TWA Frequent Flyer Award Travel - A Legal Remedy?
May 14th, 2000, 02:15 PM
#21
Guest
Posts: n/a
There's an excellent thread of messages covering this same subject at the following location on Barry Peterson's Frequent Flyer Web site. Note that I've also linked their thread to this one.
http://216.167.74.240/forum/Forum49/HTML/000128.html
and
http://216.167.74.240/forum/Forum49/HTML/000135.html
and
http://216.167.74.240/forum/Forum49/HTML/000118.html
[email protected]
http://216.167.74.240/forum/Forum49/HTML/000128.html
and
http://216.167.74.240/forum/Forum49/HTML/000135.html
and
http://216.167.74.240/forum/Forum49/HTML/000118.html
[email protected]
May 14th, 2000, 06:38 PM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mark,
Read both your post here and on the Webflyer board. I understand your frustration and anger, but at the same time, I don't think that it's at all unusual for FF programs.
As an mid-level Elite flyer on TWA, I have been extremely happy with my ability to claim award seats. Now, I did not have many equity miles, so I don't have any experience with them. But, for my regular miles, I have had very good luck.
I also understand that membership in a FF program, and the corresponding miles, are also a bonus, not a privilege. Anytime I can use them, I'm extremely happy.
The fact of the matter is that award seats, especially in FC, are very limited. The biggest plane that TWA flies now only has 30 FC seats, and 2 are reserved for crew rest seats on longer flights. And with only 1 flight a day to most international and Hawaii destinations, this makes seats even harder to come by. You do have to be extremely flexible in determining dates of travel, and be able to travel in off-peak times.
The inflation of the miles, for restricted and un-restricted awards, is much the same as different fare classes. If I want to fly STL-LAX during midweek, without any advance purchase, and no Saturday night stay, it's going to cost me. Conversely, with some planning ahead, and a Sat. night stay, it's only $289 vs $2000. Perhaps not fair, but the way the game is played.
So, in terms of trying to get seats, I am understand, but am not that sympathetic. However, in regards to the response from TWA customer service- that is unexcusable, and an area where I have found TWA extremely lacking. The front line personnel, as you allude to, like the customer service agents on the phone, have been nothing but helpful. However, getting a personal response from HQ is a different story.
Also, the second issue that I think you have a legitimate complaint with the airline is in the devaluation of your Equity miles with their expiration. As I understand it, equity miles were never to expire. Period. And now, they have. I think that many longtime TWA flyers are frustrated not so much over the lack of availibility of awards, but over their expiration. That to me is a much bigger issue.
However, having said this, TWA has and continues to treat me very well as a frequent flyer. Getting to an Elite level has certainly helped.
P.S. For those who want to deify Continental, while they have an excellent FF program, there is a tremendous amount of frustration with an inability (by rule) of confirming FC seats until 30 days from departure, even on award tickets. And by the way, CO barely edged out TWA in the JDPower study- and these two airlines were far, far ahead of the pack.
Read both your post here and on the Webflyer board. I understand your frustration and anger, but at the same time, I don't think that it's at all unusual for FF programs.
As an mid-level Elite flyer on TWA, I have been extremely happy with my ability to claim award seats. Now, I did not have many equity miles, so I don't have any experience with them. But, for my regular miles, I have had very good luck.
I also understand that membership in a FF program, and the corresponding miles, are also a bonus, not a privilege. Anytime I can use them, I'm extremely happy.
The fact of the matter is that award seats, especially in FC, are very limited. The biggest plane that TWA flies now only has 30 FC seats, and 2 are reserved for crew rest seats on longer flights. And with only 1 flight a day to most international and Hawaii destinations, this makes seats even harder to come by. You do have to be extremely flexible in determining dates of travel, and be able to travel in off-peak times.
The inflation of the miles, for restricted and un-restricted awards, is much the same as different fare classes. If I want to fly STL-LAX during midweek, without any advance purchase, and no Saturday night stay, it's going to cost me. Conversely, with some planning ahead, and a Sat. night stay, it's only $289 vs $2000. Perhaps not fair, but the way the game is played.
