Dec 31, 2014, 12:15 am
Last edit by: J.Edward
Related New Articles for United/Orbitz vs. Skiplagged.com
(Mod Note: While some FTers have chosen to contribute to skiplagged's legal defense we request a direct link to do so not be placed in the wiki.)
(Mod Note: While some FTers have chosen to contribute to skiplagged's legal defense we request a direct link to do so not be placed in the wiki.)
UA sues "hidden city" search site Skiplagged.com
Nov 25, 2014, 8:31 am
#76
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, MM, NR; HH Diamond, Bonvoy LT Gold, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Diamond, others
Posts: 12,159
Your opinion, not necessarily fact - which is why we have the adversarial court system so a Judge and perhaps a Jury can decide which party's claim is correct.
If I'm on the Jury, neither UA nor Orbitz gets a dime unless they show me actual examples of real damages traced back to this site.
If I'm on the Jury, neither UA nor Orbitz gets a dime unless they show me actual examples of real damages traced back to this site.
Yes, the jury does get to decide which party prevails in a civil suit brought before them - I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. If the plaintiff does not show where or how they are damaged, or by how much, do you honestly expect a jury to rule in their favor and award damages someone pulled out of their behind? 
Nov 25, 2014, 8:33 am
#77
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, MM, NR; HH Diamond, Bonvoy LT Gold, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Diamond, others
Posts: 12,159
Actually the website is entirely at fault here. The user searches "LAX-JFK" and it delivers a bookable link for "LAX-JFK-BOS", which can only have 2 reasons :
1. The website delivered an incorrect link (through extremely poor IT), and the unsuspecting traveler will end up at the wrong destination from the original search request if the traveler flies the entire itinerary as delivered by the website.
2. The website delivers a link that encourages the customer to violate the airline CoC, and the savvy traveler follows through with the booking knowing in full that his/her actions are in violation of CoC, and with every intention at the booking not to fly the itinerary as displayed
1. The website delivered an incorrect link (through extremely poor IT), and the unsuspecting traveler will end up at the wrong destination from the original search request if the traveler flies the entire itinerary as delivered by the website.
2. The website delivers a link that encourages the customer to violate the airline CoC, and the savvy traveler follows through with the booking knowing in full that his/her actions are in violation of CoC, and with every intention at the booking not to fly the itinerary as displayed
I've abandoned segments with no comment from the airline other than "the cost of that segment is below the change fee so just don't fly it."
Nov 25, 2014, 1:14 pm
#78
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: EAU
Programs: UA 1K, CO Plat, NW Plat, Marriott Premiere Plat, SPG Plat, Priority Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,712
Nov 26, 2014, 1:55 pm
#79
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: EAU
Programs: UA 1K, CO Plat, NW Plat, Marriott Premiere Plat, SPG Plat, Priority Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 4,712
Went to check this site out today, looks like United flights have been pulled.
Nov 26, 2014, 10:51 pm
#80
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: 42,220
If you're on the jury, you get the law explained to you by the judge and you agree to interpret the facts a provided for in the actual law. If you don't agree to that, you aren't on the jury. If you agree to that and don't intend to abide by your agreement, you're committing perjury.
The judge tells the jury what the law actually says, it's not up to each juror to pull reasons for a ruling out of his ....
The judge tells the jury what the law actually says, it's not up to each juror to pull reasons for a ruling out of his ....
The judge does not instruct jurors on how to rule - the judge will instruct the jurors on the law, and it's up to the jury to apply the evidence and their personal judgement and common sense to determine which party should prevail.
Nov 26, 2014, 10:56 pm
#81
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
This is nonsense. You've never heard of jury nullification? Everyday, jurors interpret and apply the law to cases they serve as they see fit. Jurors committing 'nullification' are not committing perjury, give me a break
The judge does not instruct jurors on how to rule - the judge will instruct the jurors on the law, and it's up to the jury to apply the evidence and their personal judgement and common sense to determine which party should prevail.
The judge does not instruct jurors on how to rule - the judge will instruct the jurors on the law, and it's up to the jury to apply the evidence and their personal judgement and common sense to determine which party should prevail.
