UAs Official Response to HKG Ticketing/IT Error: Redeem @ Correct Amount or Redeposit
Oct 12, 2012, 7:38 am
#3976
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: New York / Hawaii
Programs: UA Global Services, HH Diamond
Posts: 5,178
Got this today in the morning;
We have completed our review of United’s conduct regarding its recent Frequent Flyer fare sale to Hong Kong from the United States on its website. Our review found that the actual price of the advertised fare was never clearly stated during the booking process, thereby creating ambiguous circumstances in which it could be reasonably interpreted that the actual price of the fare was significantly more than the amount consumers paid at the time they attempted to purchase the fare, e.g., $40 plus 4 frequent flyer miles. Therefore, we are not able to establish that consumers, in fact, paid the full amount of the offered fare at the time of purchase. Accordingly, the evidence does not support a finding that United engaged in an unfair and deceptive practice in violation of the relevant statute. Please note that, regardless of the outcome of our investigation, consumers are free to pursue claims (e.g., a breach of contract claim) against the airline in an appropriate civil court for monetary damages and other remedies particular to their situation.
Alexander A. Taday III Aviation Industry Analyst
US Department of Transportation
We have completed our review of United’s conduct regarding its recent Frequent Flyer fare sale to Hong Kong from the United States on its website. Our review found that the actual price of the advertised fare was never clearly stated during the booking process, thereby creating ambiguous circumstances in which it could be reasonably interpreted that the actual price of the fare was significantly more than the amount consumers paid at the time they attempted to purchase the fare, e.g., $40 plus 4 frequent flyer miles. Therefore, we are not able to establish that consumers, in fact, paid the full amount of the offered fare at the time of purchase. Accordingly, the evidence does not support a finding that United engaged in an unfair and deceptive practice in violation of the relevant statute. Please note that, regardless of the outcome of our investigation, consumers are free to pursue claims (e.g., a breach of contract claim) against the airline in an appropriate civil court for monetary damages and other remedies particular to their situation.
Alexander A. Taday III Aviation Industry Analyst
US Department of Transportation
Oct 12, 2012, 8:33 am
#3979
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: SFO
Programs: AY Plat, LH FTL
Posts: 7,375
This has been a farce from beginning to it's thankful end.
Oct 12, 2012, 8:53 am
#3980
Moderator Hilton Honors, Travel News, West, The Suggestion Box, Smoking Lounge & DiningBuzz
Join Date: Jun 2000
Programs: Honors Diamond, Hertz Presidents Circle, National Exec Elite
Posts: 36,028
Excellent result! Bravo! ^
Oct 12, 2012, 9:25 am
#3981
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA Gold-MM, AA Gold-MM, F9-Silver, Hyatt Something, Marriott Gold, IHG Plat, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 6,393
Do you have a script setup to automatically insert comments such as this every 30 minutes or so? Or do you actually sit here and post them manually?
Last edited by hobo13; Oct 12, 2012 at 12:03 pm
Oct 12, 2012, 9:37 am
#3982
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Florida
Programs: UA 2MM
Posts: 1,917
Did anyone else notice something interesting happen, when the miles came back into the account when the ticket was refunded? ^ All I can say is that UA really needs an IT overhaul.
Last edited by BangkokTraveler; Oct 12, 2012 at 2:57 pm Reason: TMI
Oct 12, 2012, 10:16 am
#3983
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: 10^7 mm from Ȱ
Programs: Hyatt D/HHonors D/ SPG P/ Marriott P/ IHG P/ UA 1K/ AA EXP/ DL D
Posts: 1,976
Oct 12, 2012, 10:41 am
#3984
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DFW
Programs: UA Pleb, HH Gold, PWP General Secretary
Posts: 23,199
Example,
Total $400.00
Total with Taxes and Fees $180.00
boom instant inconsistency.
Oct 12, 2012, 11:04 am
#3985
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
I think it's lousy analysis by the DOT.
I read it as "if the airline creates "ambiguous circumstances" by quoting different fares at different stages, they can cancel your ticket unless you pay the highest fare quoted at any point in the process".
I've found it's common to see the lowest total fare change in your favor as you select segments, particularly for complicated ticket bookings, due to the computational difficulty of flight/fare searches. I see this happen all the time on ITA Software, which provides the fare searching for UA. Although I doubt they will, this DOT reasoning gives UA the ability to do the same "pay up or cancel" with revenue ticekts they did with these HKG award tickets.
I read it as "if the airline creates "ambiguous circumstances" by quoting different fares at different stages, they can cancel your ticket unless you pay the highest fare quoted at any point in the process".
I've found it's common to see the lowest total fare change in your favor as you select segments, particularly for complicated ticket bookings, due to the computational difficulty of flight/fare searches. I see this happen all the time on ITA Software, which provides the fare searching for UA. Although I doubt they will, this DOT reasoning gives UA the ability to do the same "pay up or cancel" with revenue ticekts they did with these HKG award tickets.
Oct 12, 2012, 11:06 am
#3986
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PDX
Posts: 2,284
Our review found that the actual price of the advertised fare was never clearly stated during the booking process, thereby creating ambiguous circumstances in which it could be reasonably interpreted that the actual price of the fare was significantly more than the amount consumers paid at the time they attempted to purchase the fare, e.g., $40 plus 4 frequent flyer miles.
Oct 12, 2012, 11:36 am
#3987
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: SFO
Programs: AY Plat, LH FTL
Posts: 7,375
In some respects I agree.
It would have been better if the DOT had called the folks pursuing claims 'thieves' and chastised them for wasting public resources on 'frivolous' claims@:-)
At the end of the day, for most, this was about a pricing glitch, posted on the blogoshpere and exploited by people hoping to get award travel at a fraction of the stated price.
Next thing you know, folks will try to justify stealing that which was intended for the blind
It would have been better if the DOT had called the folks pursuing claims 'thieves' and chastised them for wasting public resources on 'frivolous' claims@:-)
At the end of the day, for most, this was about a pricing glitch, posted on the blogoshpere and exploited by people hoping to get award travel at a fraction of the stated price.
Next thing you know, folks will try to justify stealing that which was intended for the blind
Oct 12, 2012, 12:05 pm
#3988
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: DEN, BOS, HKG, SYD, SFO
Programs: UA 1K, SPG Plat
Posts: 215
Cheers,
Adam
Oct 12, 2012, 12:06 pm
#3989
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA Gold-MM, AA Gold-MM, F9-Silver, Hyatt Something, Marriott Gold, IHG Plat, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 6,393
Oct 12, 2012, 12:17 pm
#3990
In Memoriam
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Easton, CT, USA
Programs: ua prem exec, Former hilton diamond
Posts: 31,801
Not really seeing how this is in any way, shape or form related to what this thread is about.
$180 is a possible and realistic fare. 4 miles to Hong Kong is not a realistic or possible fare, and there's nobody who is not lying who believes they were booking a legitimate fare.
The DOT used common sense in their resolution, the intent of the regulation was not to allow a bunch of internet connected people to take advantage of something they knew was not even conceivable.