So, in terms of trying to get seats, I am understand, but am not that sympathetic. However, in regards to the response from TWA customer service- that is unexcusable, and an area where I have found TWA extremely lacking. The front line personnel, as you allude to, like the customer service agents on the phone, have been nothing but helpful. However, getting a personal response from HQ is a different story.
Also, the second issue that I think you have a legitimate complaint with the airline is in the devaluation of your Equity miles with their expiration. As I understand it, equity miles were never to expire. Period. And now, they have. I think that many longtime TWA flyers are frustrated not so much over the lack of availibility of awards, but over their expiration. That to me is a much bigger issue.
However, having said this, TWA has and continues to treat me very well as a frequent flyer. Getting to an Elite level has certainly helped.
P.S. For those who want to deify Continental, while they have an excellent FF program, there is a tremendous amount of frustration with an inability (by rule) of confirming FC seats until 30 days from departure, even on award tickets. And by the way, CO barely edged out TWA in the JDPower study- and these two airlines were far, far ahead of the pack.
May 15th, 2000, 04:08 AM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mark, where are you trying to visit? I've read that TWA recently dropped Barcelona, Madrid and Rome from its route network to move the 767s to the Caribbean and to long-haul domestic service. I'm not sure you're gonna have many choices past Gatwick or Paris at this point...may be worth checking out the TWA route map for an updated listing!
May 15th, 2000, 04:56 AM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mark,
I understand your situation. But as others have said, not unusual for many FF programs when traveling to "prime" cities. I am a Platinum TWA member and , as such, have no problems with seats on TWA. It is a primary reason I sly so much with them. However, I am a mid level flyer with United, American, and CO and have similar problems with them trying to get Award seats. I remember the CO "No Inflation Promise" (NIP) awards where they gave certificates good for an award to HI or Europe in exchange for old miles when they upped their redemption requirements. There was no deadline to use them. Then, they decided they would expire (or convert to new miles) if not used by a certain date. I had a real problem using my award -- although by being flexible and going "non-prime" dates, I did it. So a "promise" is not really a promise with the airlines.
I wish Randy Petersen and other FF "avocates" would do more to follow up on complaints like yours. But they seem to just send out info on programs where one can find the info in a million places rather than working on the 'difficult" issues. We will see how successful Randy is if/when the Latin Pass program doesn't follow through as stated.
I am unsure if TWA said they had seats using enough miles for "restriction free" and that is why they were available. Most airlines do have seats for "extra" miles that are not available under the normal award structure. Don't have my award chart with me, but that may be why they had seats for 160,00 miles - these were unrestricted from award availablity Is that the case?
As far as CO goes, I had a First Class upgrade award to Europe that I tried to use for various trips and never could - despite many tries. My complaint to CO:
1. You need to get certificates in advance and then never know if you can use them.
2. If you can't use them, you must pay $35 redeposit fee.
3. They have NO toll free number to talk to One Pass Customer Service desk AND put you on hold for a long time. And do not give you any message about how long you may be on hold (I was on 10 minutes.) So you pay more money and time to talk to them.
John (jja3477) -- if your family flies 600,000 miles each year - you should fly TWA. As Platinum member, you could redeem award travel as long as any seat is available for sale. No blackouts or restrictions. I have NEVER had to look for alternate flights or dates for award travel. Of course, one must travel a lot on TWA for this -- but it is a great deal. BUT TWA is not is the best financial shape, so that is a concern.
I understand your situation. But as others have said, not unusual for many FF programs when traveling to "prime" cities. I am a Platinum TWA member and , as such, have no problems with seats on TWA. It is a primary reason I sly so much with them. However, I am a mid level flyer with United, American, and CO and have similar problems with them trying to get Award seats. I remember the CO "No Inflation Promise" (NIP) awards where they gave certificates good for an award to HI or Europe in exchange for old miles when they upped their redemption requirements. There was no deadline to use them. Then, they decided they would expire (or convert to new miles) if not used by a certain date. I had a real problem using my award -- although by being flexible and going "non-prime" dates, I did it. So a "promise" is not really a promise with the airlines.
