veeRob

Completely unfair for United to want to cancel this >24 hours with no penalty. I'm pretty sure if I book a flight and 3 days later call United to tell them I made a mistake and didn't mean to click Book, I wouldn't get a refund. Why should they be off the hook just because they made a mistake?

alex_b

Is anyone aware of this being tested in a court of law? I know they have cancelled accounts and I know their contract says they can do anything they like whenever they like it with no liability whatsoever, but is there a judgement that afirms this stance.

Whenever I see 'we have all the rights, you have none' consumer contracts such as the United one posted earlier I am suspicious about whether it is any way enforceable under either common law principals or many consumer protection laws.

sbm12

That is actually not what the law says.
Because it would have cost me a sufficient amount in the change fee that it wasn't worth it. Such is life some times.
It is not currently clear whether the rules regarding mistake fares apply to award tickets or not. It is also not currently clear whether being charged only the taxes rather than the listed taxes and miles qualifies as being paid in full, the condition the DoT sets for defining whether the transaction is complete and covered by their rules.

I do not believe that is at all clear.
Really? Case to provide a cite from the DoT in that regard?

I do not believe that it is at all clear.

Maybe, maybe not. If we're talking about rules vis a vis the DoT then, IMO, the relevant line is "A purchase is deemed to have occurred when the full amount agreed upon has been paid by the consumer." Charging your CC for the taxes is certainly part of the full amount agreed upon. But it is not, IMO, a clear cut issue at all.
I disagree regarding the precedent and the clarity of the law. There is no clarity as to whether tickets purchased by FF points rather than cash are covered by the rule or not. My bet is that they are, but I do not believe there is any precedence or clarity here yet. I also believe that there is some confusion regarding "the full amount agreed upon" and what that means in a case where two prices were clearly listed on the purchase page, one was shown on a receipt and the points weren't debited.

I hope you're not including me in this category. It would be demonstrably false in at least two ways.
While I think this is the best course of action I see no certainty on the outcome at this point. I do believe that UA considered that before coming to the decision they did so they must think they can get away with it, even with the DoT rules.

@:-)

I'll take that bet. I'll even give you odds.

Are you saying that there is no competition for air service to HKG from the USA? Or within the USA in general??

Lack

It should be clear. Ticket is a ticket, if we begin to question that, then we might distinigish cash paid vs credit card paid ticket - agent issued, or direct airlines issued etc. There should be no discussion here - and at least in EU, there is none - a valid ticket is a valid ticket no matter how you paid for it.

I think the law is pretty clear not distingishing methods of payment. Award tickets aren't standby or similar based, they shouldn't be treated anyway different.

chinatraderjmr

I think everyone is missing the point. Airlines in general (and American carriers specifically) are just about the greediest business' around. They will fight tooth and nail even before giving a customer back $1 when they are entitled to it ( lost bag claims, hotel expenses, etc). Airlines break the law thousands of times a day and get away with it. Regardless of what is right and what is wrong, or legal , not legal, UA is going to do what it wants and let the chips fall where they may. Those of you telling the guy he should go to Hong Kong tomorrow are being irresponsible. I doubt UA will leave him stranded but am pretty sure they will deduct the correct miles, even if it brings his account to a negative. Those of you that got tickets for future travel are crazy to think UA will honor them. They will try to give the choice of deducting the full mileage or a refund "with fees waved" (I love that line. The balls they have for suggesting that they are doing you a favor by not honoring the tickets). For those of you that stand fast and refuse to accept UA's kind offer of a full refund of the 6 miles + fees and taxes, UA will probably offer some kind of apology with miles, or a reduced rate, etc. for those of us that don't have enough miles to cover the full cost, they may even allow accounts to go into negative numbers. But barring all that, if UA won't honor the tickets, no one is going to "make" UA fly them anywhere. Sure, we could sue them and I'm sure they know that. But by the time the case is heard, your flight will have departed long ago. The worst thing that happens then is UA loses the suit and is forced to give you a new tkt. big deal, they would have done that anyway by honoring them in the first place. It's a numbers game. If UA issued 100 of these tickets and don't honor them how many people will take this all the way to court? 25? If UA loses these suits somewhere down the road (years perhaps), they still win in the long run....Unfortunatly, they usually do.

+10000. Really, and you wonder why they used the word "over entitled". UA should offer a nice apology w some miles. For those unwilling to work w UA and throw out threats and law suits, UA should do the one thing it has the right to do for "any" reason; start shutting down accounts!!!

sbm12

I agree that it should be clear and I believe that ultimately the DoT will come to the same conclusion that a ticket is a ticket. But I do not believe that said position is definitively clear at this time.

dsquared37

Indeed, but they haven't.

