United Airlines - Page 5 - E46Fanatics E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > General Off-Topic

General Off-Topic
Everything not about BMWs. Posts must be "primetime" safe and in good taste. You must be logged in to see sub-forums.
Click here to browse all new posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 04-10-2017, 05:37 PM   #81
ed17331
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hanover, PA
Posts: 21
My Ride: 2002 BMW 325i Sedan
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffro3000 View Post
This is interesting, but seems to apply only to people that were denied boarding (i.e. stopped at the gate, not allowed on the plane).

It seems that this policy does not apply to someone who has already boarded and taken their seat. At least that is the way I read it.

But of course, I'm no airline lawyer.
ed17331 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 05:43 PM   #82
jeffro3000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 2,812
My Ride: 2000 328i
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed17331 View Post
This is interesting, but seems to apply only to people that were denied boarding (i.e. stopped at the gate, not allowed on the plane).

It seems that this policy does not apply to someone who has already boarded and taken their seat. At least that is the way I read it.

But of course, I'm no airline lawyer.
You probably have a different definition of boarding than airlines do. "Boarding" might not be complete until the door is shut, or the plane has left the gate, or maybe even off the ground.

Then there's also instances of a plane making an emergency landing to kick someone off. They're going to reserve the right to to whatever they feel may be necessary at any given time.


Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Last edited by jeffro3000; 04-10-2017 at 05:46 PM.
jeffro3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 05:51 PM   #83
swordsman11868
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,324
My Ride: 2003 325i
Sounds like his lawyer needs to find a sympathetic judge before they litigate.


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics
__________________
I'm just here to change the world.
BMW Wiki: http://www.bimmerfest.com/wiki/index.php

E46Fanatics inspiration Robolop: http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthr...87566&page=101

2016 Beheadings in Saudi Arabia: 92.
swordsman11868 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 07:21 PM   #84
BoogetyBoogety
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dallas!
Posts: 814
My Ride: 2010 SL550
No doubt United was well within its legal rights to remove the passenger (any passenger) for any reason it deems appropriate from its planes. No doubt if it ever gets to a court of law, its attorneys will quote chapter and verse of why United can do so. The jury would be instructed to follow the letter of the law, and find for United.

But.

We all saw the video, we all know the passenger was a physician with a valid reason to be somewhere else (they could conceivably have picked someone else to boot off the plane after he refused to leave), they dragged him off the plane and injured him in the process, and made him an international object of pity and sympathy. I'm in that jury, I find for the good doctor, and send a message to United that I'm not one to be fvcked with, and neither are the hapless passengers they choose to jettison just so their people can go somewhere else on time.

I've settled two lawsuits in my favor where the other party was in the legal right, but exhibited actions or behaviors that painted their enterprise in an unfavorable light. Their counsel took them aside in each case, basically told them "you can and might win this, or you can pay this amount of money to make it go away before it gets to a jury or a judge," and they decided to pay that amount to make it go away. Betcha United ends up settling with the good doctor with a very generous offer that will not be revealed to the world by a mutual, confidential agreement. And then the doctor can go buy a nice little getaway place in Aspen...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdc336
BE QUIET STAY IN SILENT YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO TALK ANY MORE. YOU ARE SO MADD AND IM HAPPY . DUMB YOUR MOM
BoogetyBoogety is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 07:26 PM   #85
Wraisil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Acworth, GA
Posts: 219
My Ride: 2010 Infiniti G37
This wouldn't necessarily be the first or only time that someone acted within the letter of the law and was found liable for damages to another party.

Did UA violate the law? I don't know, I'm not going to try and learn FAA legal requirements/etc. Will that matter in the long run? Unlikely. I imagine that a decent lawyer will make sure the passenger gets some pretty decent compensation either way.
Wraisil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 07:30 PM   #86
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 964
My Ride: S2000+Wrangler
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoogetyBoogety View Post
No doubt United was well within its legal rights to remove the passenger (any passenger) for any reason it deems appropriate from its planes. No doubt if it ever gets to a court of law, its attorneys will quote chapter and verse of why United can do so. The jury would be instructed to follow the letter of the law, and find for United.

But.

We all saw the video, we all know the passenger was a physician with a valid reason to be somewhere else (they could conceivably have picked someone else to boot off the plane after he refused to leave), they dragged him off the plane and injured him in the process, and made him an international object of pity and sympathy. I'm in that jury, I find for the good doctor, and send a message to United that I'm not one to be fvcked with, and neither are the hapless passengers they choose to jettison just so their people can go somewhere else on time.

I've settled two lawsuits in my favor where the other party was in the legal right, but exhibited actions or behaviors that painted their enterprise in an unfavorable light. Their counsel took them aside in each case, basically told them "you can and might win this, or you can pay this amount of money to make it go away before it gets to a jury or a judge," and they decided to pay that amount to make it go away. Betcha United ends up settling with the good doctor with a very generous offer that will not be revealed to the world by a mutual, confidential agreement. And then the doctor can go buy a nice little getaway place in Aspen...
Small note, internal company policies often are not in agreement with the law, or have the law on their side. Often times, when tested, they do not. I've personally been involved in a few lawsuits which had non-enforceable/found to be unreasonable by a judge. (2 were non-competes.)
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 07:36 PM   #87
bimmerfan08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 4,905
My Ride: F
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabrio330 View Post
So last year I was bumped from a Southwest flight and they offered me $400 (I think). I complained, saying that this was their issue, not mine, and they should simply continue to increase the amount of compensation until they got enough volunteers to take a later flight. They gave me a piece of paper from the FAA that says the airlines, in this case Southwest, cannot offer more than the FAA-allowed maximum, e.g., $400.