I wish Randy Petersen and other FF "avocates" would do more to follow up on complaints like yours. But they seem to just send out info on programs where one can find the info in a million places rather than working on the 'difficult" issues. We will see how successful Randy is if/when the Latin Pass program doesn't follow through as stated.
I am unsure if TWA said they had seats using enough miles for "restriction free" and that is why they were available. Most airlines do have seats for "extra" miles that are not available under the normal award structure. Don't have my award chart with me, but that may be why they had seats for 160,00 miles - these were unrestricted from award availablity Is that the case?
As far as CO goes, I had a First Class upgrade award to Europe that I tried to use for various trips and never could - despite many tries. My complaint to CO:
1. You need to get certificates in advance and then never know if you can use them.
2. If you can't use them, you must pay $35 redeposit fee.
3. They have NO toll free number to talk to One Pass Customer Service desk AND put you on hold for a long time. And do not give you any message about how long you may be on hold (I was on 10 minutes.) So you pay more money and time to talk to them.
John (jja3477) -- if your family flies 600,000 miles each year - you should fly TWA. As Platinum member, you could redeem award travel as long as any seat is available for sale. No blackouts or restrictions. I have NEVER had to look for alternate flights or dates for award travel. Of course, one must travel a lot on TWA for this -- but it is a great deal. BUT TWA is not is the best financial shape, so that is a concern.
May 15th, 2000, 05:13 AM
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don't know whether I'm very lucky or some of the previous posters are unlucky, but I've had none of the problems with Continental's One Pass that some of you have had. In fact, it's been quite the opposite. I've never had trouble reaching them on a toll-free number without too long a wait, obtaining the information of the booking that I wanted, getting tickets and seat assignments well in advance and, most importantly, being treated and assisted with extreme courtesy!
May 15th, 2000, 10:40 AM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
For Socalterp who replied on 5/14/2000:
( Hang in there Neil Sanders because your reply will be next! [grin] )
Hi,
I wanted to reply to your message out-of-sequence because of what you stated as " The inflation of the miles, for restricted and un-restricted awards" and " in the devaluation of your Equity miles with their expiration." As you stated above, as well as on the Webflyer board, this situation of how the equity miles are treated gets right at one of the core issues that is disturbing the long-term TWA frequent flyers in the original program. I know it disturbs me greatly. It rings right of their posts like a loud-wailing warning siren.
I note this situation called "inflation" wherein TWA is now already stating that it takes 160,000 (unrestricted) miles of whatever type to get a seat that requires 90,000 (restricted) equity miles is an attempt on their part to force inflation right now! In effect they are stating that equity miles just aren't as good because they are OLD miles. But TWA is also stating that the equity miles just won't disappear if you didn't cash them in by the end of last year for certificates. I find that very interesting. While it mollifies, it also forces inflation on the saved equity miles right now.
Now for the devaluation aspect: It certainly is devaluation by closing out the equity miles program along with it's accompanying awards redemption schedule. However, in attempt to mollify the long-running members of their program, the provision was made to allow them to keep those equity miles if they didn't cash them in. I think it could be safely called massive devaluation.
What I see happening is that TWA is trying to get us to accept an inverted logic idea that has a fundamental flaw - namely that "inflation" that has to be accepted. But that is actually backwards from what is the reality as the equity milers see it. And here are the reasons why:
1…The original concept for establishing equity miles was clearly stated by TWA itself as a means to protect the accumulated mileage and award levels for those that accumulated actual flying miles early-on. It's the very thing that made the TWA program so valuable to the early members. There just were not other advertised ways to get miles other than flying on the plane.
