UAs Official Response to HKG Ticketing/IT Error: Redeem @ Correct Amount or Redeposit
Jul 31, 2012, 2:55 pm
#3181
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
Uhh, that would be a stupid defense, that would set them up for possibly losing more than they're being sued for! If you sue for $5000 (the maximum for small claims court in most states) that's enough for a nice ticket to Hong Kong.
Often times when you sue a major corporation in small claims court, they determine that the amount of money it would cost to defend themselves is greater than the amount they're being sued for and don't even bother showing up resulting in a default judgment for the plaintiff. Remember, they can't send their high profile attorney's to small claims court.
Often times when you sue a major corporation in small claims court, they determine that the amount of money it would cost to defend themselves is greater than the amount they're being sued for and don't even bother showing up resulting in a default judgment for the plaintiff. Remember, they can't send their high profile attorney's to small claims court.
A defendent not showing up does not automatically result in a default judgement for the plaintiff. You still have to prove your case based on evidence and law.
But ultimately - you can only sue for damages. And, you'll have to explain to a judge what your damages are. If your miles are returned and taxes/fees are refunded - you have no damages. If you want to argue about your cancelled ticket - it again goes back to damages - you don't have any. A small claims court can't make United fly you to Hong Kong - it can only award you money. To even have judge ponder this case - you'd have to prove United cancelled your ticket illegally and bringing up the DOT won't be applicable because DOT has guidelines - they don't make the law. You'll need to show your contract was violated (cancelled ticket) - but then again - it will go back to damages and since you've made whole with refunded fees you are out of luck.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:05 pm
#3182
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
As a landlord having been to small claims court a few times you should know:
A defendent not showing up does not automatically result in a default judgement for the plaintiff. You still have to prove your case based on evidence and law.
But ultimately - you can only sue for damages. And, you'll have to explain to a judge what your damages are. If your miles are returned and taxes/fees are refunded - you have no damages. If you want to argue about your cancelled ticket - it again goes back to damages - you don't have any. A small claims court can't make United fly you to Hong Kong - it can only award you money. To even have judge ponder this case - you'd have to prove United cancelled your ticket illegally and bringing up the DOT won't be applicable because DOT has guidelines - they don't make the law. You'll need to show your contract was violated (cancelled ticket) - but then again - it will go back to damages and since you've made whole with refunded fees you are out of luck.
A defendent not showing up does not automatically result in a default judgement for the plaintiff. You still have to prove your case based on evidence and law.
But ultimately - you can only sue for damages. And, you'll have to explain to a judge what your damages are. If your miles are returned and taxes/fees are refunded - you have no damages. If you want to argue about your cancelled ticket - it again goes back to damages - you don't have any. A small claims court can't make United fly you to Hong Kong - it can only award you money. To even have judge ponder this case - you'd have to prove United cancelled your ticket illegally and bringing up the DOT won't be applicable because DOT has guidelines - they don't make the law. You'll need to show your contract was violated (cancelled ticket) - but then again - it will go back to damages and since you've made whole with refunded fees you are out of luck.
However, since I paid for my ticket using milles through the MileagePlus program and United Airlines is the only company that accepts MileagePlus miles for payment. I would ask that the judge order United to rebook me at UA's expense.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:15 pm
#3183
In Memoriam
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Easton, CT, USA
Programs: ua prem exec, Former hilton diamond
Posts: 31,801
Contract damages are that you be made whole. What this means is that if UA is liable UA would owe you the difference between what you paid and the next best alternative, IE rebooking on another carrier.
However, since I paid for my ticket using milles through the MileagePlus program and United Airlines is the only company that accepts MileagePlus miles for payment. I would ask that the judge order United to rebook me at UA's expense.
However, since I paid for my ticket using milles through the MileagePlus program and United Airlines is the only company that accepts MileagePlus miles for payment. I would ask that the judge order United to rebook me at UA's expense.
