Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

UAs Official Response to HKG Ticketing/IT Error: Redeem @ Correct Amount or Redeposit

UAs Official Response to HKG Ticketing/IT Error: Redeem @ Correct Amount or Redeposit

Old Jul 17, 12, 6:38 pm
  #661  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,644
Wink

Originally Posted by apk123 View Post
So you are saying that airlines can decide to display numbers that not sum and then charge the sum of the numbers rather than the bottom line price quoted? The Dot has put a lot of emphasis on the total price rather than the different components.
Bingo! And the DoT has fined just about every airline for at one time or another, failing to disclose the total price including all taxes/fees. Here, UA did, but totaled it up wrong. The DoT can't have it both ways by defending the total+breakdown and then saying that those figures don't count. If they count enough to obtain a fine, they are important and possibly what any decision will be based partially on.
fastair is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:38 pm
  #662  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Programs: Delta Gold Medallion
Posts: 448
Originally Posted by murphyUA View Post
This was not a mistake fare...there was no fat finger that omitted a zero. The correct price was clearly presented along with a math error.
The total price was 4 miles. The itemized list had an item worth 120,000 miles. Maybe united forgot to display the mileage discount item in their list? A list is a list and it's fine but total price is what's important. There are no "two" prices, there is a list and there is the total price.
apk123 is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:39 pm
  #663  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal
Programs: UA Plat, National Exec Elite
Posts: 832
Originally Posted by apk123 View Post
So you are saying that airlines can decide to display numbers that not sum and then charge the sum of the numbers rather than the bottom line price quoted? The Dot has put a lot of emphasis on the total price rather than the different components.
If UA had a history of these types of antics, obviously something would need to be done. This doesn't seem to be the case.

People love laws and regulations until the the laws and regulations aren't in their favor. I really don't get how people can feel so entitled to something they didn't know was going to "exist" 3 days ago. People really need to move on and stop losing sleep.
murphyUA is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:39 pm
  #664  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC, US
Posts: 74
Originally Posted by murphyUA View Post
In what world is 70,000 + $30 equal to 4 + $30? It really doesn't matter what "you" agreed to. Two prices were presented, you chose the one that you liked better.

This was not a mistake fare...there was no fat finger that omitted a zero. The correct price was clearly presented along with a math error.

Just read the regulations. We all know you'll never admit you're wrong, but if you actually read the rules and the DoT FAQ, you'll probably give up like the rest of the "no way in hell" crowd did several hours ago.
davidbridgman is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:41 pm
  #665  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal
Programs: UA Plat, National Exec Elite
Posts: 832
Originally Posted by apk123 View Post
The total price was 4 miles. The itemized list had an item worth 120,000 miles. Maybe united forgot to display the mileage discount item in their list? A list is a list and it's fine but total price is what's important. There are no "two" prices, there is a list and there is the total price.
There was clearly two prices. There was the correct one, and a ridiculous one. You gambled and hoped the ridiculous one was going to stick.

As of now, it didn't, and you won't be going to Hong Kong. If you want to pursue the matter further, I really wish you the best of luck.

Originally Posted by davidbridgman View Post
Just read the regulations. We all know you'll never admit you're wrong, but if you actually read the rules and the DoT FAQ, you'll probably give up like the rest of the "no way in hell" crowd did several hours ago.
Like I said to the other poster, if you feel the need to use your own resources to pursue the matter further, I wish you the best of luck.

Last edited by FlyinHawaiian; Jul 17, 12 at 7:14 pm Reason: merge
murphyUA is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:45 pm
  #666  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
Programs: United 1K & AA Exec Plat
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by murphyUA View Post
There was clearly two prices. There was the correct one, and a ridiculous one. You gambled and hoped the ridiculous one was going to stick.

As of now, it didn't, and you won't be going to Hong Kong. If you want to pursue the matter further, I really wish you the best of luck.
Well technically speaking, as on now he is going UNTIL United actually calls him and cancels his ticket, which is something the DOT might stop, which we will just have to wait out, but technically he is going.
Chucksterace is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:46 pm
  #667  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC, US
Posts: 74
Originally Posted by murphyUA View Post
There was clearly two prices. There was the correct one, and a ridiculous one. You gambled and hoped the ridiculous one was going to stick.