2…The increasing popularity of frequent flyer programs began to "catch-on" and more and more people began to see the free travel opportunities. Therefore, the mileage requirements for the newer members to travel free were raised. Then the mileage add-on programs (credit cards, linked long distance telephone usage, various "affinity" programs, etc.) began to appear which allowed members to accumulate miles even faster without ever stepping on a plane. I'm absolutely certain that many of the original TWA frequent flyers can see by their own experiences that they can now accumulate miles at a much faster rate than they used to be able to do no matter what frequent flyer programs they belong to. THAT is how the inflation actually occured.
So, it's an absurd idea that inflation has to be accepted against equity miles. In effect it is an attempt to devalue the equity miles by some sort of strange Swiss accounting method. But the devaluation rate is absolutely out of sight.
If you are a person who has TWA equity miles and is disturbed as I am about this, please contact me and/or reply to this message in the forum!
( Hang in there Neil Sanders because your reply will be next! [grin] )
Hi,
I wanted to reply to your message out-of-sequence because of what you stated as " The inflation of the miles, for restricted and un-restricted awards" and " in the devaluation of your Equity miles with their expiration." As you stated above, as well as on the Webflyer board, this situation of how the equity miles are treated gets right at one of the core issues that is disturbing the long-term TWA frequent flyers in the original program. I know it disturbs me greatly. It rings right of their posts like a loud-wailing warning siren.
I note this situation called "inflation" wherein TWA is now already stating that it takes 160,000 (unrestricted) miles of whatever type to get a seat that requires 90,000 (restricted) equity miles is an attempt on their part to force inflation right now! In effect they are stating that equity miles just aren't as good because they are OLD miles. But TWA is also stating that the equity miles just won't disappear if you didn't cash them in by the end of last year for certificates. I find that very interesting. While it mollifies, it also forces inflation on the saved equity miles right now.
Now for the devaluation aspect: It certainly is devaluation by closing out the equity miles program along with it's accompanying awards redemption schedule. However, in attempt to mollify the long-running members of their program, the provision was made to allow them to keep those equity miles if they didn't cash them in. I think it could be safely called massive devaluation.
What I see happening is that TWA is trying to get us to accept an inverted logic idea that has a fundamental flaw - namely that "inflation" that has to be accepted. But that is actually backwards from what is the reality as the equity milers see it. And here are the reasons why:
1…The original concept for establishing equity miles was clearly stated by TWA itself as a means to protect the accumulated mileage and award levels for those that accumulated actual flying miles early-on. It's the very thing that made the TWA program so valuable to the early members. There just were not other advertised ways to get miles other than flying on the plane.
2…The increasing popularity of frequent flyer programs began to "catch-on" and more and more people began to see the free travel opportunities. Therefore, the mileage requirements for the newer members to travel free were raised. Then the mileage add-on programs (credit cards, linked long distance telephone usage, various "affinity" programs, etc.) began to appear which allowed members to accumulate miles even faster without ever stepping on a plane. I'm absolutely certain that many of the original TWA frequent flyers can see by their own experiences that they can now accumulate miles at a much faster rate than they used to be able to do no matter what frequent flyer programs they belong to. THAT is how the inflation actually occured.
So, it's an absurd idea that inflation has to be accepted against equity miles. In effect it is an attempt to devalue the equity miles by some sort of strange Swiss accounting method. But the devaluation rate is absolutely out of sight.
If you are a person who has TWA equity miles and is disturbed as I am about this, please contact me and/or reply to this message in the forum!
May 16th, 2000, 10:18 AM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
For Neal Sanders who wrote on 5/11/2000:
Neal, first let me say thank you for what my wife and I have read from YOUR posts around the Fodor's forums. They've been very informative and well-written. So, for you to mention that my initial message was well-written is flattering!
I suppose that my approach is one-thing-at-a-time right now. I am keeping the legal approach bubbling. In the meantime I have been collecting information and pursuing other contacts. Amongst other letters, follow-up correspondence to TWA will probably happen and it will be specifically directed to certain persons by name and title. That list is now pretty focused.
