Steve M

If your above assertion is true (that is, there's a payment due to the seller in addition to the stated eBay auction price), not only is he defrauding the airline, but also eBay, by not listing the full price of what he's selling as part of the auction item. Outstanding!

Often1

People way over-personalize their relationship with air carriers, including UA. The notion that UA management is plotting to "get" them is juvenile.

UA has simply made a business judgment that when you catch someone, you deal with it. The impact on the one scammer is not the reason for spending money on anti-fraud efforts. It is the general deterrence achieved when the story gets around.

Don't think that there aren't a whole bunch of people out there who think that they are smarter than the average bear because they have figured out that by not selling the GPU, but rather the advice, they have not violated the MP rules.

gobluetwo

And JLAforums.com in December 2014, and the same wording was found on some site called bidbut.com from late 2012 or Jan 2013. My guess is that this guy has been at it for a while, trying to make a few bucks with his unredeemed GPUs, and maybe RPUs.

dsauch

could be a broker, which of course doesnt make it any better. The OP could have also sold to broker and been given up by such. Or even given up by OP's "client" who got caught.

Alpha Golf

I do recall in the past people selling white envelopes for $250 and including free upgrade vouchers with them...

bruceba

The OP could be United Air Lines warning FT-ers to follow the rules.

fastair

Not likely if you look at the posting history by the OP. It would also be against FT ToS.

rankourabu

So how does UA distinguish between someone giving away GPUs as presents to family/coworkers and selling them?

Guilty until proven innocent?

Kacee

I've never had a problem with legitimately gifted instruments, giving or receiving.

But when UA sees an ad on e-bay or craigslist, that's probably an indication there's a violation

emcampbe

This. When you put it up on a public web site for sale or auction, chances are it's not to gift it to friends/family.

EMan

2 points:

1. Yes, Guilty until proven innocent is precisely the case. If you mention a dollar figure and GPU in the same ad, you're deemed Guilty! (It doesn't matter what the money is associated with in the ad.)

2. To be clear, it's not necessary to only gift GPU's to family/co-workers/friends. Here's the language from united.com:
http://www.united.com/web/en-US/cont...wupgrades.aspx

"Sponsoring another member

Premier members may request an upgrade for any other traveler using a Global Premier Upgrade, even if they are not traveling on the same reservation."

Thus, you are perfectly entitled to give away your unused GPUs to John or Jane Doe before they expire.

sbm12

When was the last time someone came in here protesting an account being shut down and did not admit to having actually broken the rules. I cannot remember such an instance.

Seems that UA gets it right pretty much every time on this stuff.

EMan

I don't think it's Rocket Science. Can you think of a legitimate reason to mention $$$ and GPU in the same paragraph in an Ad? (I think you have a much better chance of getting off a Speeding Ticket! )

ani90

That is probably because UA is judge, juror and executioner. The OP knew clearly what he was doing and identified what he perceived was a loop hole. He did not sell the GPU but sold the "advice" so thought he was okay.

There are several examples in trade where the commodity itself is not charged for but a commission is taken for the advice and guidance on obtaining the commodity (which you may or may not pay for independently); the reality of course for the person paying is that it is the commodity you are after. Many politicians, officials and establishments accept all sorts of 'gifts' or "tips" in exchange for favors or services; provided the two are not explicitly connected then they mostly get away with it (but in practice it is no more than a bribe).

While UA remain correct in that they can close down any account literally at will (and members of MP agree to that term), I doubt one could go so far as to saying he was committing fraud (as some have suggested) and doubt a prosecution would win a fraud case (and if one does it will probably be that if he sold advice, but did not render it, rather than the sale of a GPU).

Tchiowa

I don't think anyone said there was any "criminal" fraud involved. But the guy was definitely scamming because he knew what he was doing was against the rules.

And remember what happens to those politicians you mention. They don't get prosecuted. But they don't get re-elected either (unless they are in Chicago or Lousiana).