UA mistake award redemption rates for China travel [UA says will void tickets]
Jul 16, 2012, 10:58 am
#406
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tucson, AZ, USA. UA 1K, reluctant but * best in class * DL FO/MM. Former BA jumpseat rider and scourge of Dilbertian management and apologists. As LX might - and do - say: "....an experienced frequent flyer of international airlines"
Posts: 3,386
Deja vu... didn't we have all of this not two months ago wrt F fares from Asia? Remember, "KE will never honor all those hundreds of F suites," "cost of small sedans" etc etc. Yet I see lots of people transiting RGN as we speak, writing TRs, now the furore on that one has died down.
Another thing. It's not immaterial that people are already flying these. Social media affects the legal calculus.
In the past, lack of access to information meant that consumers would be isolated without knowledge of what others did or how the vendor responded. The authorities wouldn't know, either, because the airline/vendor functioned as the information conduit and could effectively prevent a full inventory from being inspected.
The new information-rich environment is legally material. It means that the calculus on class action is very different that it used to be when corporations could rely on suppressing information and holding litigants to NDAs.
A corporate lawyer in these situations must assume that if differential responses are enacted, i.e. some people flew on these while others, purchased same time, same channel, same fare, were revoked and denied boarding, that it will inevitably result in a class action suit. The lawyer must realize that people are in contact with one another over social media and will be in a position to present documentation of other people's travels, supporting their case with incontrovertible hard evidence like names, times, e-ticket numbers etc. This would be devastating to a defense presenting a case that consumers were being treated equably.
That would potentially be more damaging than all the fines assessable from individual violations.
They know this. And so do we. Game theory analysis works well when all parties know clearly the rules of the game, including each other's likely access to information and evidence.
If the potential damage is too large, better to suck it up this time.
Hey, I haven't even been to RGN yet on any of mine. And what jouissance it would be, to position via HKG on one of these
Another thing. It's not immaterial that people are already flying these. Social media affects the legal calculus.
In the past, lack of access to information meant that consumers would be isolated without knowledge of what others did or how the vendor responded. The authorities wouldn't know, either, because the airline/vendor functioned as the information conduit and could effectively prevent a full inventory from being inspected.
The new information-rich environment is legally material. It means that the calculus on class action is very different that it used to be when corporations could rely on suppressing information and holding litigants to NDAs.
A corporate lawyer in these situations must assume that if differential responses are enacted, i.e. some people flew on these while others, purchased same time, same channel, same fare, were revoked and denied boarding, that it will inevitably result in a class action suit. The lawyer must realize that people are in contact with one another over social media and will be in a position to present documentation of other people's travels, supporting their case with incontrovertible hard evidence like names, times, e-ticket numbers etc. This would be devastating to a defense presenting a case that consumers were being treated equably.
That would potentially be more damaging than all the fines assessable from individual violations.
They know this. And so do we. Game theory analysis works well when all parties know clearly the rules of the game, including each other's likely access to information and evidence.
If the potential damage is too large, better to suck it up this time.
Hey, I haven't even been to RGN yet on any of mine. And what jouissance it would be, to position via HKG on one of these
Last edited by redtailshark; Jul 16, 2012 at 11:09 am
Jul 16, 2012, 11:02 am
#407
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, AA, DL
Posts: 7,418
Jul 16, 2012, 11:04 am
#409
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SJU
Programs: Amex FHR elite travel agent, Ritz Stars, Hyatt Prive, Four Seasons Preferred Partner and others
Posts: 1,520
Not a valid analogy since the actual cost of letting you fly might be very little whereas the bank in the above situation would be out a tangible $132.
Jul 16, 2012, 11:04 am
#410
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: AMEX PLT, AA PPro, Spire AMB
Posts: 1,617
Jul 16, 2012, 11:10 am
#411
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Danville, CA, USA;
Programs: UA 1MM, WN CP, Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Gold, IC Plat
Posts: 15,717
State law still applies to airline contracts in absence of preemption. Even with preemption, federal courts may look to state law if an issue isn't specifically addressed by federal statutes.
No miles are not currency. If they were, you would own them, not UA.
Not really. Federal courts, like state courts, often use the Restatement of Contracts for guidance to interpret contracts. The Restatement would apply equally to an amazon transaction as they would to purchase of an airline ticket. And the Restatement has specific guidance on unilateral mistakes - which is what we have here. See Restatement of Contracts (2d) , Section 153. Note that the UCC also provides guidance but does not apply to sale of services.
This demonstrates your complete lack of credibility on contract law.
