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
#91
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: 12 stops from ORD
Programs: UA, AA, DL
Posts: 992
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?
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?
#7 = we might sue you if you don't pay that bill
And what's a cancer attack?
Or, you could be underestimating the complexity.
#92
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
You guys seem to be talking past each other. You're accurately describing how the system is supposed to work -- and does in the vast majority of cases. I get the feeling that Boca thinks the system rarely works the way it's supposed to and that juries often do whatever they want - which is simply not the case.
Or, you could be underestimating the complexity.
Or, you could be underestimating the complexity.
#93
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
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.
The judge tells the jurors the law, the jurors decide on the facts, and are supposed to rule based on the facts and the law, not "common sense" or "personal judgement".
#95
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: LHR (sometimes CLE, SFO, BOS, LAX, SEA)
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 5,894
Looks like Zaman got a real attorney. Super cute filing on 15 December with an affidavit from Zaman saying, shame on United and Orbitz for serving legal papers to his elderly non-English-speaking mom's place in NYC.
Docket includes in part
As of the time of this filing, the summons and complaint in this action have not been served on defendant Aktarer Zaman in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Rather, the summons and complaint were left with Mr. Zaman’s mother at her residence. As Mr. Zaman does not reside at that location, and he has not otherwise been served, service should be quashed and the plaintiffs should be required to serve Mr. Zaman in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Charles P. Kocoras: Motion hearing held. Motion to quash service 16 is granted. Defendant's counsel is to provide plaintiff's counsel with Defendant's current address. Defendant is to answer or otherwise plead by 1/6/2015. Plaintiff's reply is due by 1/13/2015. Court will rule by mail on 1/20/2015. In the event that parties resolve voluntarily, please contact the courtroom deputy [Mod Edit: contact name and info removed. Status hearing set for 1/15/2015 is stricken. Mailed notice (vcf, ) (Entered: 12/23/2014)
Last edited by goalie; Dec 30, 2014 at 1:40 pm Reason: removed personal information per tos
#96
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 5,690
I'm sorry but this is the behavior of a dying company grasping for remnants of how things use to be. I personally HATE this nonsense about having to use all of the legs.
Even from this idiot's chair, this isn't difficult to understand why hidden city ticketing is prohibited by ALL airlines.
All together now...airfares are not driven by the cost basis....
#97
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,575
The little website with 1 lawyer vs. a massive oligopoly with hundreds of lawyers and cozy relationships with politicians: no question who's going to win here.
But I do hope the fight is fought and there's at least some media coverage of predatory airline practices such as fortress-hub pricing. Skiplagged will be gone if it isn't already, but perhaps some good will come from this for the future.
But I do hope the fight is fought and there's at least some media coverage of predatory airline practices such as fortress-hub pricing. Skiplagged will be gone if it isn't already, but perhaps some good will come from this for the future.
#98
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: DCA/IAD
Programs: most of them
Posts: 3,283
They're certainly getting plenty of publicity. From the looks of Facebook every Fox affiliate in the country has been running the story. And most of the commentary seems to be "Look at the big, bad corporation trying to destroy this poor little computer genius." The fact is most people think airline pricing is non-sensical. And that UA is just out to screw its pax as much as possible.
#99
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Programs: UA Premier 1K: PlAAtinum; DL SM, MM; Marriott Gold; CO Plat Emeritus; NW Plat Emeritus
Posts: 4,776
#100
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ORD
Posts: 870
Freaking UA man, one of the dirtiest businesses out there! I would leave in a heartbeat if it were for Star Alliance.
#101
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 5,690
The fact is most people think airline pricing is non-sensical.
#102
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,575
They're certainly getting plenty of publicity. From the looks of Facebook every Fox affiliate in the country has been running the story. And most of the commentary seems to be "Look at the big, bad corporation trying to destroy this poor little computer genius." The fact is most people think airline pricing is non-sensical. And that UA is just out to screw its pax as much as possible.
#103
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CLE
Programs: UA 1K MM, DL Plat
Posts: 982
For whatever reason, this has certainly taken off in the news today. Not just in general news services either, but in a lot of tech-news sites like Engadget and ReadWrite.
I think UA is about to learn about The Streisand Effect.
Call this much attention to something that is, in practice, easy to take advantage of, and people will take advantage of it. As has been discussed to death, most travelers are not FT'ers, and so things like miles and PQDs don't matter much to them. There's suddenly a lot of computer-savvy, casual travelers who now know about something they otherwise would never have thought about.
