3 ms·

I don't think that is going to happen. Before this new-ish regulation, the airline had discretion over how to rebook you or compensate you. Now if the delay is

I don't think that is going to happen. Before this new-ish regulation, the airline had discretion over how to rebook you or compensate you. Now if the delay is over 3h (iirc) they have to refund you. I think even an arbitration court would have them reimburse you if they simply canceled a flight and kept your money.

dghlsakjg 1y ago
Yes, But no one wants to have to go to court or arbitration to get a refund on a service that the service provider cancelled. If AA cancels my flight, I want my money back without having to ask for it. I don't want to have to submit an application to receive AA credits that expire in 6 months, and then have to initiate legal action to get my actual cash back. Or having them say that they rebooked me on a flight three days later so they are off the hook. The current rules make it so that the customer has the power. I can still give AA the option of rebooking me or refunding me, but it is MY choice.
- cosmicgadget 1y ago
  I agree with you on everything except ever flying American Airlines. I think most people would agree with you.
itopaloglu83 1y ago
And what percentage of people will take them to court just to get them to refund their ticket? Airlines have full time lawyers with nothing to do but push paper around. Why are we making it harder for the consumer to resolve an issue when the flight is clearly cancelled? They just want to force you into weird store-credit style refunds so that you cannot go to a competitor or choose not to travel.
- cosmicgadget 1y ago
  > And what percentage of people will take them to court just to get them to refund their ticket? If there is any upside to mandatory binding final arbitration, it's that proceedings are cheaper and quicker. It might be that the arbitrators decide to universally rule in favor of the airlines amidst unambiguous evidence that the airlines took money and canceled the service, but seems unlikely. It's also a huge risk on the part of the airlines to decide that their official policy is to stiff customers and hope it works out in arbitration. > Why are we making it harder for the consumer to resolve an issue when the flight is clearly cancelled? Because we elected the guy who said he would, going so far as to ensure he had a majority in both houses of Congress. > They just want to force you into weird store-credit style refunds so that you cannot go to a competitor or choose not to travel. Lol yes that is exactly it. I wouldn't have written that stuff above if I knew you were going to correct yourself.
  - itopaloglu83 1y ago
    There are so many things to know, the world moves fast, so everything keeps changing constantly. It’s impossible for people to keep up and instead of providing a service, some airlines are trying to benefit from it knowing that folks will not claim their refunds or fee meals etc. I wish every flight cancellation and delay emails had FAQ style “what are my choices” section where you can see your right clearly.

dghlsakjg 1y ago

Yes, But no one wants to have to go to court or arbitration to get a refund on a service that the service provider cancelled. If AA cancels my flight, I want my money back without having to ask for it. I don't want to have to submit an application to receive AA credits that expire in 6 months, and then have to initiate legal action to get my actual cash back. Or having them say that they rebooked me on a flight three days later so they are off the hook. The current rules make it so that the customer has the power. I can still give AA the option of rebooking me or refunding me, but it is MY choice.

cosmicgadget 1y ago
I agree with you on everything except ever flying American Airlines. I think most people would agree with you.

itopaloglu83 1y ago

And what percentage of people will take them to court just to get them to refund their ticket? Airlines have full time lawyers with nothing to do but push paper around. Why are we making it harder for the consumer to resolve an issue when the flight is clearly cancelled? They just want to force you into weird store-credit style refunds so that you cannot go to a competitor or choose not to travel.

cosmicgadget 1y ago
> And what percentage of people will take them to court just to get them to refund their ticket? If there is any upside to mandatory binding final arbitration, it's that proceedings are cheaper and quicker. It might be that the arbitrators decide to universally rule in favor of the airlines amidst unambiguous evidence that the airlines took money and canceled the service, but seems unlikely. It's also a huge risk on the part of the airlines to decide that their official policy is to stiff customers and hope it works out in arbitration. > Why are we making it harder for the consumer to resolve an issue when the flight is clearly cancelled? Because we elected the guy who said he would, going so far as to ensure he had a majority in both houses of Congress. > They just want to force you into weird store-credit style refunds so that you cannot go to a competitor or choose not to travel. Lol yes that is exactly it. I wouldn't have written that stuff above if I knew you were going to correct yourself.
- itopaloglu83 1y ago
  There are so many things to know, the world moves fast, so everything keeps changing constantly. It’s impossible for people to keep up and instead of providing a service, some airlines are trying to benefit from it knowing that folks will not claim their refunds or fee meals etc. I wish every flight cancellation and delay emails had FAQ style “what are my choices” section where you can see your right clearly.