Suing an Airline for kicking u off their FF program

[MarkS]

 Got kicked of a FF program?  Sue them!!!   See  HERE   and  HERE
Passengers can sue airlines for backing out of deals - like frequent-flier mileage credits - despite the federal law that largely frees the companies from regulation, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.

Air carriers have argued that the 1978 law, which prohibits state regulation of their prices, routes or services, bars customers from using state laws to file suits that could affect airline operations. A judge in San Diego agreed with that argument in dismissing a suit by a passenger who accused Northwest Airlines of arbitrarily revoking his frequent-flier status in 2008.

But the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the federal law forbids only state laws and lawsuits that would directly require changes in prices, routes or service, and doesn't excuse airlines from honoring their contracts with passengers.

The purpose of the law was "to make the airline industry more efficient by unleashing the market forces of competition - it was not to immunize the airline industry" from responsibility for reneging on its own agreements, like the frequent-flier program, the court said in a 3-0 ruling.

The ruling allows Rabbi S. Binyomin Ginsberg, a Minneapolis clergyman and author of education books, to try to prove that Northwest broke its contract with him by withdrawing his frequent-flier status after nine years in the program.

Ginsberg claimed the airline was punishing him for his complaints about its service and a merger with Delta Air Lines; Northwest told him in an e-mail that it was entitled to decide when a passenger was abusing the frequent-flier program.

The ruling is good news for "anybody who does business with the airlines," said Ginsberg's lawyer, Thatcher Stone. Since the 1978 law passed, he said, "airlines in this country have acted as if they were independent governments with sovereign immunity" from lawsuits.

He declined to say why Ginsberg sued in San Diego. Lawyers for the airline were unavailable for comment.

The airline law has prompted a series of rulings on the scope of its restrictions on state regulation and related lawsuits.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the ban on price regulation bars states from applying their false-advertising laws to ads for air fares. The court has allowed customers to sue an airline for frequent-flier program changes that reduced the value of their credits, saying the law allowed claims for breach of contract even if they might affect the passengers' fares.

That distinction applies to Ginsberg's case, Judge Robert Beezer said in Friday's ruling.
Northwest's "economic decision" to establish the program "means that the airline has to abide by its contractual obligations," Beezer said.

The ruling can be viewed at links.sfgate.com/ZLBN.

[milechazzer]

Supreme Court to hear frequent-flier case:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/05/20/supreme-court-northwest-airlines-frequent-flier/2326529/

A dispute between a frequent flier and an airline is heading to the Supreme Court.

The court announced Monday it would hear the case called Northwest Airlines vs. Ginsburg, which is basically about what justifies an airline dropping a traveler from its frequent-flier program.

The airline revoked Rabbi Binyomin Ginsberg's membership in the WorldPerks Platinum Elite program in June 2008. He had complained 24 times in eight months about Northwest's service and sought "compensation over and above (Northwest's) guidelines," according to the airline's written argument.

Ginsberg, who flies 75 times a year as a lecturer, filed a federal class-action lawsuit seeking $5 million, saying he was dropped without adequate cause. He acknowledged complaining about getting bumped from flights, but not every time.

"Rabbi Ginsberg appealed solely with respect to the claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing," Ginsberg's written argument said.

But Northwest, which is now part of Delta Air Lines, argued that the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 prevents lawsuits governing "price, route or service of an air carrier."

ALSO ONLINE: Delta frequent fliers fume about award availability
READ MORE: Travelers get stingier with their loyalty

A U.S. District Court dismissed Ginsberg's case, but the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the case, saying that Ginsberg could argue whether the airline acted in good faith.

Now Northwest is asking the Supreme Court to explain how much freedom airlines have to set their own policies under the Airline Deregulation Act. The trade group Airlines for America supported Northwest in the case.

"The prospect of state and local regulations that affect airline prices and services, subject to the shifting political whims of each locality airlines serve, is precisely the danger that led Congress to adopt the ADA's broad preemption provision," the group said in a written argument.

The Supreme Court will hear the case in the fall term that begins in October.

[Dan]

Wow!

[birne]

Wow!

+10

[smart brit]

Wow!

? the 5million he is suing?

[Dan]

That the supreme court took the case.

[smart brit]

That the supreme court took the case.

+1
I guess this is more important to them then someone serving a 27yr sentence 

[Finckmyster]

+1
I guess this is more important to them then someone serving a 27yr sentence 

+1 (It's very sad)

[Drago]

+1
I guess this is more important to them then someone serving a 27yr sentence 

AJK can explain better, but whatever you're referring to is likely s/t that would have been decided in the lower courts. Supreme Court usually comes in when there remains uncertainty as to how the law addresses s/t.

(@AJK, any tutorials possible about this?)

[Yordai Dooma]

An article from 2011 about it: http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2011/08/rabbi_s_binyomin_ginsberg_suing_northwest_delta_airlines_complaint.php

[marko]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/05/20/supreme-court-northwest-airlines-frequent-flier/2326529/

Aside from being humorous, this can actually have big implications for us DD.
Supreme Court will decide if Airlines can unilaterally drop someone from their frequent flyer program. Pretty interesting.

[jj1000]

+1
I guess this is more important to them then someone serving a 27yr sentence 

Has nothing to do with importance. The supreme court chooses what cases they take fwiu.

[marko]

they took the case because of the implications and precedent it will set for all Airlines. Pretty important I guess..

[YudiG]

this certainly is a case the airlines dont want to lose

[chaimmayer]

Pretty surprising that it's ainer fun unzere that is suing.  It is even being reported as the "rabbi" who is suing. Wow

[chff]

That the supreme court took the case.

I think that he made a fuzz that it's because he is a Jew

[Nitantnel]

I don't understand why NW wont settle?

[Dan]

They feel that SCOTUS will rule that they can do whatever they want whenever they want.

[Sowhat]

I don't understand why NW wont settle?

They claim that the Rabbi's claims are barred because they fall under a specific Federal law which gives them the right to do what they want.  The Rabbi disagrees.  Its a technical issue, not just right vs wrong.

[chff]

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/boardingarea/viewfromthewing/~3/vu00FfYsy-c/