ALASKA is shutting down your accounts and taking away points!

[AJK]

Again, you don't know the precise details of the contract and relationship between AS and BofA.

Complaining based on clueless assumptions is nothing more than whining.

You, too?

As long as the terms say the program can do whatever it pleases without regard to the imbalance of bargaining power in this context, no one has a right to feel aggrieved, no matter the actions taken by the program, and regardless of the scenario?

I hope AS doesn't ban you, too, the next time you wear a red (or white) shirt.

[yuneeq]

You, too?

As long as the terms say the program can do whatever it pleases without regard to the imbalance of bargaining power in this context, no one has a right to feel aggrieved, no matter the actions taken by the program, and regardless of the scenario?

I hope AS doesn't ban you, too, the next time you wear a red (or white) shirt.

You don't know if they're auditing you for wearing a white shirt, or if they're banning you because BofA is demanding it along with a clawback. Or any of another hundred options.

What is clear to me though, is that anybody churning is not acting in good faith and that separates churners from colored shirt wearers.

[etech0]

You don't know if they're auditing you for wearing a white shirt, or if they're banning you because BofA is demanding it along with a clawback. Or any of another hundred options.

What is clear to me though, is that anybody churning is not acting in good faith and that separates churners from colored shirt wearers.

What's with the colored shirts nowadays, anyways? If you look at pictures of our great-great-grandparents, EVERYONE is wearing black and white!

[Aj3042]

You don't know if they're auditing you for wearing a white shirt, or if they're banning you because BofA is demanding it along with a clawback. Or any of another hundred options.

What is clear to me though, is that anybody churning is not acting in good faith and that separates churners from colored shirt wearers.

Yes I'm not sure what this colored T-shirt comparison is doing here. Large scale churning is hurting them, it's not the intention of their cc offers, and so they have the right to shut down the accounts. What's so difficult about that?

[AJK]

You don't know if they're auditing you for wearing a white shirt, or if they're banning you because BofA is demanding it along with a clawback. Or any of another hundred options.

What is clear to me though, is that anybody churning is not acting in good faith and that separates churners from colored shirt wearers.

That's true; churning may not be as innocuous as wearing a colored shirt.

But if the stated terms were not being violated, and the only reason the accounts are being shuttered is because of the catch-all "we can do whatever want, so na-na-boo-boo" clause, then I still maintain people have a right to be upset his or her points were confiscated.

What's with the colored shirts nowadays, anyways? If you look at pictures of our great-great-grandparents, EVERYONE is wearing black and white!

Let's try to keep this on topic.

[Aj3042]

That's true; churning may not be as innocuous as wearing a colored shirt.

But if the stated terms were not being violated, and the only reason the accounts are being shuttered is because of the catch-all "we can do whatever want, so na-na-boo-boo" clause, then I still maintain people have a right to be upset his or her points were confiscated.

Let's try to keep this on topic.

I agree-people definitely have the right to be upset (as I would, had I done this and this happened to me) but that doesn't negate the fact that AS didn't confiscate the points based on T-shirt color but based on a legit and understandable business decision. The right "to be upset" and AS's right to confiscate the miles aren't mutually exclusive.

[yuneeq]

That's true; churning may not be as innocuous as wearing a colored shirt.

But if the stated terms were not being violated, and the only reason the accounts are being shuttered is because of the catch-all "we can do whatever want, so na-na-boo-boo" clause, then I still maintain people have a right to be upset his or her points were confiscated.

Let's try to keep this on topic.

Let's imagine that Alaska's lawyers are convinced that churning the way ddfers churn is considered wire fraud.
Their terms would be violated and they could do whatever they want.

Would that console you?

[mawmaw]

i would advise victims of AS to take AS to SCC in another case chase lawyers have called people right  before court dates approached  to negotiate payments on confiscated UR points

[12HRS]

i would advise victims of AS to take AS to SCC in another case chase lawyers have called people right  before court dates approached  to negotiate payments on confiscated UR points

I'm sure some of this will end up in lawsuits. how it ends is another story.

[AJK]

Let's imagine that Alaska's lawyers are convinced that churning the way ddfers churn is considered wire fraud.
Their terms would be violated and they could do whatever they want.

Would that console you?

The terms don't mean what the AS lawyers prefer them to mean. It's what a judge says they mean.

[Aj3042]

The terms don't mean what the AS lawyers prefer them to mean. It's what a judge says they mean.

Wake me up when somebody wins against AS.

[AJK]

... Said the same people about Chase closures. You haven't been around long enough.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

... Said the same people about Chase closures. You haven't been around long enough.

You can add Amex and Citi to the list. I expect Suntrust/DL to be added also.

[MosheD]

Wow D93 ( not gomna quote whole shpeil)
It seems they are just making stuff up as they go along.
So what happens if you pay the $500? Will you actually get the miles back or will it be another headache? And if you do get miles back would you have to pay $500 again if you booked an Ek f ticket (apparantly the part that boyhered them most bec thats totally against good faith
If so, I think we can estimate how much an ek ticket costs them...

[D93]

So what happens if you pay the $500? Will you actually get the miles back

According to the rep, No.

[Emkay]

As much as this sucks for the OP and I would also go to the SCC, will that do more harm then good? At the end of the day the rules of this game are more likely to change the bigger the deal about is made

[peace123]

Don't know if what he is saying is true or not but if AS took your miles just cos you got miles and canceled your card,  file  a claim in SCC. Most probably, Alaska will settle  for you than paying for a lawyer and sending a lawyer to court. Doing so costs Alaska money.

You have the  right to cancel a card anytime you want whether or not you got  miles or not! They  may also have right to cancel your account  but your already earned points?  threaten them with court papers and see!

[MosheD]

Yes, what emkay is saying though is that forcing AS to settle, is more likely to cause them to officially change the rules. Whereas if we let this slide there is a slim chance that there will be something left to salvage.
That being said, if I were in the op sitch Id prob go to the scc

[ChaimMoskowitz]

You have the  right to cancel a card anytime you want whether or not you got  miles or not! They  may also have right to cancel your account  but your already earned points?  threaten them with court papers and see!

Playing devils advocate here. They will claim you opened the CC's with no intent of ever paying the AF. You did this more than once which will show a pattern. They will then claim that it is fraud.

[D93]

Playing devils advocate here. They will claim you opened the CC's with no intent of ever paying the AF. You did this more than once which will show a pattern. They will then claim that it is fraud.

How is that fraud?