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

Any Drawbacks from having MP account registered to foreign address?

Old Nov 28, 2016, 1:30 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Print Wikipost

Any Drawbacks from having MP account registered to foreign address?

Old Aug 20, 2013, 10:39 am
  #196  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 24,153
Originally Posted by bocastephen
I think you're way overanalyzing this. Clearly UA needs to place the criteria in the T+C, but with so many unanswered questions about this program change, I doubt we'll see it - but when we do, the likely criteria will match DL - drivers license, utility bill, lease, etc. Once that documentation is provided (which is unlikely for someone who switches addresses for convenience), that should be the end of it - unless the T+C includes a statement that insists the majority of customer travel must take place outside the US or the flying pattern for tickets must originate outside the US.
I emailed a few people I know who were nabbed when PMCO went after those with non-US addresses in order to get the free PC membership. Some simply used the addresses of a friend or relative or branch of their company = they had no offical/legal ID that linked them to a non-US address other then them saying so, so their PC membership was gone.

1 said they actually had some bills going to the address and provided them and maintained their free membership but CO did ask why if they lived Overseas were they always starting there trips from the US

Also those who actually lived Overseas and started their trips from Overseas were never contacted by CO even thou they held only US PPs

You may be correct and Im overanalyzing it , but did any top DL exec come out and call their Diamonds and Plats Overentitled? It just seemed to me that the new UA was going to go after what it considered its Overentitled Elites unlike DL. So I thought theyd go as far as they could to make sure anyone getting the wavier actually was living overseas rather then simply being able to change addresses or show a bill with a non US address.

Last edited by craz; Aug 20, 2013 at 10:59 am
craz is offline  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 1:04 pm
  #197  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,961
Originally Posted by bocastephen
Actually, no they can't - rules still apply, and the program is still a contract between the vendor (UA) and the customer (us), and therefore UA must follow its terms and conditions as do we. Sure they can make changes to the T+C as they see fit, but making up arbitrary rules and applying them unevenly based on a whim does not fit into the T+C or the contract between us.
Actually, it does. One of the provisions is "United has the sole right to interpret and apply the Program Rules." They have every right to draft unclear rules and then interpret them as they see fit.

Some people seem to be saying "United must do (X)" when what they really mean is "I wish United would do (X)" or "I think United should do (X)." As a matter of their rights, they can do pretty much whatever they want. They can draft vague rules and then interpret them how they like.
DaviddesJ is offline  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 1:36 pm
  #198  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 24,153
Originally Posted by DaviddesJ
Actually, it does. One of the provisions is "United has the sole right to interpret and apply the Program Rules." They have every right to draft unclear rules and then interpret them as they see fit.

Some people seem to be saying "United must do (X)" when what they really mean is "I wish United would do (X)" or "I think United should do (X)." As a matter of their rights, they can do pretty much whatever they want. They can draft vague rules and then interpret them how they like.
And 1 need not look very far at all to see how COdbaUA does things. Originally they said 1MMers PM would keep their benefits, as we all know they took away the 2 RPUs and many are awaiting the result of the lawsuit to see if CO can get away with it

If they did it with MM they most certainly can do as they please with everything else. And once again the vast majority that will be affected will be UAs Overentitled Elites w/o the min Spend being met, which already has a big red target on their backs.

Those who already meet and exceed the min Spend wont be affected,its Us(including myself) 1Ks that have little Spend that either will have to be satisfied with PP and $25k spend on the CC or actually spend the $10 needed to maintain 1K. and it seems its these folks who are screaming foul the loudest
craz is offline  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 1:42 pm
  #199  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 41,763
Originally Posted by DaviddesJ
Actually, it does. One of the provisions is "United has the sole right to interpret and apply the Program Rules." They have every right to draft unclear rules and then interpret them as they see fit....
That is not the purpose of that verbiage - the program rules must be clear and concise, the verbiage is not to give UA carte blanche to create ambiguous rules it can flip multiple ways - the verbiage simply makes UA the sole entity to determine what the rules mean and how they are applied (unless they are taken to court, which others are currently doing).

What is lacking here is clarity around this, and countless other unanswered questions regarding the program change. It is not in UA's best interests to leave those questions unanswered or clarified, then turn around in 1-2 or 3 years and make decisions that affect customers by relying on rules that were never clarified. Isn't that why UA is in court right now fighting a number of lawsuits?

You seem to think a company can invite people to a contract and then just make things up as they go along willy nilly without any consequences....that's not reality.
bocastephen is online now  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 1:48 pm
  #200  
Suspended
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,961
Originally Posted by bocastephen
the program rules must be clear and concise,
No, UA can make rules that are confusing and verbose, if they want. You keep saying people and companies must do things that you want. But no. They don't have to. They can make decisions you think are bad. They can interpret the rules as they see fit, because the rules say they can interpret the rules as they see fit. There hasn't been much litigation around frequent flyer programs, but what there has been has generally been unsuccessful. The airlines have drafted the terms to favor their ability to act as they please, and for the most part the courts have agreed that they can.