At the moment many posters here are hemming and hawing and UA is saying we'll give you back money without cancellation fees. Oh, how generous they are.

Should UA offer a sweetener I'm sure they'd find many will cave in and take the offer. There will always be diehards in any situation and UA hasn't garnered any kind of good-will among the general population recently. It's time they conceded something more than nothing.

Again, I don't have a dog in this race, but it sure is fun to watch.

SFO777

+1
Exactly what I was thinking. "I was playing golf, mowing the lawn, etc. and missed the fun. I sure as hell don't want someone getting a deal that I missed."

Two months ago, Korean Airlines took the same "so sorry but no way we can honor our mistake fare" initial position as UA. It didn't take the DOT long to change that tune.

apk123

For those saying that UA's decision means they know something about what DOT would do, don't forget that they sold a lot of tickets that don't touch the US, so they would save money from mass cancellation no matter what DOT decides. And even if everything were US-based, 90% probability of having to honor the tickets is better than 100% probability. UA has proved over and over again that they place no value on brand reputation. They just stranded people in china for three days for god sake, what kind of airline is this?

Also the tickets weren't for 4 miles they were for 4 miles + $50 (for example). I've seen published fares where the base fare is $0 and the total price consists only of "taxes and fees". So what's wrong with an award for 4 miles + "taxes and fees"?

Cargojon

I don't have a dog in this race, but I'd be curious as to how much $ UA has at stake here.

Is it really worth the negative PR / backlash from some of your most loyal customers?

My personal opinion is that DoT is going to make them honor it. But that's my uneducated opinion, others may disagree and are free to do so.

Popcorn in hand, I'll be following this one....

csd97tj

I got in on this with the same mindset as when buying a $200 million lottery ticket, knowing the chances of it happening was highly unlikely. I am not out anything when they cancel the ticket. It was fun to play.

A poster above mentioned that United is looking at it as a billing error not a pricing error. I have not read of anyone saying the pricing screen showed these as being priced at 4 mi. When I booked them, the pricing showed a much higher amount than 4 mi, and i assume it did for everyone. If when booking it had shown the price at 4mi and the billing was for 4mi it would be a completely different ball game when they cancel the tickets.

kokonutz

I also agree with many here that UNITED's "choice" approach is savvy in that it will cause quite a few folks to cancel or agree to cancel their purchased, booked and confirmed ticket 'voluntarily'. That's a 'free' limit of the scope of their liability. They won't start actually contacting people until they see how effective just putting the notion out there that choices are limited is at getting folks to cancel.

But at some point they will start contacting folks. And at some point someone will say 'no.'

Then if UA unilaterally cancels or unilaterally charges more miles and then the customer files with the DoT, we will see what the regulators think.

Speaking as someone who spends a lot of time with federal regulators, it is impossible to overstate how pro-consumer the mood in Washington is these days. I've had my butt handed to me several times on issues where companies I represent present an economic case only to have the regulators side 100% with the consumer.

I don't know where DoT will come down on this. But if I were going to bet $10,000, it would be on the side of the consumer.

As others have said, regulators tend to look at issues like this dispassionately and from the perspective of the consumer, NOT the perspective of the company. And they tend to be pretty rigid in that thinking.

That's just my experience. I would never dare to say I know for sure how they will see this.

My other strong agreement is with those who say this is a classic penny-wise, pound foolish matter. The patchwork of systems that UNITED has decided to go with was doomed to result in an outcome like this. These are the scenarios that management and risk consultants spend their lives preaching about. Penny wise, pound foolish. The chickens are roosting.

If they did something like that after a DoT ruling, you'd pretty quickly see a push for federal regulation of mileage and points programs. As I said, the mood in DC is pretty damn pro-consumer these days.

chinatraderjmr

What would really be nice is for people to stop posting what the DOT will or will not do. Is it really so hard just to put a little "IMO" infront of some of these posts. Anyone who says they know with 100% certainty what the DOT will or will not do is fooling themselves.

(I wrote this to late. I stand corrected as the posts above mine are very well written)

I think someone did sue AA a while back over a closed account. If my memory is correct AA won but they had good cause for closing the account. I believe the guy was obtaining mileage some way that was against the stated rules of the program. I don't think that's the same thing as having your account closed because your a nuisance.

myeurocrush

Has anyone actually been contacted by united yet?

SFO777

Based on post 3/3 actions, not sure this regime really cares about backlash from their most loyal customers, many of whom have already up and left for AA.