Continental dis-honoring upgrade

wrote:

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:13:06 -0500, Olivers
wrote:


Of course, one personaladvantage comes from living in a state with a small
claims court system in which a lawyer is not required, that an action could
be filed in a city in which CO would have to hire representation, thus
making it likely that the airline would be willing to make a deal. Of
course, it might make a judgement hard to collect, having to hire process
service to nail a notice of sequestration to a baggae cart or aircraft
nose.


Which I do. Asfor serving a judgement, it so happens I can reach the
owner of the largest process server company in the USA with one phone
call. We went to high school together. His business model is built in
guaranteed service. No service; no fee.

Now we ARE impressed. Wow.. All of this power and still reduce to
sending email to the same place us peons send it.

Impressive people don't have to "impress" people.

wrote:

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:27:14 -0500, "Bob Chipeska"
wrote:

The acme of foolishness is spending thousands on an attorney to collect a
couple hundred dollars. You can't even define your monetary damages.



And the epitome of arrogance is assuming things about which you know
nothing. A small claims court filing fee in this area is around $35
or so and includes service of the summons. Because the defendant is a
corporation they must appear with an attorney. I am not required to
have one.

Which state forces a corporation to use an attorney in small claims court?

wrote:

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:27:14 -0500, "Bob Chipeska"
wrote:

The acme of foolishness is spending thousands on an attorney to collect a
couple hundred dollars. You can't even define your monetary damages.



And the epitome of arrogance is assuming things about which you know
nothing. A small claims court filing fee in this area is around $35
or so and includes service of the summons. Because the defendant is a
corporation they must appear with an attorney. I am not required to
have one.

Which state forces a corporation to use an attorney in small claims court?

On 28 Jul 2004 10:08:25 -0700, (Reef
Fish) wrote:

First of all, on the purchased ticket class being "too low", this is
a uniform policy, well publicized on the webpage

Exactly where? You should be able to support this claim with a
relevant and specific citation. The agents I spoken with and
corresponded with cannot answer that either.

I'm holding a document that says - "This certificate is valid for a
First Class upgrade when traveling on a paid fare ticket."

That's what I'm wanting to do. It's plain English.

The only other condition stated is "excluding industry discounts" -
and none are involved.

The voucher does not state any other relevant condition ANYWHERE
(front, back or sideways, in large or smal print). It does not mention
- "subject to change" nor dioeoes it state that the fare must be in a
certain class.

It says it cannot be in Business First Class - but the flights in
question do not have that service and I'm not asking for it.

Yes, it mentions limitations of available space - but that is not the
issue. CO is flat out refusing to honor the voucher and has yet to
come up with a supportable excuse.

You have to read losts of fineprints in CO's policies to get all of
this.

Not really. If the document I hold is not a valid contract delivering
compensation for the service I performed for them then what is a
contract? Were I to say to you, let me use your house for a few days
and I'll pay you $1000 - can I then satisfy you with $100 by saying
I've changed my mind and published a new rate?

This document makes no reference anywehere to any other rules and
regulations.

There is NO ROOM to spell all that out on a voucher.

Then they need a larger piece of paper. And BTW, this is not an
especially crowded document. There's plenty of room for conditions
they did not mention.

it can be CHANGED WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE.

That's the whole point here. There is no such disclaimer on my voucher
and I would not have taken such a phony deal had there been one. A
contract is a contract, not a negotitating agenda for future
resolution. What we have here is a clasic contract - Offer,
acceptance, consideration, performance - and then payment due. They
just don't want to pay.

joehark's hyperbole,

Hyperbole = A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for
emphasis or effect. (American Heritage Dictionary see
www.dictiionary.com)

What hyperbole have I used? I have not exaggerated anything. I've
simply stated the facts. It is you whoare ignoring the plain facts and
wandering off into fanciful irrelevancies and assumptions.

You want to argue issues that are not involved. There is no issue here
that CO has suddenly cut out upgrades. They are refusing to honor this
one for unsupportable reasons (fare too low, wrong itiinerary, flight
does not have FC service, flight has a competing class of service,
etc.)

I am sympathetic to Joehark's feeling of injustice done, but not
sympathetic with many of the reasons (or invalid reasons) he gave
in his post.

Name one - The only party giving invalid reasons is CO - and after
exhaiusting them and each one was shown to be without foundation, they
ended communication.

I infer joehark's fare must have been some kind of "bulk fare" by
discount houses.

Sheeesh - God help us and save us from inferences that are not based
on the baldly stated facts.

THIS WAS NOT A DISCOUNT FARE!!!! It is not a BULK RATE FARE. No third
party is invokved. It;'s just CO and me. Go back and read the original
post or shut up.

The reservation is for a 21-day advance purchase fare - the one on
CO's normal rate schedule and the one used by hundreds of thousands of
airline pax every day. There is not even a senior or student discount
involved.

Reason for the inference:

You are confusing "inference" with "unfounded assumption. " The facts
are not what you "infer" but what I stated.

But thaks anyway.