It is not in UA's best interests to leave those questions unanswered or clarified
I disagree, I think it's actually smart, but even if you turn out to be right, saying something is a bad decision is different from saying they can't do it that way if they want.
DaviddesJ is offline  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 2:18 pm
  #201  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 24,153
Originally Posted by bocastephen

You seem to think a company can invite people to a contract and then just make things up as they go along willy nilly without any consequences....that's not reality.
another case the 4 Mile F tkt to HKG, everyone screamed they had to honor it as it was a contract that both sides accepted. And if not report them to DOT who will bring COdbaUa to its knees, alot of good that did. UA did exactly what it wanted to

I may be wrong but the ones doing all the yelling are the so called Overentitled 1Ks and PPs. And it seems UAs answer is either pony up the $$$ or go pound sand. Which is exactly the opposite of what you are saying.

It seems UA wants to be rid of us, while we dont want to be rid of UA, and the Overentitles simply want UA to allow then to continue flying on Intl tkts for nothing or as little as possible due to being top Elite memebers, and being Upgraded on Domestic flights which they paid little for while being wined and dinned , and when the food or bev changes not to their liking lookout baby.

I dont know any biz that can be profitable if it ran itself this way
craz is offline  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 2:33 pm
  #202  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 41,763
Originally Posted by craz
...
I don't know any biz that can be profitable if it ran itself this way
CO did perfectly fine taking care of its Elite customers. It might not have coddled them to the extreme the former, weak UA did, but I was a gleefully happy customer for 10+ years as a top tier with little to nothing to complain about.

CO was also clear, concise and upfront with customers (most of the time) and was willing to be transparent. At CO, Elites were not over-entitled or problematic, they were the core of the business and the airline's best customers - and while compromises had to be made by both sides, the relationship balanced well and the airline and product thrived.

If a business (any business) is going out of its way to be deliberately vague about rules and processes that customers must follow, it shouldn't be surprised when it lands in court - be it an airline, bank, department store or restaurant. Unfortunately some folks here seem to think a company is some sort of god that should be allowed to do whatever it wants, consequences be damned, and customers should either be bowing to it, or told to get lost

UA needs to be clear, concise, upfront and transparent about program rules and actions required of customers - we might not like these rules, and then our option is to abide or leave, but no business can get away with being deliberately vague, then harming a customer who didn't perform a required action because that requirement was unknown or interpreted in a different manner than intended.
bocastephen is online now  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 2:39 pm
  #203  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AA DULtArer
Posts: 5,525
Anyone grown up can tell the spend requirement is aimed at US flyers, period.

Trying to invent a foreign address to circumvent this, and then complaining the rules are vague, is simply OverEntitled Sheenanigans.

If you do live overseas, you dont have to worry about spend. If you don't, spend or PP.
LaserSailor is offline  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 2:46 pm
  #204  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 41,763
Originally Posted by LaserSailor
...Trying to invent a foreign address to circumvent this, and then complaining the rules are vague, is simply OverEntitled Sheenanigans.....


That is not what is being done here - those with multiple addresses in various locations around the world are in a perfectly legitimate position to move their MP account. We are simply seeking clarification on the documents or flying patterns that may be required to support the address switch. Is that too much to ask? I think not.
bocastephen is online now  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 2:53 pm
  #205  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AA DULtArer
Posts: 5,525
There are those with legitimate claims to residency overseas, and then there are posts where they clearly do not, is all.

Im not trying to say everyone in this thread is a crook, but understand the program rules are aimed at the vast majority, not the small minority with "true" ex-pat status. Such folks will have to be patient and see how the program evolves.

I have an overseas residence, but I am an American, and plastic status chasing wont change that for me - but thats my choice, and I respect yours if it is different.
LaserSailor is offline  
Old Aug 20, 2013, 3:27 pm
  #206  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold, UA Nobody, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,372
Originally Posted by craz
If a person has a non-US PP on their acct that will probably take care of things, but few people have both. Also if their non US PP isnt from a Country that is on GE, they may have to kiss that goodbye as CBP wont have them as flying in and Id hate to run a ground of CBP and try explaining well Im playing with UA .....
This is nonsense. Huge numbers of people are dual nationals and I'd guess that the vast majority of them have two passports. Many countries (including the US) make it a illegal for their nationals (even if dual) to enter on another country's passport. CBP is well aware of the issues of dual-nationals are are pretty sanguine about it provided you use the right passport at checkin (for API) and at the border.