I can just see the first case that actually gets in front of a judge. Hopefully a young judge, an old one will be laughing so hard they may have a heart attack.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:25 pm
#3184
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: LAS
Programs: UA 1MM, Marriott Lifetime Plat, Southwest A-List Preferred
Posts: 2,846
P.S:
I VERY MUCH want to know what really happend at UAL. Was this a hack? Unlike the RGN incident, where there was a currency conversion issue (which I can logically follow), I don't understand what "error" lead to this particular problem. And, in case anyone doesn't understand, I am not saying that UAL handled this well. I know that their PR people wrote things that were ultimately wrong, I know what their letters were unclear/inaccurate, etc. But that doesn't change my conclusions.
A friend of mine in Chicago works for UA corporate was over at my place on Saturday and we talked about what happened. They were not hacked.
I will check with him to see if he's ok with me explaining what happened.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:27 pm
#3185
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
Contract damages are that you be made whole. What this means is that if UA is liable UA would owe you the difference between what you paid and the next best alternative, IE rebooking on another carrier.
However, since I paid for my ticket using milles through the MileagePlus program and United Airlines is the only company that accepts MileagePlus miles for payment. I would ask that the judge order United to rebook me at UA's expense.
However, since I paid for my ticket using milles through the MileagePlus program and United Airlines is the only company that accepts MileagePlus miles for payment. I would ask that the judge order United to rebook me at UA's expense.
And with any small claims case, getting a judgment in your favor is fine. But then it's usually up to you to pursue actually getting the cold, hard cash in hand from the other party. That in itself is time and effort though again, it would only be the above refunds.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:31 pm
#3186
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
Contract damages are that you be made whole. What this means is that if UA is liable UA would owe you the difference between what you paid and the next best alternative, IE rebooking on another carrier.
However, since I paid for my ticket using milles through the MileagePlus program and United Airlines is the only company that accepts MileagePlus miles for payment. I would ask that the judge order United to rebook me at UA's expense.
However, since I paid for my ticket using milles through the MileagePlus program and United Airlines is the only company that accepts MileagePlus miles for payment. I would ask that the judge order United to rebook me at UA's expense.
For instance - If I signed a contract with you to install carpet for $1,000 - and you paid me for that service but I didn't do it - all a small claims court could do is make me give you back the $1,000 - not force me to install the carpet.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:33 pm
#3187
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Left
Programs: FT
Posts: 7,285
Best post so far out of the 3000+ posts. 99.99% of the people here are banking on the DOT ruling and if DOT stays silent they will just accept it. Nobody is going to file a lawsuit over the same (maybe they can go to small claims court). They are expecting it will be a repeat RGN scenario, but looks like DOT is getting wiser and although they do want to protect the consumers, they definitely don't want to put the airlines out of business. In case of RGN fares as well there was no need to rule in the favor of consumer but they still did and are now realizing that the intent of the rules they made were different than the ways they are getting applied.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:43 pm
#3188
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
First - you'll have the burden of proof based on your contract that United did not have the right to cancel your ticket. So lets say you break out your contract of carriage and the judge finds in your favor (which they won't) - but if they did - they can't order United to fly you - they don't have that power. Small claims court deals with monetary damages. A judge can only order United to refund the money you paid - just like any contract. It doesn't matter if this is United or any other company - a small claims court can't order a company to provide a service - just refund the money.
For instance - If I signed a contract with you to install carpet for $1,000 - and you paid me for that service but I didn't do it - all a small claims court could do is make me give you back the $1,000 - not force me to install the carpet.
For instance - If I signed a contract with you to install carpet for $1,000 - and you paid me for that service but I didn't do it - all a small claims court could do is make me give you back the $1,000 - not force me to install the carpet.
But you're wrong on what damages are and what being "made whole" means. What normally happens is that the plaintiff gets the "benefit of their deal." IE that the plaintiff would not only get the 1000.00 back but all so the difference that it cost the plaintiff to hire someone else to do it.
for example, if it costs the plaintiff 1200 to install the carpet she is getting the 1000 back plus another 200 on top of it. Under your view contract law completely falls apart, because people could just refund the money to avoid obligations that they would want to avoid.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:50 pm
#3189
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
you know I successfully sued Delta in small claims court. I'm really kind of sad they paid me. I was because I really wanted to have the sheriff's office take posession of an A330 and see it auctioned on the courthouse steps.