Actually it is just that simple. If UA voids the contract, the buyer's remedy would be to sue for specific performance or damages. The former is unlikely because the court can adequately compensate the buyer for damages that result from UA backing out of the contract - assuming it was a valid contract in the first place.
DOT has previously stated that it won't regulate FF programs. At its heart this is simply an issue of how many FF miles are deducted from your account. So UA can offer two options: (1) pay the correct amount of miles shown in the chart (2) refund the miles deducted from your account and void the ticket. Both of these actions fall within UA's management of the FF program.
I know it's fun for you to think so, but I doubt UA lawyers are scrambling on the weekend to work on your little problem. If anyone is it would be an outside law firm on retainer. I very much doubt this item is at the top of anyone's list - they are running an airline with daily operational issues that take precedence over a few hundred FF tickets that were mispriced by the system.
As for your purchase of non-refundable add-on flights and/or hotels, the legal question would be whether you were reasonably entitled to rely on your ticket with United when you purchased other travel, and whether United should have reasonably foreseen that you would do so. Not looking good there, mate, though people traveling now or in the next few days would have a better argument.
No miles are not currency. If they were, you would own them, not UA.
You're comparing Apples to Oranges when you only know about bananas. I mean, you don;t even know enough about apples oranges to even compare them. Just stop. I'm not here to discuss Best Buy. This isn't a widget, and the people who bought the product have confirmed tickets. Even though your example is totally inapplicable to this situation in every respect, which makes me reluctant to even continue this discussion, if you want to try to make this into Best Buy, it's more like Best Buy chasing you to your car after you paid saying, "Wait, Wait, that TV was supposed to cost $800". And, the availability of the product is not in question here. You could not book it if it was not available. So, just stop.
Not only is your understanding of contract law non-existent. You're also ignoring federal law in it's entirety.
Not only is your understanding of contract law non-existent. You're also ignoring federal law in it's entirety.
I mean, you're right I'm being a jerk. But oversimplifications do annoy me more than they should. You're wrong in general about contract law. If they agree to sell it for X price, and you agree to purchase it, there's a contract. A potential defense to enforcement of that contract would be attempting to void it on the basis of mistake. But, obviously there are numerous factors in whether that defense can be used that go way beyond a message board discussion. If the defense was allowed to be used willy nilly no contract of any kind would be enforceable.
There are cases that say flyer ads in the paper and such cannot create a contract. If Best Buy is out of a TV advertised for $100, you do not have a right to purchase it. However, shaking hands with a best buy employee, paying for a specific product that is specifically represented to be in current inventory and signing the paperwork with a promise of future delivery is a different story. And then, the DOT rules make it even more complicated when you start talking about airline tickets.
In the British Airways case in the WSJ article linked earlier, a small claims judge gave the guy cover when BA voided his $50 ticket to India on the basis of mistake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_(law)) That is a concept that is in play here along with a whole bunch of others.
It's just not as simple as the merchant saying he doesn't have to go through with it. And forgive me, but it's ignorant to suggest that it is.
There are cases that say flyer ads in the paper and such cannot create a contract. If Best Buy is out of a TV advertised for $100, you do not have a right to purchase it. However, shaking hands with a best buy employee, paying for a specific product that is specifically represented to be in current inventory and signing the paperwork with a promise of future delivery is a different story. And then, the DOT rules make it even more complicated when you start talking about airline tickets.
In the British Airways case in the WSJ article linked earlier, a small claims judge gave the guy cover when BA voided his $50 ticket to India on the basis of mistake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_(law)) That is a concept that is in play here along with a whole bunch of others.
It's just not as simple as the merchant saying he doesn't have to go through with it. And forgive me, but it's ignorant to suggest that it is.
Well, DOT can't make anyone have a FF program, or force them to make it worth a crap. See, for example, Delta. But, they have every right to control regulations regarding issued tickets, regardless of the compensation that led to their issue. Just as if you showed up at the airport for an overbooked flight, it's not as if the airline can say "this is an award ticket, we're voiding it because we're overbooked". Admittedly I have no specific authority, but I believe once a confirmed ticket is issued the DOT rules apply to it.
It's another interesting issue that makes this clear as mud.
It's another interesting issue that makes this clear as mud.
Yes, there are lawyers frantically writing memos about every possible legal scenario, meetings about the numbers as mentioned above, etc. *** OTOH, they cancel all these flights and someone sues or it is otherwise definitively established that they had no legal right to cancel them (and someone will sue 
) , you are looking at an easily defined class and the rare class action where each Plaintiff could get more than 13 cents and a free ice cream cone.
One thing I will say to all the people saying "no way in hell", is that if it was cut and dry they could cancel the tickets, they'd have already done it and that would be the end of that. Going on 20 hours since they discovered the mistake, and yes, their lawyers work on Sunday.
) , you are looking at an easily defined class and the rare class action where each Plaintiff could get more than 13 cents and a free ice cream cone. One thing I will say to all the people saying "no way in hell", is that if it was cut and dry they could cancel the tickets, they'd have already done it and that would be the end of that. Going on 20 hours since they discovered the mistake, and yes, their lawyers work on Sunday.
As for your purchase of non-refundable add-on flights and/or hotels, the legal question would be whether you were reasonably entitled to rely on your ticket with United when you purchased other travel, and whether United should have reasonably foreseen that you would do so. Not looking good there, mate, though people traveling now or in the next few days would have a better argument.
Jul 16, 2012, 11:10 am
#412
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC, US
Posts: 74
All the customer service folks have been given a line to spew I'm sure.
Don't know if Pablo is telling the truth but damage control calls would be a logical starting point because anything people agree to voluntarily binds them regardless of what the true legal entitlement is determined to be later (if anything). I wouldn't be surprised to see a team of robots calling up and offering a voucher, space available upgrades or some other half decent token "as a courtesy for our inconvenience", in other words "the least we think the average person will take to get us out of this mess".
Don't know if Pablo is telling the truth but damage control calls would be a logical starting point because anything people agree to voluntarily binds them regardless of what the true legal entitlement is determined to be later (if anything). I wouldn't be surprised to see a team of robots calling up and offering a voucher, space available upgrades or some other half decent token "as a courtesy for our inconvenience", in other words "the least we think the average person will take to get us out of this mess".
I think it's a judgment call because even though I think the law is technically on our side, I wouldn't be surprised to see DOT let them weasel out of it somehow because the error is so obvious. I mean, if I didn't actually have a trip to Asia planned for next month and I had just booked it because I could, I might say a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and take a voucher or something.
In my situation, it would take quite a generous offer from UA for me to cancel these voluntarily given that I already have a Delta ticket to SIN I can cancel for $300.
Jul 16, 2012, 11:14 am
#413
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,259
Buying seats for 4 miles? That's entirely different. Airlines can print as many miles as they want, and as long as the miles are used for redeeming seats that would otherwise go empty, printing those miles don't "cost" the airline anything, and can earn extremely valuable loyalty. I don't even think airlines have to account for issued FF miles on their financial statements (but I could be wrong).
Airlines fly seats without making money all the time. Award seats, employee seats, other non-revs, goodwill, etc. This fare is a lot of things, but it ain't anywhere near the same as taking money from a malfunctioning ATM. Or driving off the lot with a Hyundai.
Jul 16, 2012, 11:14 am
#414
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Programs: UA-1Kmm, AA-EX Plt mm-, Hilton Diamond,
Posts: 1,093
Has UA blocked searching for all award inventory ex HKG? I have been trying all day to look for award at regular rates. It does not show me any flights at all. I can't find a single one way flight departing 14 April to US gateway cities at any award price.
Jul 16, 2012, 11:16 am
#415
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ORD
Posts: 869
Apparently <10 people have booked successful US-China tickets this way, insider info.
Jul 16, 2012, 11:16 am
#416
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
I can recall airlines having sales knocking 5,000 miles off their normal awards, but not a single one offering international awards for anything near 4 miles. Can you cite some instances where award tickets, heavily discounted like these, have been honored? I think we're breaking new ground and the suits in Chicago are trying to sort out a response this morning. If honored, it basically means everyone flies for free and that could take a hit on the bottom line (and we know this airline loves every penny of revenue they can generate).
Jul 16, 2012, 11:16 am
#417
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SJU
Programs: Amex FHR elite travel agent, Ritz Stars, Hyatt Prive, Four Seasons Preferred Partner and others
Posts: 1,520
They actually do, but they are valued at an extremely low level, i.e. just the marginal costs of handling an additional passenger and often only at increments of 25k miles (or some other redeemable increment).
Jul 16, 2012, 11:23 am
#420
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: YHU
Posts: 77
A little bit off the track but anyone in the same situation?
I got ticketed on QR metal to HKG next May/June, which is kinda impossible according to UA's termination of the partnership, however IT IS TICKETED in UA bucket.
So, can I get a ride from QR even if the party is finally honored? LOL
Dennis
I got ticketed on QR metal to HKG next May/June, which is kinda impossible according to UA's termination of the partnership, however IT IS TICKETED in UA bucket.
So, can I get a ride from QR even if the party is finally honored? LOL
Dennis