I suspect that UA will be reluctant to be too heavy handed about purported overseas nationals in the absence of written criteria for determining residence. In many countries (most of Europe for instance) contracts of adhesion related to consumers are legally dodgy and if UA were using purported nationality as a search criteria also potentially discriminatory. I doubt UA would be stupid enough to pick a fight like that with the bad blood it could create.


Originally Posted by DaviddesJ
Actually, it does. One of the provisions is "United has the sole right to interpret and apply the Program Rules." They have every right to draft unclear rules and then interpret them as they see fit.

Some people seem to be saying "United must do (X)" when what they really mean is "I wish United would do (X)" or "I think United should do (X)." As a matter of their rights, they can do pretty much whatever they want. They can draft vague rules and then interpret them how they like.
I think we should remember that here we are discussing how United treats a contract marketed at consumers in countries other than the US and where they specifically market products at overseas members (i.e. local credit card affiliates) and have specific terms for overseas members (i.e. no PQD requirement). Therefore whilst the sentence you highlighted in red may work with certain US jurisdictions, I am highly doubtful that it would fly with other courts. For example the UK's Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 has the following explanatory notes:
A term is unfair if:
Contrary to the requirement of good faith it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract, to the detriment of consumers.
'Good faith' means that you must deal fairly and openly with consumers. Standard terms may be drafted to protect commercial needs but must also take account of the interests and rights of consumers by going no further than is necessary to protect those legitimate commercial interests.
and
According to the UTCCRs, a standard term must be expressed in plain and intelligible language. A term is open to challenge if it could put the consumer at a disadvantage because he or she is not clear about its meaning - even if its meaning could be worked out by a lawyer. If there is doubt as to what a term means, the meaning most favourable to the consumer will apply.
Emphasis mine.

If you maintained a residence in the UK for some part of the year, I would suspect that you could easily claim English jurisdiction for the contract case and probably prevail if UA even bothered defending (once I threatened CO with court in the UK and they settled immediately having initially relied on US contract law to protect themselves). As all EU member states have similar regs, I doubt UA would wish to run headlong into this.

Last edited by alex_b; Aug 20, 2013 at 3:46 pm Reason: Merge
alex_b is offline  
Old Aug 23, 2013, 8:13 pm
  #207  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike...
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus
Posts: 35,182
Originally Posted by craz
I honestly dont remember the T&Cs from the free PC membership,
There was no published T&C for that. It was nt an advertised benefit. It just happened.
Xyzzy is offline  
Old Sep 5, 2013, 9:58 am
  #208  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: TPA 50%/BKK 30%/HKG 20%
Programs: UA 1K MM - AF G – TK G – AZ Ex – Hilton D – Marriott G – IHG P
Posts: 1,989
I can't register for any of the double miles promotions, etc. It's rare that they have one I can take advanctage of, but it happens.
TomA is offline  
Old Sep 7, 2013, 4:11 am
  #209  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SRQ
Programs: UA Plat-Million Miler (1.6MM), IHG-Plat Amb; Amex Plat-P, Marriott-Gold;Hertz Gold; Hilton-Gold
Posts: 762
Smile Anyone see a problem with...?

Oh wise Flyertalk Sages,

I live in Saudi Arabia, have a Permanent Saudi Residence Card and Saudi D/L, but my banking, CC's, billing addresses and UA MP Membership addresses are all in the USA. I probably spend right at about $10K per year with UA, but that includes excise taxes, security fees, etc.. SO I am a bit concerned about maintaining 1K for 2015.

Can I change my UA MP address to Saudi Arabia, furnish UA a copy of my Residence Permit and Saudi D/L, and keep my existing CC's and USA Billing Address for purposes of purchasing tickets ?

Your keen posts and insight are most greatly appreciated.
gpicur is offline  
Old Sep 7, 2013, 6:51 am
  #210  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS/EAP
Programs: UA 1K, MR LTT, HH Dia, Amex Plat
Posts: 31,538
Originally Posted by gpicur
Oh wise Flyertalk Sages,

I live in Saudi Arabia, have a Permanent Saudi Residence Card and Saudi D/L, but my banking, CC's, billing addresses and UA MP Membership addresses are all in the USA. I probably spend right at about $10K per year with UA, but that includes excise taxes, security fees, etc.. SO I am a bit concerned about maintaining 1K for 2015.

Can I change my UA MP address to Saudi Arabia, furnish UA a copy of my Residence Permit and Saudi D/L, and keep my existing CC's and USA Billing Address for purposes of purchasing tickets ?

Your keen posts and insight are most greatly appreciated.
as long as you live there and book tickets ex Saudi Arabia I can't see any problem.
cfischer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.