I don't have that piece of paper any longer, and a quick google search didn't bring any hits that made it clear the airlines are in fact prohibited by the FAA from paying more than the FAA-proscribed amounts. Maybe someone else in here knows more and can confirm either way?

I mention this only because (1) I think it is stupid for the FAA to limit the compensation to passengers in these circumstances, but (2) if it is true, then United bears less responsibility here than might seem appropriate otherwise.
Pretty sure you can get more than that. IIRC I got somewhere in the ballpark of $500 (literally handed me a check to cash) when I got bumped from a Delta flight a few years back. I didn't mind as the next flight out was only 2 hours later plus it was early on a Friday and I had finished my work for the week. And I got first class on that flight and I got meal vouchers. Made a nice contribution to my Roth IRA at the time.
__________________
"You are free to make choices. You are not free to escape the consequences."

Last edited by bimmerfan08; 04-10-2017 at 07:42 PM.
bimmerfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 07:38 PM   #88
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 964
My Ride: S2000+Wrangler
I don't have the DOT rules in front of me, I believe it's is currently 200% compensation of ticket price for a 1-2 hour delay and 400% for a 4 hour delay, with the max being 675 and 1350 respectively, plus ALL the ancillary costs.
__________________

Last edited by NFRs2000nyc; 04-10-2017 at 07:38 PM.
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 09:33 PM   #89
BreakfastBurrito
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: OC, CA
Posts: 362
My Ride: ///GT3 RSR
__________________
BreakfastBurrito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 10:04 PM   #90
jeffro3000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 2,812
My Ride: 2000 328i
https://www.google.com/amp/gizmodo.c...1794181325/amp

Damn, so much blood coming out of his mouth.
jeffro3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2017, 11:03 PM   #91
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 964
My Ride: S2000+Wrangler
Yea, anyone that thinks this guy isn't getting paid is out of their minds. God forbid their union POS employees had to wait for another flight.
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 12:19 AM   #92
BreakfastBurrito
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: OC, CA
Posts: 362
My Ride: ///GT3 RSR
Maybe we'll get to see Gorsuch in action on this one.
__________________
BreakfastBurrito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 05:41 AM   #93
choxor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 5,537
My Ride: JDM
Maybe he should have just gotten off the fking plane.
__________________
choxor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 06:10 AM   #94
cowmoo32
.--. . -. .. ...
 
cowmoo32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: FL
Posts: 5,545
My Ride: Yukon
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/10/unit...lligerent.html
Quote:

In an email to employees, United CEO Oscar Munoz addressed an incident in which an overbooked passenger had to be forcibly removed from a United plane.
Passenger described as "disruptive and belligerent."
Munoz: "I emphatically stand behind all of you."
__________________
cowmoo32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 06:24 AM   #95
coco savage
Registered User
 
coco savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: CFBMW.org
Posts: 1,371
My Ride: 325i
Quote:
Originally Posted by BreakfastBurrito View Post


__________________
**LINK:BUY MY E46 Parts**

Random Images


Quote:
Originally Posted by Black107 View Post
he's just the resident off-topic ball breaker. Dont take it personally.
coco savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 06:51 AM   #96
ryanwhite74115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,804
My Ride: 2013 Infiniti G37S
Lawyer here. This myth that passengers don't have rights needs to go away, ASAP. You are dead wrong when saying that United legally kicked him off the plane.

1. First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSELLING", which is specifically defined as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to deny boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.

2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.

3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.
__________________
\(`' )/
ryanwhite74115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 07:22 AM   #97
Solidjake
Zero. Leaks.
 
Solidjake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 31,101
My Ride: '02 330i 6MT
Quote:
Originally Posted by BreakfastBurrito View Post
__________________
Solidjake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 07:32 AM   #98
ryanwhite74115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,804
My Ride: 2013 Infiniti G37S
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaderDave View Post
I'm still waiting for someone to post something in support of the notion that United did something legally wrong here in choosing to boot the dude off the plane. All I'm seeing are articles and guides that suggest the opposite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaderDave View Post
I was hoping that someone might post something that had some actual citations/support--like actual articles or commentaries or something.
See my above post.
__________________
\(`' )/
ryanwhite74115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 07:53 AM   #99
BreakfastBurrito
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: OC, CA
Posts: 362
My Ride: ///GT3 RSR


Sent from my Pixel using E46Fanatics mobile app
__________________
BreakfastBurrito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2017, 09:36 AM   #100
NFRs2000nyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 964
My Ride: S2000+Wrangler
CEO doubled down on stupidity. Just added a 0 to the settlement, and will probably tank share prices 10% and will be out of a job inside of 6 months lol


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics
__________________
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.