There is no nullification right in civil cases.
Please, please, please stop making up the law.
Nov 26, 2014, 10:59 pm
#82
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: 42,220
A civil *fraud* matter. By definition, hidden city ticket is where the purchaser bought a ticket that he didn't intend to use in order to dishonestly gain a benefit by lying to the airline.
Definition: a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain
Undeniably fraud.
Definition: a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain
Undeniably fraud.
Using the code - not fraud. Using the code, getting into an accident, then using the benefits of the code (CDW) to get out of paying for the repairs, fraud. There is an obvious line between the two.
Either way, the only parties that have skin in the fight are the airline and passenger who uses a hidden city ticket.
Nov 26, 2014, 11:17 pm
#83
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 19,510
Interesting discussion.
Here's my question for the future SCOTUS justices on the forum:
United's current COC states under Rule 6: Tickets ...
So, are all seven of these "actions" "permitted by law"? In other words, is there any specific legislation that authorizes (or forbids) any of these "actions," particularly numbers 5 & 7?
Also, what happens when a passenger becomes violently ill at a connection point? The above rule says nothing about intent; it's all about actual use. If I have a cancer attack while waiting for a connection at IAH and am hauled off to M.D. Anderson, can United "take legal action" against me?
(FWIW, I have no personal interest in "Hidden City" ticketing. None of my typical origin / destination airports are United hubs and I earn status through segments, so not flying a segment is pointless to me. I often fly routes with extra connections / segments at marginally higher - and sometimes even lower - fares than the most direct route between my origin and destination.)
Here's my question for the future SCOTUS justices on the forum:
United's current COC states under Rule 6: Tickets ...
K) UA’s Remedies for Violation(s) of Rules - Where a Ticket is purchased and used in violation of the law, these rules or any fare rule (including Hidden Cities Ticketing, Point Beyond Ticketing, Throwaway Ticketing, or Back-to-Back Ticketing), UA has the right in its sole discretion to take all actions permitted by law, including but not limited to, the following:
1) Invalidate the Ticket(s);
2) Cancel any remaining portion of the Passenger’s itinerary;
3) Confiscate any unused Flight Coupons;
4) Refuse to board the Passenger and to carry the Passenger’s baggage, unless the difference between the fare paid and the fare for transportation used is collected prior to boarding;
5) Assess the Passenger for the actual value of the Ticket which shall be the difference between the lowest fare applicable to the Passenger’s actual itinerary and the fare actually paid;
6) Delete miles in the Passenger’s frequent flyer account (UA’s MileagePlus Program), revoke the Passenger’s Elite status, if any, in the MileagePlus Program, terminate the Passenger’s participation in the MileagePlus Program, or take any other action permitted by the MileagePlus Program Rules in UA’s “MileagePlus Rules;” and
7) Take legal action with respect to the Passenger.
1) Invalidate the Ticket(s);
2) Cancel any remaining portion of the Passenger’s itinerary;
3) Confiscate any unused Flight Coupons;
4) Refuse to board the Passenger and to carry the Passenger’s baggage, unless the difference between the fare paid and the fare for transportation used is collected prior to boarding;
5) Assess the Passenger for the actual value of the Ticket which shall be the difference between the lowest fare applicable to the Passenger’s actual itinerary and the fare actually paid;
6) Delete miles in the Passenger’s frequent flyer account (UA’s MileagePlus Program), revoke the Passenger’s Elite status, if any, in the MileagePlus Program, terminate the Passenger’s participation in the MileagePlus Program, or take any other action permitted by the MileagePlus Program Rules in UA’s “MileagePlus Rules;” and
7) Take legal action with respect to the Passenger.
Also, what happens when a passenger becomes violently ill at a connection point? The above rule says nothing about intent; it's all about actual use. If I have a cancer attack while waiting for a connection at IAH and am hauled off to M.D. Anderson, can United "take legal action" against me?
(FWIW, I have no personal interest in "Hidden City" ticketing. None of my typical origin / destination airports are United hubs and I earn status through segments, so not flying a segment is pointless to me. I often fly routes with extra connections / segments at marginally higher - and sometimes even lower - fares than the most direct route between my origin and destination.)