I'm also pursuing a separate path within TWA that might produce some results, but I can't describe it here - at least not yet. I can say that if it produces unsatisfactory results, it could lead to a voice call to a vice-president that would have some real meat in it.
Over the weekend I was in the queue waiting to talk live on the air with a radio show host who also happens to be a lawyer. What can I say … the queue was just a tiny bit too long!
Another talk show host provided some useful information including a lawyer contact who deals consumer protection issues - particularly ones relating to the travel industry.
email: [email protected]
Neal, first let me say thank you for what my wife and I have read from YOUR posts around the Fodor's forums. They've been very informative and well-written. So, for you to mention that my initial message was well-written is flattering!
I suppose that my approach is one-thing-at-a-time right now. I am keeping the legal approach bubbling. In the meantime I have been collecting information and pursuing other contacts. Amongst other letters, follow-up correspondence to TWA will probably happen and it will be specifically directed to certain persons by name and title. That list is now pretty focused.
I'm also pursuing a separate path within TWA that might produce some results, but I can't describe it here - at least not yet. I can say that if it produces unsatisfactory results, it could lead to a voice call to a vice-president that would have some real meat in it.
Over the weekend I was in the queue waiting to talk live on the air with a radio show host who also happens to be a lawyer. What can I say … the queue was just a tiny bit too long!
Another talk show host provided some useful information including a lawyer contact who deals consumer protection issues - particularly ones relating to the travel industry.
email: [email protected]
May 16th, 2000, 04:16 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
I disagree with the poster who said that there is not a legal remedy because of the wording in the "contract" . Mark should be getting rewarded for the thousands of miles accumulated, not punished by being given the runaround for eleven months. In any other field this is called deceptive advertising. It's high time for a class action suit against these bullies.
May 17th, 2000, 09:25 AM
#30
Guest
Posts: n/a
For Ally who replied on 5/16/2000:
Ally,
I wonder why my eyes focused on your words "runaround" and "bullies" !!!
One would hope that a corporation which exists to provide a service to the public:
1. would advertise and perform in a
reputable manner,
2. would endeavor to build confidence
and trust of the public in
providing that service.
In my discussions with others about this situation, a common response of "class action" comes up - particularly in this case because it reaches to the public which needs to be fairly served.
Ally,
I wonder why my eyes focused on your words "runaround" and "bullies" !!!
One would hope that a corporation which exists to provide a service to the public:
1. would advertise and perform in a
reputable manner,
2. would endeavor to build confidence
and trust of the public in
providing that service.
In my discussions with others about this situation, a common response of "class action" comes up - particularly in this case because it reaches to the public which needs to be fairly served.
May 19th, 2000, 08:36 AM
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
For xx ([email protected])who wrote on 5/11/2000.
Hi XX!
The letter is now finalized to the President with cc's to VP Marketing, VP Operations, and VP Customer Relations - each with their real names.
There's one other possibility hanging out there and "in process" before the letter hits the mails. That still might work, but I'm ready if it doesn't.
This all comes down to TWA not releasing the seats from their corporate "Yield Management" office. It's being called "Unyielding Management" among the people not in corporate who are trying to deal with the public on a daily basis.
You are right, and I can understand why the corporate office needs to read to its mail and respond to it. First of all, they are required to respond within 60 days, and second they probably want to do so because of various legal ramifications. If I were them I'd be sitting on the edge of my seat too because of what they advertise and what they don't deliver!
--mark-- [email protected]
Hi XX!
The letter is now finalized to the President with cc's to VP Marketing, VP Operations, and VP Customer Relations - each with their real names.
There's one other possibility hanging out there and "in process" before the letter hits the mails. That still might work, but I'm ready if it doesn't.
This all comes down to TWA not releasing the seats from their corporate "Yield Management" office. It's being called "Unyielding Management" among the people not in corporate who are trying to deal with the public on a daily basis.