Jul 31, 2012, 3:57 pm
#3191
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
Jul 31, 2012, 4:52 pm
#3192
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
I don't know whether equity remedies are available in small claims court.
But you're wrong on what damages are and what being "made whole" means. What normally happens is that the plaintiff gets the "benefit of their deal." IE that the plaintiff would not only get the 1000.00 back but all so the difference that it cost the plaintiff to hire someone else to do it.
for example, if it costs the plaintiff 1200 to install the carpet she is getting the 1000 back plus another 200 on top of it. Under your view contract law completely falls apart, because people could just refund the money to avoid obligations that they would want to avoid.
But you're wrong on what damages are and what being "made whole" means. What normally happens is that the plaintiff gets the "benefit of their deal." IE that the plaintiff would not only get the 1000.00 back but all so the difference that it cost the plaintiff to hire someone else to do it.
for example, if it costs the plaintiff 1200 to install the carpet she is getting the 1000 back plus another 200 on top of it. Under your view contract law completely falls apart, because people could just refund the money to avoid obligations that they would want to avoid.
(Just to answer your question, there are no equitable remedies in small claims. And even in a "real court" you couldn't get this injunction, because you can only get injunction for "irreparable harm" which means that money can't fix it. Here, money can fix it (enough to buy a ticket, for example).)
While I have already expressed the fact that I think a person would lose this case on "liability," the recent discussion has shifted to damages and colpuck is right - it is arguably benefit of the bargain. So, if you go to a judge (any - small claims or not) and say "UA had a contract to fly me to HKG first class, and I paid the full amount due (according to the DOT regulations if nothing else), and now they won't do it" then IF you win on liability, the damages would be up to the cost of a replacement ticket.
Jul 31, 2012, 5:21 pm
#3193
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
I don't know whether equity remedies are available in small claims court.
But you're wrong on what damages are and what being "made whole" means. What normally happens is that the plaintiff gets the "benefit of their deal." IE that the plaintiff would not only get the 1000.00 back but all so the difference that it cost the plaintiff to hire someone else to do it.
for example, if it costs the plaintiff 1200 to install the carpet she is getting the 1000 back plus another 200 on top of it. Under your view contract law completely falls apart, because people could just refund the money to avoid obligations that they would want to avoid.
But you're wrong on what damages are and what being "made whole" means. What normally happens is that the plaintiff gets the "benefit of their deal." IE that the plaintiff would not only get the 1000.00 back but all so the difference that it cost the plaintiff to hire someone else to do it.
for example, if it costs the plaintiff 1200 to install the carpet she is getting the 1000 back plus another 200 on top of it. Under your view contract law completely falls apart, because people could just refund the money to avoid obligations that they would want to avoid.
If I didn't install carpet - you can't just go to another installer that costs more and have the court award you the extra money. You get the money back and you start over.
Now, if I took on a job and botched it up - and you are out of pocket money to fix it - you may be entitled to the money.
Jul 31, 2012, 6:01 pm
#3194
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
Sorry - it doesn't quite work like you are describing in small claims court.
If I didn't install carpet - you can't just go to another installer that costs more and have the court award you the extra money. You get the money back and you start over.
Now, if I took on a job and botched it up - and you are out of pocket money to fix it - you may be entitled to the money.
If I didn't install carpet - you can't just go to another installer that costs more and have the court award you the extra money. You get the money back and you start over.
Now, if I took on a job and botched it up - and you are out of pocket money to fix it - you may be entitled to the money.
Jul 31, 2012, 6:05 pm
#3195
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: PHX
Programs: UA *Alliance
Posts: 5,624
Personally I think this would be an awesome episode of Judge Judy or Judge Joe Brown if UA and some travel hacker made it that far and agreed to "have their dispute settled in our forum!" Yeah yeah I know that's another show....