Incorrect Charge After Using Cert
#1
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,072
Incorrect Charge After Using Cert
Bought a ticket for $228.10 - $200 e-cert and was quoted $28.10 add collect. Ticket was issued, and receipt showed $28.10 charged to credit card.
Since this is United, I actually check the charge posting, since I don't trust their post-merger IT, and sure enough the charge posted to my card slightly higher.
Not a huge amount, but in aggregate, they could be making quite a few bucks with this "tens of pennies" approach if they're ripping off others as well.
This same thing happened for 2 pax on 2 separate records. Both had the same incorrect posting.
RECEIPT:
VIXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX on Saturday, January 23, 2016. $28.10 USD per ticket for an additional total of $28.10 USD was collected.
CC POSTING:
01/23/2016 01/25/2016 Sale UNITED $29.03
Credit card is in USD, ticket was bought from united.com's USA site in USD, so it's not an exchange issue.
Anyhow watch your charges...
Since this is United, I actually check the charge posting, since I don't trust their post-merger IT, and sure enough the charge posted to my card slightly higher.
Not a huge amount, but in aggregate, they could be making quite a few bucks with this "tens of pennies" approach if they're ripping off others as well.
This same thing happened for 2 pax on 2 separate records. Both had the same incorrect posting.
RECEIPT:
VIXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX on Saturday, January 23, 2016. $28.10 USD per ticket for an additional total of $28.10 USD was collected.
CC POSTING:
01/23/2016 01/25/2016 Sale UNITED $29.03
Credit card is in USD, ticket was bought from united.com's USA site in USD, so it's not an exchange issue.
Anyhow watch your charges...
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 15,125
Was it a tax/fee thing? Maybe 29.03 was taxes/fees? I'm thinking maybe ETCs can't apply towards taxes/fees? I don't have one available, so I can't look. If so, maybe there's still a buck or so left on ETC?
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,072
Hmm, you can use ETCs on taxes, though. I've used ETCs to cover a whole ticket before.
Maybe it's a bug with base fares that are approaching the cert value.
#4
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: None - previously UA
Posts: 4,915
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,072
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,926
Incorrect Charge After Using Cert
Was the charge you are seeing on your CC one that is an pending charge (I.e. Authorization) or an actual posted charge? The two can be different, and oftentimes merchants authorize a higher amount than they actually post the charge for. Just a possibility.
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,072
Actual posted charge. The pending charge was correct, but has since dropped off. They actually posted the higher number.
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,072
An additional amount for the difference in fare was charged to VISA VIXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX on Saturday, January 23, 2016. $28.10 USD per ticket for an additional total of $28.10 USD was collected.
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,072
It's 93 cents x 2 pax, I'm not really interested in spending time with UA on it or having UA putz around with it and probably break something else for a couple of bucks. I still need to fly the ticket.
As for a CC dispute, Chase would probably not pursue a dispute that low -- they'd just credit me and move on. So nothing would happen to UA.
Plus, UA would likely not acknowledge the real issue, which we all know, is that their technology hasn't worked since they downgraded to CO's systems back in 2012.
#12
Join Date: Sep 2005
Programs: UA gold; WN A; PC plat; Marriott Gold
Posts: 425
It's 93 cents x 2 pax, I'm not really interested in spending time with UA on it or having UA putz around with it and probably break something else for a couple of bucks. I still need to fly the ticket.
As for a CC dispute, Chase would probably not pursue a dispute that low -- they'd just credit me and move on. So nothing would happen to UA.
Plus, UA would likely not acknowledge the real issue, which we all know, is that their technology hasn't worked since they downgraded to CO's systems back in 2012.
As for a CC dispute, Chase would probably not pursue a dispute that low -- they'd just credit me and move on. So nothing would happen to UA.
Plus, UA would likely not acknowledge the real issue, which we all know, is that their technology hasn't worked since they downgraded to CO's systems back in 2012.
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern Calif./Eastern Ida.
Programs: Amethyst Premier Plutonium Medallion
Posts: 20,710
i agree, DOT them on the premise of 'post purchase price increase'. making them spend lots of hours on a dispute of $.93 would be especially rewarding.
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,072
Filed a DOT complaint against UA for the overcharge. They left me a voicemail saying that the charge was correct, and the receipt shows the whole ticket price regardless of the form of payment (in other words, they didn't read my letter, detail, and copy of credit card charges I attached).
A couple days later, UA left another voicemail saying that it was an unintentional technical glitch, and they'll refund me the 93 cents x 2 tickets or whatever it was. I wonder if they sent their proposed response to DOT who may have rejected it as not addressing the concern.