Nov 26, 2014, 11:41 pm
#84
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: 42,220
Some folks here make it seem like a jury making a decision independent of a judge's instructions or preference is an impossibility - it's not.
Nov 27, 2014, 12:31 am
#85
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693
Also, what happens when a passenger becomes violently ill at a connection point? The above rule says nothing about intent; it's all about actual use. If I have a cancer attack while waiting for a connection at IAH and am hauled off to M.D. Anderson, can United "take legal action" against me?
And they even might, if you had a cancer attack every Thursday evening for a year...
Nov 27, 2014, 12:34 am
#86
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
Really? Does the Apple/Samsung case ring a bell? Juries can ignore instructions and rule as they see fit. In a civil case, sure the judge can overrule them and apply their own decision, but it doesn't mean a jury is barred from interpreting findings of fact as they see fit and appropriate.
Some folks here make it seem like a jury making a decision independent of a judge's instructions or preference is an impossibility - it's not.
Some folks here make it seem like a jury making a decision independent of a judge's instructions or preference is an impossibility - it's not.
This is getting tiresome. What remains true is that the original ridiculous idea that jurors just get some facts and decide who is in "the wrong" is not how the law works. We have business torts, deal with it.
Nov 27, 2014, 1:33 am
#87
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 163
Defendant's interrogatory no. 1: identify each instance of hidden city ticketing initiated via skiplagged for which you are seeking damages.
Interrogatory no. 2: for each hidden city ticket identified above, identify the "lawful" itinerary, if any, including applicable fare, that the purchaser would have actually purchased if not for skiplagged.
I'm really curious to see how any actual damages will be proved with the requisite certainty. Considering that the damages all stem from the hypothetical proposition that in any particular case the consumer would have in fact purchased a more expensive ticket (still on united, no less), there are just too many variables and assumptions involved.
Interrogatory no. 2: for each hidden city ticket identified above, identify the "lawful" itinerary, if any, including applicable fare, that the purchaser would have actually purchased if not for skiplagged.
I'm really curious to see how any actual damages will be proved with the requisite certainty. Considering that the damages all stem from the hypothetical proposition that in any particular case the consumer would have in fact purchased a more expensive ticket (still on united, no less), there are just too many variables and assumptions involved.
Nov 27, 2014, 7:34 am
#88
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
Defendant's interrogatory no. 1: identify each instance of hidden city ticketing initiated via skiplagged for which you are seeking damages.
Interrogatory no. 2: for each hidden city ticket identified above, identify the "lawful" itinerary, if any, including applicable fare, that the purchaser would have actually purchased if not for skiplagged.
I'm really curious to see how any actual damages will be proved with the requisite certainty. Considering that the damages all stem from the hypothetical proposition that in any particular case the consumer would have in fact purchased a more expensive ticket (still on united, no less), there are just too many variables and assumptions involved.
Interrogatory no. 2: for each hidden city ticket identified above, identify the "lawful" itinerary, if any, including applicable fare, that the purchaser would have actually purchased if not for skiplagged.
I'm really curious to see how any actual damages will be proved with the requisite certainty. Considering that the damages all stem from the hypothetical proposition that in any particular case the consumer would have in fact purchased a more expensive ticket (still on united, no less), there are just too many variables and assumptions involved.
Nov 27, 2014, 9:46 am
#89
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bangkok or San Francisco
Programs: United 1k, Marriott Lifetime PE, Former DL Gold, Former SQ Solitaire, HH Gold
Posts: 11,886
One other thing. While I am not a lawyer (though I play one on FT) I did take a couple of business law classes while earning my degree. IIRC when this site works with customers to commit a civil tort, that constitutes "conspiracy". Isn't conspiracy to commit a civil fraud actually a criminal act? Even though the underlying fraud is only civil?
Nov 27, 2014, 10:03 am
#90
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Colorado
Programs: Lifetime UA 1K, Lifetime Hilton Diamond, Lifetime Marriott Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 1,261