Today I purchase a tix for Mrs. cblaisd on UA's website for next month, OAK-DEN-ORD-IAD and returning IAD-OAK. So far so good; fare is reasonable and E+ seat selection not too bad.

Then, with PNR assigned, I call the 1K desk to ask that her outbound and return be upgraded using HK49's from my electronic bank. So far, ok, but thunderclouds form on the horizon: Two segments clear and two waitlist (not surprising), and the CSR asks me for my MP # and says I'll have to go to the CTO to sign an authorization. I say "The CTO has told me that that is not necessary when the last names are the same." She says, "They're wrong, and you have to go and sign an authorization." I thank her and hang up.

On the way home from work, I go to my favorite CTO in Walnut Creek (I feel so lucky still to have one nearby). I explain why I was sent there by the 1K desk. Two of the CSR's say they've never heard of this for folks with the same last name, but they go in and look up the record. Full-scale thunderstorms: While the upgraded segments (and the waitlisted ones on request) are still there, my MP # is nowhere to be found (nothing in the SSR field at all) and the record indicated that she would be using HK49's from her e-bank -- which she doesn't have as a Premier! This would have led to a nasty surprise at the airport, and an unpleasant phone call to cblaisd.

I say, "This is not good." The CSR immediately grasps the domestic relations implications and agrees heartily. "So let's fix it," she says. She then takes out two pages worth of cheat sheet showing how to assign an HK49 from my account to my spouse's itinerary. That's ok; they probably don't do these everyday and there seems to be a lot of keystrokes involved, and I am all in favor of checklists to avoid problems. But somehow Mrs. cblaisd's record simply won't take the insertion of my MP account number as the source for her upgrades! The CSR types and types and types and types. Then she has to call over a colleague. Together they try to make it work. No go. So she then has to call her help desk, where the conversation took about 15 minutes. More typing and typing and typing and typing. Finally she says "It's fixed." I say "I want a copy of the PNR showing the SSR field where it authorizes the upgrades coming from my account." She agrees that that is a good idea and prints it. She also then says that actually the 1K desk (she discovered from her long conversation with the help desk) is right; I do have to show a picture i.d. and she has to note in the record that she has so seen it. So we engage in that final transaction and I'm off, all of this having taken only 45 minutes....!

How much wasted staff time does UA do with such a process? How much easier it would be to return to 3 kinds of paper certs -- 500 milers, HK49's (and their variants/cousins), and SWU's. In that case, you call UA, you tell them you want to upgrade, and in the case of either sort of confirmed upgrade, you show up with the proper paper. End of story. If Mrs. cblaisd forgets the paper I would give her, then it's either buy the upgrade with her miles or go to the back of the bus; if Mr. cblaisd forgets to give her the paper certs, then he goes to the doghouse. This would seem so much simpler, less wasteful of staff time, and you could dispense with a whole layer of computer software and the attendant woes. (I realize that some folks make this sort of transaction easily and swimmingly; you are lucky, though, imo).

An aside: Doesn't it also seem a little nuts that there are three different sets of rules for these kinds of upgrades:

500 milers -- Not assignable unless to a person who is your "traveling companion" on the same itin.
HK49's -- Assignable, but you have to authorize in person with a picture i.d. and signature, even w/same last name!
Upgrading someone else with miles from your account -- NO in-person authorization required, if last name is same! Phone is fine!
SWU's -- Assignable, and just show up with the right paper.

I assume that there is some purported or hoped-for logic here on UA's part to maximize the "breakage" of such upgrades, but the the time, energy, confusion, and wasted effort sure make me wonder if this is worth it.

And that's why I pine for paper.

Not to mention the United Connecton software.....

Well, at least Walnut Creek was there to untangle this mess. Didn't I read that San Ramon was closing down? Without Walnut Creek, both you and I would be zipping back and forth to the Oakland Airport to sort things out, a major undertaking with the volume of vehicle traffic in and out of there each day now.

I've never had to go there, but there is/was a UA office near Stoneridge. Since my geography is failing me, and I apologize since I'm right over the valley in Fremont, is that Pleasanton or San Ramon office?

I haven't been there myself. I did find the thread where it was posted that San Ramon closes at the end of September:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/013581.html

One thing that I'd dearly like to see, is for married couples to be able to do these kind of transactions without repeated trips to CTOs or airports. How about a one time showing of a marriage certificate and UA appending a notation to the FF(s) personal record(s) to indicate this fact.

At least it's not like the old days were it was easier to transfer miles to a in-law by marriage (with the same last name as you) than to your spouse who has a different name.

John

------------------
From a kiwi who can fly!

[This message has been edited by SoFlyOn (edited 08-14-2002).]

The Stoneridge office was in Pleasanton and closed a long time ago. San Ramon will close soon.

As for the paper vs. ecerts, it's unfortunate they don't realize that this "fix" in many ways costs more money than it saves.

Yes, end of September, iirc

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
Without Walnut Creek, both you and I would be zipping back and forth to the Oakland Airport to sort things out, a major undertaking with the volume of vehicle traffic in and out of there each day now.

Oh, and not just that (as well as the utter unpredictability of OAK traffic to the terminal!), but I can hardly imagine the CSR's delight at OAK if we'd been doing this transaction while they were also trying to check in flights!

Agreed, a marriage cert or domestic partner cert ought only have to be noted once. And for that matter, UA could easily add this this functionality to its website to avoid this whole go-to-the-CTO for some but not other things.

It sure seems that way.

This is what happens when you have to make rules for everything.

Speaking of paper, I purchase all of my tickets, and Mrs. DADIS's tickets, using my credit card.

Since there were always sooo many problems with her e tickets, I would simply ask for paper tickets. Not any more...I am not spending $20 for them.

So if I am travling on United, and she is too (she's "only" a Premier Exec), how does she show my credit card when she's travling and I am too?

I know, I know, it cuts down on all this fraud...I keep buying tickets on United.com and I keep using the tickets i am buying on United.com so I must be doing something fraudulent....