Programs: *A Junkie, SQ PPS, Skywards Gold, 2 Million Mile Flyer;*wood LT Plat, BA MM
Posts: 1,762
If UA were to end their FF program, the airline would cease to exist because the liabilities are enormous.
In any business, IN MY OPINION, you can't promise LIFETIME benefits year after year, decade after decade, and then change it. Benefits that have to be earned over time by spending a lot of money with the company. No matter how many asterisks - LIFETIME means exactly a LIFETIME.
If one goes online and reads Smisek's contract, it states ALL his benefits. One of the words used the most? Yes, you got it, LIFETIME. In the contract there isn't a seperate paragraph stating what the definition of LIFETIME means. Why? Because LIFETIME means exactly what the word means: for the life of the person or the life of the company.
What the new United did to all PM UA MP members - those gunning for 1 MM status or above, was immoral, slimy, and just plain bad business. I think it's wonderful we live in a country where a person can take a Goliath to court and fight for what he believes is fair and just.
Will I be disappointed if UA wins this? Yes of course. But kudos to the one who had the guts to file not only for himself but for the rest of us. This will also give a precedent to other airlines/companies as to what "LIFETIME" means - this is more important than just the PM UA MMiler Program.
UG
PS I wouldn't mind being 1K for life and not get the SWUs (re: IEs).
Jan 21, 2013, 12:19 am
#762
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ORD
Programs: AA EXP,2MM, DL Gold,Starwood PLT
Posts: 3,876
Those "beanies" are NOT free, they are included in the price of EVERY ticket. I'm not an accountant, but this I know. Also, FF programs are in every airlines' balance sheets (those with accounting knowledge can get deeper into this), again it has been discussed ad nauseum on here.
If UA were to end their FF program, the airline would cease to exist because the liabilities are enormous.
In any business, IN MY OPINION, you can't promise LIFETIME benefits year after year, decade after decade, and then change it. Benefits that have to be earned over time by spending a lot of money with the company. No matter how many asterisks - LIFETIME means exactly a LIFETIME.
If one goes online and reads Smisek's contract, it states ALL his benefits. One of the words used the most? Yes, you got it, LIFETIME. In the contract there isn't a seperate paragraph stating what the definition of LIFETIME means. Why? Because LIFETIME means exactly what the word means: for the life of the person or the life of the company.
What the new United did to all PM UA MP members - those gunning for 1 MM status or above, was immoral, slimy, and just plain bad business. I think it's wonderful we live in a country where a person can take a Goliath to court and fight for what he believes is fair and just.
Will I be disappointed if UA wins this? Yes of course. But kudos to the one who had the guts to file not only for himself but for the rest of us. This will also give a precedent to other airlines/companies as to what "LIFETIME" means - this is more important than just the PM UA MMiler Program.
UG
PS I wouldn't mind being 1K for life and not get the SWUs (re: IEs).
If UA were to end their FF program, the airline would cease to exist because the liabilities are enormous.
In any business, IN MY OPINION, you can't promise LIFETIME benefits year after year, decade after decade, and then change it. Benefits that have to be earned over time by spending a lot of money with the company. No matter how many asterisks - LIFETIME means exactly a LIFETIME.
If one goes online and reads Smisek's contract, it states ALL his benefits. One of the words used the most? Yes, you got it, LIFETIME. In the contract there isn't a seperate paragraph stating what the definition of LIFETIME means. Why? Because LIFETIME means exactly what the word means: for the life of the person or the life of the company.
What the new United did to all PM UA MP members - those gunning for 1 MM status or above, was immoral, slimy, and just plain bad business. I think it's wonderful we live in a country where a person can take a Goliath to court and fight for what he believes is fair and just.
Will I be disappointed if UA wins this? Yes of course. But kudos to the one who had the guts to file not only for himself but for the rest of us. This will also give a precedent to other airlines/companies as to what "LIFETIME" means - this is more important than just the PM UA MMiler Program.
UG
PS I wouldn't mind being 1K for life and not get the SWUs (re: IEs).
Jan 21, 2013, 2:27 am
#763
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
BTW, the Contract of Carriage does not cover the contractual relationship between Mileage Plus and the passengers.
Jan 21, 2013, 2:31 am
#764
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
I think it would be so much easier and less drama if they just ended the million milier program - status should be based on what you fly and this program was just a perk that has way to much emotion - I think everyone would be happier if they just ended it.
Jan 21, 2013, 3:01 am
#765
Join Date: Jun 2012
Programs: UA
Posts: 56
When you buy a product from UA, namely a service of transportation from point A to point B, you are governed by the contract of carriage to receive such service/good. If, as a bonus, you receive extra items outside of such contract of carriage (as an extra benefit), and is not binding in the sale of said service/good, how does that entitle the customer to claim the service/good was not met if they reached their destination? Isn't anything above and beyond such said service/good just a bonus?
How are the 'beanies not free' and 'included in the price'? Can you elaborate how you know this, because it is not as obvious to me.
Where does it state this? Under what conditions?
How is a S fare different from a T fare, or from a K fare from the perspective of getting a person from point A to point B, all within the same class of service? The plane still moves your butt and luggage (presumably with the same mass no matter the fare class).
Also, from a historical perspective, in what I assume was the start of FFP back in the early 80's, what happened in the 'contract' between airlines and customers such that it is different now?
Before FFPs, certainly the concept of moving people from point A to point B has not changed, therefore how has that particular sale of goods/service changed now that it is 30 years later?
If you take the perspective of a person who experienced flying before FFPs existed, can you honestly state that FFP benefits are now a guaranteed right of the flyer, when you still get to where you are going as the main purchase (but probably a little faster)?