So UA will crack down on travelers. The only way they could "punish" someone without a meaningful MP account would be to detect hidden-city ticketing mid-trip, and cancel their (separate) return ticket, stranding them at their destination. THEN that will make the news yet again, and various activist Attorneys General will start crowing about how companies can't punish customers who aren't breaking the law, etc etc etc...
This will not end well for UA, regardless of the actual legal outcome.
I think UA is about to learn about The Streisand Effect.
Call this much attention to something that is, in practice, easy to take advantage of, and people will take advantage of it. As has been discussed to death, most travelers are not FT'ers, and so things like miles and PQDs don't matter much to them. There's suddenly a lot of computer-savvy, casual travelers who now know about something they otherwise would never have thought about.
So UA will crack down on travelers. The only way they could "punish" someone without a meaningful MP account would be to detect hidden-city ticketing mid-trip, and cancel their (separate) return ticket, stranding them at their destination. THEN that will make the news yet again, and various activist Attorneys General will start crowing about how companies can't punish customers who aren't breaking the law, etc etc etc...
This will not end well for UA, regardless of the actual legal outcome.
#104
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,707
OK let's think for a minute about what will happen if the pro-hidden-city-ticketing side prevails.
Right now there is sufficient customer demand for an airline to charge $x for AAA - HUB. But it can only charge, say, 0.5x for AAA - smaller city BBB via HUB (or in other words, AAA - HUB - BBB).
What do you think is more likely if they can no longer charge that difference:
(A) The airline will drop the AAA-HUB fare to 0.5x to match the AAA-HUB-BBB fare; or
(B) The airline will stop service to BBB (with associated cost savings, which are often significantly higher on short legs on a passenger-mile basis) so it can still charge x on the much-higher-margin AAA-HUB fare?
My money would be on (B). So I would expect to see the BBBs of the world have service either reduced or eliminated, or maybe have higher fares to match AAA-HUB fares on those relatively few BBB markets where there is sufficient demand.
Congratulations! You won!
Right now there is sufficient customer demand for an airline to charge $x for AAA - HUB. But it can only charge, say, 0.5x for AAA - smaller city BBB via HUB (or in other words, AAA - HUB - BBB).
What do you think is more likely if they can no longer charge that difference:
(A) The airline will drop the AAA-HUB fare to 0.5x to match the AAA-HUB-BBB fare; or
(B) The airline will stop service to BBB (with associated cost savings, which are often significantly higher on short legs on a passenger-mile basis) so it can still charge x on the much-higher-margin AAA-HUB fare?
My money would be on (B). So I would expect to see the BBBs of the world have service either reduced or eliminated, or maybe have higher fares to match AAA-HUB fares on those relatively few BBB markets where there is sufficient demand.
Congratulations! You won!
#105
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: WAS, LAX
Programs: AS 100K
Posts: 1,330
OK let's think for a minute about what will happen if the pro-hidden-city-ticketing side prevails.
Right now there is sufficient customer demand for an airline to charge $x for AAA - HUB. But it can only charge, say, 0.5x for AAA - smaller city BBB via HUB (or in other words, AAA - HUB - BBB).
What do you think is more likely if they can no longer charge that difference:
(A) The airline will drop the AAA-HUB fare to 0.5x to match the AAA-HUB-BBB fare; or
(B) The airline will stop service to BBB (with associated cost savings, which are often significantly higher on short legs on a passenger-mile basis) so it can still charge x on the much-higher-margin AAA-HUB fare?
My money would be on (B). So I would expect to see the BBBs of the world have service either reduced or eliminated, or maybe have higher fares to match AAA-HUB fares on those relatively few BBB markets where there is sufficient demand.
Congratulations! You won!
Right now there is sufficient customer demand for an airline to charge $x for AAA - HUB. But it can only charge, say, 0.5x for AAA - smaller city BBB via HUB (or in other words, AAA - HUB - BBB).
What do you think is more likely if they can no longer charge that difference:
(A) The airline will drop the AAA-HUB fare to 0.5x to match the AAA-HUB-BBB fare; or
(B) The airline will stop service to BBB (with associated cost savings, which are often significantly higher on short legs on a passenger-mile basis) so it can still charge x on the much-higher-margin AAA-HUB fare?
My money would be on (B). So I would expect to see the BBBs of the world have service either reduced or eliminated, or maybe have higher fares to match AAA-HUB fares on those relatively few BBB markets where there is sufficient demand.
Congratulations! You won!