You are right, and I can understand why the corporate office needs to read to its mail and respond to it. First of all, they are required to respond within 60 days, and second they probably want to do so because of various legal ramifications. If I were them I'd be sitting on the edge of my seat too because of what they advertise and what they don't deliver!
--mark-- [email protected]
May 21st, 2000, 10:00 AM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mark:
Best of luck in your ff redemption quest. I had a pretty good idea how TWA would be handling these Equity certificates when they offered them a couple of years ago. I've had so many problems with TWA that I opt to drive 135 miles to Lambert Field and fly CO & partners to connect to get to my destinations.
I have as a Platinum on CO had problems with their asinine 30 day Int. upgrade policy and have voiced my concern on many occasions.
I ended up on TWA enough last year to hit Elite 1, and still have had a few problems with their yeild managment/award seat availiblity balance, and ended up skipping a possible "fun" trip or two in the past.
After some reading about their financial situation, I may want to just go "somewhere" just to get some value out of the program.
Just my two cents
Best of luck in your ff redemption quest. I had a pretty good idea how TWA would be handling these Equity certificates when they offered them a couple of years ago. I've had so many problems with TWA that I opt to drive 135 miles to Lambert Field and fly CO & partners to connect to get to my destinations.
I have as a Platinum on CO had problems with their asinine 30 day Int. upgrade policy and have voiced my concern on many occasions.
I ended up on TWA enough last year to hit Elite 1, and still have had a few problems with their yeild managment/award seat availiblity balance, and ended up skipping a possible "fun" trip or two in the past.
After some reading about their financial situation, I may want to just go "somewhere" just to get some value out of the program.
Just my two cents
May 23rd, 2000, 08:11 AM
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
For John ([email protected]) who replied on 5/11/2000:
I did have a look at that American Airlines decision and also another one involving Morales vs TWA which was reported in the St. Louis Post Dispatch 5/2/1992. It's available for a blistering cost of $1.95 from their archives at the web site:
www.stlnet.com
The case brought up an issue of what I shall call "shabby" advertising here. And if that decision happened in 1992, something really seems to be systemically wrong with the airline industry advertising programs.
Note that we keep getting bombarded with "free miles" for this credit card, and this phone affiliation, and whatever. But any fine print about what this really means must be very small with respect to what happens when one tries to redeem the awards. The redemption difficulties do not seem like they will be lessening in the future.
--mark--
[email protected]
I did have a look at that American Airlines decision and also another one involving Morales vs TWA which was reported in the St. Louis Post Dispatch 5/2/1992. It's available for a blistering cost of $1.95 from their archives at the web site:
www.stlnet.com
The case brought up an issue of what I shall call "shabby" advertising here. And if that decision happened in 1992, something really seems to be systemically wrong with the airline industry advertising programs.
Note that we keep getting bombarded with "free miles" for this credit card, and this phone affiliation, and whatever. But any fine print about what this really means must be very small with respect to what happens when one tries to redeem the awards. The redemption difficulties do not seem like they will be lessening in the future.
--mark--
[email protected]
May 24th, 2000, 08:25 AM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
For John () who wrote on 5/15/2000
To answer you about where we want to go:
We stated that either London-Gatwick or Paris-Degaulle would work for us. Departing dates at any time between 14-19 June. Since that initial request, I've identified that any time between 14-29 June would be okay. Wanted to be sure that they understand that we can be flexible.
It's good to keep one's humor in this. We had one agent try to get us to change destinations, and he offerred Lisbon, Portugal - even checked availability! Well, for this trip that seemed to be just a little too much flexibiity!
To answer you about where we want to go:
We stated that either London-Gatwick or Paris-Degaulle would work for us. Departing dates at any time between 14-19 June. Since that initial request, I've identified that any time between 14-29 June would be okay. Wanted to be sure that they understand that we can be flexible.
It's good to keep one's humor in this. We had one agent try to get us to change destinations, and he offerred Lisbon, Portugal - even checked availability! Well, for this trip that seemed to be just a little too much flexibiity!