As of now, it didn't, and you won't be going to Hong Kong. If you want to pursue the matter further, I really wish you the best of luck.
LOL It's against DoT rules to charge the consumer ANY amount higher than the LOWEST quoted fare on the screen. Period. Then add the clarification of the mistake rule, well, I'll give you credit for being stubborn.
davidbridgman is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:47 pm
  #668  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Programs: US CP ; LH FTL ; *G
Posts: 1,630
Guys, guys, you should chill. This would be the question for lawyers and judges - whether UACO should be able to wiggle out of the contracts made by mistake in their IT dept. There are good arguments on both sides, but my guess is that in most cases those contracts are either void or voidable. The case is much less stronger for UA in cases where pax called and UA agents manually processed the awards - it is much more difficult to claim a programming error in this case, since UA was on notice and had an opportunity to correct the mistake then and there. By the way, this is exactly why participating in a class action suit may be a bad idea for some people - because actual human involvement is going to be important in whether a plaintiff wins or loses.
burlax is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:47 pm
  #669  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal
Programs: UA Plat, National Exec Elite
Posts: 832
Originally Posted by Chucksterace View Post
Well technically speaking, as on now he is going UNTIL United actually calls him and cancels his ticket, which is something the DOT might stop, which we will just have to wait out, but technically he is going.
True. In any case, should be interesting to watch (on the sidelines )
murphyUA is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:48 pm
  #670  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DC
Programs: Hilton Diamond, Marriott LT Titantium Elite
Posts: 144
I guarantee you the same folks who are going after this and demanding they get their trips to HKG for 4 miles are the same ones who would raise hell if they made a mistake and a company stuck to the "rules" and wouldn't give them a refund or allow a change.

"You make a mistake, tough luck, I get the benefit! I make a mistake, hey can't you see I made a mistake and you need to fix it for me at no cost because that's basic customer service!"
Eryeal is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:48 pm
  #671  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Programs: Delta Gold Medallion
Posts: 448
Originally Posted by murphyUA View Post
There was clearly two prices. There was the correct one, and a ridiculous one.
You can say whatever you want but the DoT clearly holds that the full fare is what counts. You MAY display a breakdown of the taxes etc. but this is "just for fun". there is no such thing as "two prices". See page 22 here:

http://airconsumer.dot.gov/rules/EAP...-2012final.pdf
apk123 is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:50 pm
  #672  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: DEN
Programs: US Gold • SPG Gold
Posts: 222
I applaud the passion posted herein and wish I'd gotten tix just to see how this plays out.

My 1st reaction was - "Yeah, you gambled, you lost, no big deal." However, UA's expecting customers to play nice and do the right thing when they rarely do.

I doubt much will come of this but I can appreciate wanting to capitalize on a mistake made by a company that's made many recently. Especially when it comes to valuing customers.
fevercity is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:51 pm
  #673  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Programs: Hilton G/SPG G/IHG RA/Accor P/Aeroplan Elite/CZ S
Posts: 73
Originally Posted by murphyUA View Post
There was clearly two prices. There was the correct one, and a ridiculous one. You gambled and hoped the ridiculous one was going to stick.

As of now, it didn't, and you won't be going to Hong Kong. If you want to pursue the matter further, I really wish you the best of luck.
You know you will never be able perfect your theory, don't you?
Let's say... No one saw the correct amount showed while booking. How do UA proof it is wrong? UA will never have a screenshot of my computer at the moment I click the submit button. I'm not saying I will lie. The point is which price went through and get ticketed?

Last edited by FlyinHawaiian; Jul 17, 12 at 7:13 pm Reason: removed overly-personalized and uncivil content
cdegt is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:53 pm
  #674  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal
Programs: UA Plat, National Exec Elite
Posts: 832
Originally Posted by davidbridgman View Post
LOL It's against DoT rules to charge the consumer ANY amount higher than the LOWEST quoted fare on the screen. Period. Then add the clarification of the mistake rule, well, I'll give you credit for being stubborn.
Does it ever say the airline cannot cancel a ticket? (this is a serious question).
murphyUA is offline  
Old Jul 17, 12, 6:55 pm
  #675  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC, US
Posts: 74
Originally Posted by burlax View Post
Guys, guys, you should chill. This would be the question for lawyers and judges - whether UACO should be able to wiggle out of the contracts made by mistake in their IT dept. There are good arguments on both sides, but my guess is that in most cases those contracts are either void or voidable. The case is much less stronger for UA in cases where pax called and UA agents manually processed the awards - it is much more difficult to claim a programming error in this case, since UA was on notice and had an opportunity to correct the mistake then and there. By the way, this is exactly why participating in a class action suit may be a bad idea for some people - because actual human involvement is going to be important in whether a plaintiff wins or loses.

No, it's not. The price/solicitation rule in 399.84 is clear, the mistake rule in 399.88 is clear. Common law contract defenses involving mistake do not apply here. No class action happens until the tickets are voided, then UA gets DOT penalties and a class action at the same time. It's as simple as that.
davidbridgman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: