Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Lifetime Member Edition: UC access changes Nov 1, 2019 (same day BP on UA or partner)

Lifetime Member Edition: UC access changes Nov 1, 2019 (same day BP on UA or partner)

    Hide Wikipost
Old Mar 2, 20, 9:19 am   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: texd
Wiki Link
So, is anything happening with this? Just curious (Oct 3, 2019)



If you paid cash for a lifetime Club membership and would like to join a potential class action due to this material change, please post your username here:
ctownflyer
hog Heaven
AAdmiral
nsx + 1
RichardInSF
Sykes
soartoday
lax2jfk2lax
libuser + 1
Xyzzy + 1
Buster CT1K
1K Student
Elitefreak
flyer austin + 1 (wiki-restricted member, added by IAH-OIL-TRASH)
Radonc1 + 1 (not a FT member but has LT membership)
Halo117
mikey
Mnmag
Vulcan
lateacher
kmersh
MazdaMP
bajong
sandiego1k
thesilb
HnlJay
nachosdelux
wtigerFF
a1bengal
benolaa
LeslieandDiane
SPN Lifer +1
YRKInsider
texd


If you received a lifetime Club membership from the UA MM program and would like to join a potential class action, please post your username here:
deek
honmani2
lax2jfk2lax (recd 2nd lifetime for hitting 2MM which I gifted)

Related thread: Club member/one-time pass access changes Nov 1, 2019 (same day BP on UA or partner) Original thread -- focused on the basic access issue, most lifetime membership posts have been moved to this lifetime thread



Print Wikipost

Old Nov 22, 18, 4:39 am
  #76  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,859
The Wiki states:

If you received a lifetime Club membership from the UA MM program ...........

When did United give lifetime Club membership from the UA MM program ???
BF263533 is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 6:11 am
  #77  
LBJ
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Programs: DL DM
Posts: 13,290
Originally Posted by libuser View Post
in the 10 years or i have had my LT membership i have also used the UA lounges under 20 times when flying other airlines. I bet we are in the 0.0001% of all of their guests.
It would seem silly to impose that restriction on us.
You are discounting the time and expense to document and train agents about an exception for a very small number of members which is likely the bigger concern for UA. Further, it sets a precedent of potentially having to make carve-out/exception's whenever there is a change in lounge policy. I wouldn't be surprised if you were to push this legally that they might end up offering some sort of pro-rated refund rather than making policy exceptions.
LBJ is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 10:26 am
  #78  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Programs: UA 1K 3 Million/ex-many year GS, AA PLT/2 Mil, AS MVPG, HH Dia, Starwood Life Plat, Hertz PC
Posts: 1,391
Originally Posted by BF263533 View Post
The Wiki states:

If you received a lifetime Club membership from the UA MM program ...........

When did United give lifetime Club membership from the UA MM program ???
LT Red Carpet Club membership was for years a benefit of making 2 million miles with the old pre-merger program.
pdx1M is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 11:01 am
  #79  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,026
Originally Posted by LBJ View Post
...if you were to push this legally that they might end up offering some sort of pro-rated refund rather than making policy exceptions.
And the mathematician in me asks exactly what numbers could you possibly use to calculate a “pro-rated refund”?
IAH-OIL-TRASH is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 11:27 am
  #80  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 4,582
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH View Post


And the mathematician in me asks exactly what numbers could you possibly use to calculate a “pro-rated refund”?
Exactly $20 for every year since effective date, up to $160. A gesture, not a settlement.

Intended to avoid unwanted media exposure.
LegalTender is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 11:33 am
  #81  
Moderator: United Airlines; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.85MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 49,813
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH View Post
And the mathematician in me asks exactly what numbers could you possibly use to calculate a “pro-rated refund”?
My guess if you do the equivalent NPV calculation on the purchase of the LT UC membership and the lowest cost of UC membership in the years since the LT purchase has a return value exceeding most investments. And add in the future value ( even if reduced somewhat due to this change) and financial result is even more in the purchaser's advantage.
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 11:48 am
  #82  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP; AS 75K; UA 1K 1MM; Marriott Ambassador; Hilton Diamond (Aspire); Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 43,857
Originally Posted by LegalTender View Post
Intended to avoid unwanted media exposure.
No one is going to care about a few frequent flyers having their benefits incrementally curtailed. Least of all UA. For one thing, there's no YouTube video

Originally Posted by WineCountryUA View Post
My guess if you do the equivalent NPV calculation on the purchase of the LT UC membership and the lowest cost of UC membership in the years since the LT purchase has a return value exceeding most investments. And add in the future value ( even if reduced somewhat due to this change) and financial result is even more in the purchaser's advantage.
Agree, I don't think that calculation will help the LT members' argument at all.
Kacee is online now  
Old Nov 22, 18, 1:26 pm
  #83  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,026
Originally Posted by WineCountryUA View Post
My guess if you do the equivalent NPV calculation on the purchase of the LT UC membership and the lowest cost of UC membership in the years since the LT purchase has a return value exceeding most investments. And add in the future value ( even if reduced somewhat due to this change) and financial result is even more in the purchaser's advantage.
Future value cannot be defined because (as a group) everyone won’t agree to die on the same day and year or (individually) one can’t provide a date of death (in most cases) 🙂

”pro-rata” is the term I have an issue wrt “refund” (it can’t be defined), but some sort of goodwill gesture might be due. Making an exemption would just provide a new avenue for agents to make wrong turns.
IAH-OIL-TRASH is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 1:33 pm
  #84  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP; AS 75K; UA 1K 1MM; Marriott Ambassador; Hilton Diamond (Aspire); Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 43,857
Originally Posted by IAH-OIL-TRASH View Post
Future value cannot be defined because (as a group) everyone won’t agree to die on the same day and year or (individually) one can’t provide a date of death (in most cases) 🙂
The law will allow future value damages based on expert testimony. Typically the expert will just a pick date beyond which future value becomes too speculative to estimate. Five years would be pretty common, though obviously the exact number depends on the particular circumstances.
Kacee is online now  
Old Nov 22, 18, 1:50 pm
  #85  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,503
Originally Posted by LegalTender View Post

Intended to avoid unwanted media exposure.
Unwanted media exposure? What media would possibly want to "expose" this? That UA actually wants you to fly on their own planes to use an lounge?

If UA stood its ground in Lagen v United Airlines lifetime million miler suit - with all its ugliness, including the written dissent by a Federal Appeals and then the court affirming they can unilaterally change lifetime benefits which had a lot of media exposure - then they certainly don't care about this.

Delta announced this several months before UA - where is the unwanted media exposure for them? Lagen v UA set precedent at a Federal Appeals Court level - I can't imagine any reputable law firm would remotely entertain this - I can only imagine how money was lost by the Lagen attorneys who probably felt certain UA would settle and divvy up attorney fees.
HNLbasedFlyer is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 2:48 pm
  #86  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 4,582
Originally Posted by HNLbasedFlyer View Post
If UA stood its ground in Lagen v United Airlines lifetime million miler suit - with all its ugliness, including the written dissent by a Federal Appeals and then the court affirming they can unilaterally change lifetime benefits which had a lot of media exposure - then they certainly don't care about this.
The court in Lagen punted to Congress. Media exposure may not be a deterrent to a company like UA. Point taken.

"The most basic and powerful fact is the plain meaning of the word United chose to attract plaintiff's business: “lifetime.” That's hard to reconcile with “until we change our minds.” /.../ Consumer fraud cases must be handled through the Department of Transportation. However bad United's conduct may have been, it must be addressed in the manner that Congress prescribed." - Judge David F. Hamilton, 7th U.S. Circuit

Last edited by LegalTender; Nov 22, 18 at 5:25 pm Reason: Citation error
LegalTender is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 4:23 pm
  #87  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP; AS 75K; UA 1K 1MM; Marriott Ambassador; Hilton Diamond (Aspire); Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 43,857
Originally Posted by LegalTender View Post
The court in Lagen punted to Congress.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed on two grounds - the promise to million milers was not part of the contract with Lagen, and any deceptive practices claim would be preempted by the ADA. The dissenting judge believed UA's conduct to be fraudulent and that there should be a remedy for that. He was outvoted.

Last edited by Kacee; Nov 22, 18 at 4:35 pm
Kacee is online now  
Old Nov 22, 18, 5:05 pm
  #88  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 4,582
Originally Posted by Kacee View Post
That's not exactly correct. The Seventh Circuit affirmed on two grounds - the promise to million milers was not part of the contract with Lagen, and any deceptive practices claim would be preempted by the ADA. The dissenting judge believed UA's conduct to be fraudulent. He was outvoted.
Obviously, all dissenting judges are outvoted. All 3 recognized the Act’s preemptive effect. MileagePlus Program rules have always allowed United to tinker with the program and Lagen failed to prove that Million–Miler bennies are/were separate. But the Court cited a 1992 ruling that the ADA “does not give the airlines carte blanche to lie to and deceive consumers." It channels grievances to DOT, the choice Congress made.
LegalTender is offline  
Old Nov 22, 18, 8:08 pm
  #89  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CLE
Programs: UA GS+LT UC, AA LT PLT, Fairmont LT PLT, SPG PLT, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Diamond, Avis CHM.
Posts: 3,845
Originally Posted by LegalTender View Post
Obviously, all dissenting judges are outvoted. All 3 recognized the Act’s preemptive effect. MileagePlus Program rules have always allowed United to tinker with the program and Lagen failed to prove that Million–Miler bennies are/were separate. But the Court cited a 1992 ruling that the ADA “does not give the airlines carte blanche to lie to and deceive consumers." It channels grievances to DOT, the choice Congress made.
Hence the question, does a paid club membership that had no airline ticket requirement fall under the ADA?
And does UA want this to be the test case?
I'd wager that UAs lawyers have been debating this since I raised the issue.
ctownflyer is online now  
Old Nov 22, 18, 9:24 pm
  #90  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,503
Originally Posted by ctownflyer View Post
I'd wager that UAs lawyers have been debating this since I raised the issue.
I'd wager more likely than not, UA lawyers haven't debated this whatsoever and haven't even been looped in. My opinion, DL havesn't debated this either and they announced months ago before UA.

Last edited by HNLbasedFlyer; Nov 22, 18 at 9:42 pm
HNLbasedFlyer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: