chinatraderjmr

If the same person is accessing all 2000 accounts then YES. Come on, this thread is taking things to far. UA knows that many of us have our secretaries or assistants access our accounts & I don't think they have a problem with that.. They also know and expect the head of a household will handle any minor children's account. That's not the problem here & not what OP got in trouble for. It's very simple, He took charge of his employees accounts & we all know that's not allowed. There is a big difference between my secretary having access to my account versus ME having control of all my employees accounts. This has been fought over for years & numerous court cases. The miles belong to the person flying - PERIOD!!!! They are not the property of the employer or the person paying for the tickets.

While I believe UA could have handled this differently. They could / should have contacted OP's company to find out what's going on. However, I doubt OP's situation is different then hundreds of other companies that do the same thing & UA doesn't have the time or staff to deal with them all. I can pretty much guarantee if OP's company had a corp account with UA, this would not have happened. But I assume they don't and this is what happens

invisible

So, where is the borderline? It is ok for your admin/secretary managing your account but how about if he/she manager 10 accounts?

WineCountryUA

and uses the miles for their personal usage -- yeah that might be a problem.

Finkface

I think the key difference here is an admin assistant is working FOR the account holder. Booking flights, upgrades etc for the sole benefit of the traveller. They are not doling out the miles to colleagues or themselves as in the OP's case. The account owner knows the account exists, can access it himself if desired and the miles he earns are for his use. I am sure the assistant would be fired if any of the miles were used for other than the account holder without his explicit permission. Making travel arrangements are merely a function of the assistant's job.

Here, the OP was the only one who had access to the accounts, perhaps even the only one who knew the accounts even existed as they were created and managed by him/her. So the flyer never even knew what was in the account or how it was being used. And in some cases, by his/her own admission, the flyer never even benefitted from the miles they earned but instead, tickets were given, by the OP, to colleagues and to him/herself.

To me, #1, (and the managing or spouses and children's accounts), is not the spirit of why the rule is there. In these cases, the account managers are acting in the best interests of their boss or family and not taking advantage of the account holder without their knowledge or of their ignorance of the FF benefits.. In #2, there is clearly room for a whole lot of abuse and the manager can most definitely profit from their access to the account, possibly without the flyer even knowing there is an account. Not saying the OP did, but not everyone knows or cares about miles so it is ripe for abuse. I would love to be the sole manager of my entire office, or group of friends that neither knew nor cared that they even had a FF account.

5khours

If you give violators a warning and a chance to talk themselves out of the sanctions, then there is no incentive to play by the rules. Just cheat and if you get caught, apologize.

If UA just suspends accounts and take the miles without warning then the risk of getting caught is an incentive to follow the rules and UA won't need to spend so much time and money on enforcement and auditing.

BF263533

Warning = "Due Process"

I have played my entire life, every day, by the rules. I am a rules person. I spend hours daily reading rules and laws.

How can you follow the rules if UA does not publish detailed rules?

They could put on a "test" promotion site where your could test to see if you qualify. I think it is a case of bad computers. They are probably still using IBM punch cards. Someone did not put the card weight properly on the cards in the card reader. They should have remotely tele-typed the operator's office to see what the computer was doing. I hope they have at least an IBM 360 or the Univac equivalent.


I have 4 e-mail accounts for business, personal account management, and cell phone carrier reasons. Lot's of e-mails. Many are blocked as junk or spam. Often if I see an airline or hotel promotion code and try the code to see if it works. If it works I assume I was qualified. If it works and you are not qualified, then there is a problem with the airline or hotel's computer system. I tried the AA promotion code for elite status because I have been a 40 year+ AA and US Air customer and assumed I was qualified, and was told I did not qualify. Once US leaves Star I will again pursue status by contacting the new American personally.

We simply need more consumer protection when it comes to United and any other airline that acts like them.

username

Closing Accounts = Better Balance Sheet, Less Expense = Better Financials = Better Pay for Management and License to Keep Doing What They Are Doing

Customer? What customer?

emcampbe

I find this part quite interesting:

So one of the account holders got an email, with a simple resolution - all it took was providing an ID - presumably something that matches the address on file. And instead of saying - easy enough to do - they said screw it.

Wonder what happens if UA starts doing something similar to people that "moved" out of the US after the PQD announcement.

Um...the MP rules (I.e. Terms) are easily accessible - a quick google search will get them. And you agreed to them when signing up - not reading them is quite a different thing then them not being published.

dcpdxtrans

+1. The burden to show cause why accounts should not be restored shifts to the OP & persons similarly situated, a class which obviously does not include family members /relatives /XAs. I agree with this policy. (as an aside, I've never flown BA & know nothing about their family FF accounts, but in a vacuum seems smart & my family would be interested... if Aaron is listening)

GroundStop

Having used BA's Household Accounts for many years, the clear positive is being able to actually utilize the 7k miles your two kids might have (for example) for something useful, rather than them being stranded, unusable in their solo accounts....

....the downside, miles in the Household Account can only be used by/for people that are actually part of said Household Account (so no buying awards/upgrades for friends, etc.)

MSPeconomist

According to the same rules, I wonder how UA views the various commercial award booking services. They involve the FF member voluntarily giving temporary control of their account to the people doing the award bookings.

escapefromphl

I would be happy with a change like this it would put a quick stop to selling awards upgrades etc, and being able to transfer my families miles and book under my account would be a big bonus.

dcpdxtrans

I would be interested in this type of program too. I wonder how BA deals with the situation where 1 member is a 1K/Plat and the rest are silver /no status. As for downside I'd be OK not giving friends miles/instruments - - I'll give them a box of chocolates (& some extra salty nuts) instead!!

Often1

That is indeed the tradeoff. Household gets you one cumulative account, but you can't help outsiders. You can help your kids, but not auntie.

Xyzzy

I've heard about a few of these situations and there never seems to be a half-way. It's always closed and done. There is no negtiation. It's UA's program.

I've known people who worked for companies that claimed all of the miles. The people simply never bothered to sign up for the FF programs.