chinatraderjmr

You left out a few steps. After the fine is levied, UA has X days to appeal the fine. Most of the time fines are greatly reduced to the point it's laughable. AA got fined $3M for maintenance issues. Instead of appealing they worked out a number to be paid right away ($250K). AA would probably make the same mistake again. It was sure worth it. I doubt the DOT would fine them anything but They did, I imagine it would be something funny like $500 a tkt

sbrower

If there is a fine in this matter, I predict it will be more like $20 per ticket.

bubbashow

A possible fifth option. Someone with an axe to grind is not telling the truth about tickets being honored. Imagine that, a lie online?! The horror!!

GUWonder

ROTFLOL Let's not assume anyone here is so naive as to not know better.

Many such investments in IT may make operations more complex and less profitable for the company than the company reps believed when allocating additional resources for expenditure on many an IT project.

DianeDakota

You are correct but an airline is a different beast which is what I meant. IT problems for an airline have extreme costs up to and including safety issues which can be catastrophic. No airline is going to risk not upgrading their systems because they "got away" with not having to honor a mistaken ticket giveaway. If you believe that then you are quite naive.

chinatraderjmr

I was being overly generous

No! I already brought that up a zillion pages ago & had my head handed to me. I shall now school you; it is not only impolite but down right hostile to question the intentions of your fellow FTers. Please repeat that 25 times & delete your slanderous post

AeroWesty

What would really be refreshing is if all those who've done a certain amount of chest-beating on this issue (some in smugness, some not, some examples above), would be honest enough to come back and accept that the DOT has recognized that there is at least one issue in all of this worth investigating—even though we don't know what that issue is, or if there's more than one. It could be the integrity of electronic tickets, it could be how mileage tickets apply to the newly adopted regs on mistake fares, or something else entirely.

Not all of us are following this particular case to expect or demand that the only acceptable resolution is a free ticket in First to/from/through HKG. Some of us are reasonable enough to see that there are other issues at play.

traveldealexpert, thanks for your post, and for keeping us updated.

HumbleBee

I know personally 2 people who flew them (more than 2 pax). Its not myself. And that's all I'm gonna say.

bubbashow

I know personally two guys that were walking north of Dublin following a rainbow they saw across the Irish countryside. It's not myself. When they arrived at the end of the rainbow, they met a lovely family of leprechauns. They walked away with a giant pot of gold. And that's all I'm gonna say.

HumbleBee

Whoa. You stand to gain nothing by knowing, but they do stand to lose.

If you don't trust me, all the details in the world won't help. One flew and returned before they started cancelling. The other... Did not take off beforehand.

And yes, he still stands to lose.

pdx1M

Well if they flew before the cancelling then they were in the window where UA said that they would honor the tickets as a CS gesture. But in any case, there are all sorts of reasons why one off instances may well have flown or get to fly yet. There are always situations that are more complex or where a UA supervisor simply decides honoring a ticket is the "right" thing to do in that specific case. None of the one-offs really matter in the larger context where UA has clearly decided to not honor the tickets. DoT may decide to give them a wrist slap administrative fine for the annoyance that UA caused them but beyond that I strongly suspect the case is done (other than if someone or some group actually decides to pursue a lawsuit which would strike me as pouring good money down a pit but that would obviously be up to them). This simply has never been the great consumer protection cause celeb that some folks here have wanted to make it. And as I said many pages of posts ago - you need to think about the political reality of the DoT and the consumer protection issue. DoT has no reason to try to make fools of themselves here.

dsquared37

I can only wish it were true.

Superguy

I'm not saying they should. However, they could have phrased it a lot differently rather than being wishy washy. They could have said something like "We are currently investigating the complaints. If we find that the complaints have merit, we will take appropriate action." Now doesn't that sound a lot better? It says what they will do if it's action worthy, but doesn't say they're going to be unfair either.

As they phrased it, they might as well just flip a coin and take whatever comes up.

travelkid

Werent you one of the no-sayers that said DOT was done with the case?

Obviously they are not.

^

craz

Yes I was, as to me at least it made no sense that UA would roll the dice and CX the reses they did had they not gotten some type of nod from DOT, that it would be OK for them to do so.

Its also hard to believe that DOT still hasnt come to some type of ruling, if they are there to protect the flying public, then they have Failed.

Somethings fishy over 6 weeks (I think) and still nothing out of DOT.I take it some folks had reses that they didnt use and UA would be opening themselves up wide lawsuit wise if DOT never said Boo to them yet.

I will still be very surprised if DOT holds UA has to honor all the tkts for 4 miles.

I only hope that anyone who posted an email they say DOT sent them didnt change teh wording in them