On 28 Jul 2004 10:16:07 -0700, (me) wrote:

wrote in message . ..
[snip]
No. He buys sewer tickets by his own admission. He's a first class
wanabee that's too cheap to pay for it.
[snip]

Not exactly. Regardless of what his original ticket was worth, they
apparently offered him this voucher in an attempt to get him to give
it up. They offered a deal and he took it. They are basically now
trying to alter the terms of the deal after the fact.

Thank you for one of the few intelligent comments posted here that
indicate you actually read the facts of the matter and understand the
issue.

If COs' silence continues much longer, they will go up in front of the
Essex County NJ Small Claims Court.

I exepct that the court will treat them like any other deadbeat or
con artist - and with any kind of luck, we'll wind up in front of
judge they screwed and he'll throw in some punative damages.

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 08:41:13 GMT, Really Me
wrote:

Which state forces a corporation to use an attorney in small claims court?

Somone else may have the answer to the broader question but I can tell
you that New Jersey does. I've used the system on a number of
occasions to collect from deadbeats. The Court's rules are explicit
that corporations, defendant or plaintiff, must be represented by an
attorney.

New York does, too.

In years past, when I lived there, I also made use of the Illinois
small claims system and they have the same rule. I suspect most states
do, and that rule makes legal sense, given the nature of what a
coproration is.

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 08:15:46 GMT, Really Me
wrote:

Now we ARE impressed. Wow.. All of this power and still reduce to
sending email to the same place us peons send it.

Impressive people don't have to "impress" people.

My "impresive statement" was an answer to the posted assumption that
I would have problems finding a processs erver to deliver a judgement.
Had I stated only that I would have no such problem, someone here
(you, perhaps?) might have said I was mistaken. So I pointed out that
they are in the phone book and that I know the owner.

That's impressive? You impress too easily.

wrote:

On 28 Jul 2004 10:16:07 -0700, (me) wrote:


Not exactly. Regardless of what his original ticket was worth, they
apparently offered him this voucher in an attempt to get him to give
it up. They offered a deal and he took it. They are basically now
trying to alter the terms of the deal after the fact.


Thank you for one of the few intelligent comments posted here that
indicate you actually read the facts of the matter and understand the
issue.

I see, if they disagree, they must be idiots, since only smart people
see things your way.

If COs' silence continues much longer, they will go up in front of the
Essex County NJ Small Claims Court.

Much longer??? How long do you think it takes for airline
correspondence to resolve an issue that goes against policy?
Now I understand why Southwest doesn't do email. People like you that
complain via email expect imstant gratification.


I exepct that the court will treat them like any other deadbeat or
con artist - and with any kind of luck, we'll wind up in front of
judge they screwed and he'll throw in some punative damages.

Not listing restrictions on a ticket or voucher hardly makes them a con
artist. I often here airline personel offer free tickets, etc, but they
don't shout out the restrictions unless you asked about them. Maybe an
oversight on their part if they don't publish the information, but this
is not the same as saying they screwed you in a manner that deserves
punitive damages. But, then, this is the lawsuit happy US of A, so I
would expect it.

..... and you want a judge that will rule by bias rather than law.

wrote:

On 28 Jul 2004 10:16:07 -0700, (me) wrote:


Not exactly. Regardless of what his original ticket was worth, they
apparently offered him this voucher in an attempt to get him to give
it up. They offered a deal and he took it. They are basically now
trying to alter the terms of the deal after the fact.


Thank you for one of the few intelligent comments posted here that
indicate you actually read the facts of the matter and understand the
issue.

I see, if they disagree, they must be idiots, since only smart people
see things your way.

If COs' silence continues much longer, they will go up in front of the
Essex County NJ Small Claims Court.

Much longer??? How long do you think it takes for airline
correspondence to resolve an issue that goes against policy?
Now I understand why Southwest doesn't do email. People like you that
complain via email expect imstant gratification.


I exepct that the court will treat them like any other deadbeat or
con artist - and with any kind of luck, we'll wind up in front of
judge they screwed and he'll throw in some punative damages.

Not listing restrictions on a ticket or voucher hardly makes them a con
artist. I often here airline personel offer free tickets, etc, but they
don't shout out the restrictions unless you asked about them. Maybe an
oversight on their part if they don't publish the information, but this
is not the same as saying they screwed you in a manner that deserves
punitive damages. But, then, this is the lawsuit happy US of A, so I
would expect it.

..... and you want a judge that will rule by bias rather than law.

wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 08:41:13 GMT, Really Me
wrote:

Which state forces a corporation to use an attorney in small claims court?


Somone else may have the answer to the broader question but I can tell
you that New Jersey does. I've used the system on a number of
occasions to collect from deadbeats. The Court's rules are explicit
that corporations, defendant or plaintiff, must be represented by an
attorney.


Are you claiming the following information is incorrect?

Small Claims Court
A New Jersey corporation may send an officer, director or an employee to
represent the corporation in most small claims courts. Unlike a sole
proprietorship, this can free up the time of the owner to operate the
business while employees take care of legal matters.