Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

leejo.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 159 posts

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#111

Post by uberman »

unethical_ban wrote: post #76
uberman wrote: post #7

Long story short: Guy had flight canceled and wants airlines to have automated refund system. The issue is though that no company I know of really wants an automated easy path to disperse money back to the public. Ever try to collect on an insurance policy?

There is a massive difference in fraud potential between a cancelled flight/refund for a service not delivered, and an insurance payout.

This does not need to be about fraud at all. Most companies grease the wheels when it comes to collecting money and they put breaks and checks in the way when it comes to paying money out.

Ever wonder why you get "in-store" credit before you get your money back?

Ever wonder why the adjuster offers you 50% of the value for the thing you claim was destroyed?

Why you get offered a check up front rather than what you are due as a result of a litigation?

Why there is a co-pay or a deductible?

Why your medical coverage rejects your first claim?

All these practices are intentional and structured to discourage people from getting what is technically owed them.

Feel free to look up "Unfair Claims Practice" some being illegal and some being just the normal course of business.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#112

Post by StanislavPetrov »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #38
asperous wrote: post #31

I know class action has a bad reputation, but this is the type of situation it was designed for. The courts can't handle 100,000 individual claims but it can handle one very large claim with 100,000 members.

Does class action have a bad reputation? I know businesses hate it and in the US are doing everything they can to eliminate it. But as a consumer, I see it as the only way to level the playing field. If it has a bad reputation, I speculate that is the result of businesses lobbying against it in the press and with politicians.

If you are suing because you want to recover your 300 Euros, a class-action suit that takes a decade and ends up paying you 5 Euros and results in no substantive change to the policy is a very poor substitute.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#113

Post by ckastner »

dragonwriter wrote: post #93
ckastner wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were true, concepts such as fair trade, or impact investing, or sustainability should have never had a chance, yet they are experiencing phenomenal growth.

> If that were true, concepts such as fair trade, or impact investing, or sustainability should have never had a chance, yet they are experiencing phenomenal growth. No, attaching yourself to popular interests as a marketing strategy isn't sacrificing gains for ethics. Nor is it “ethics” even if some instances of it use “ethical” or a synonym in the branding. Ethics is doing right because it's right. Making an outwar…

> No, attaching yourself to popular interests as a marketing strategy isn't sacrificing gains for ethics. Nor is it “ethics” even if some instances of it use “ethical” or a synonym in the branding.

From a pragmatic point of view, I'd argue that as long as certain ethical standards are (in fact) upheld, the distinction doesn't matter, but I concede that this is a view that not everyone would share.

> Ethics is doing right because it's right. Making an outward show of ethics where it is advantageous to make a sale (Eve if what you are selling is advice to others on where to put their money) is not ethics, it is commercial exploitation of others ethics.

Yes, but why are you assuming that no business exists that can do (at least some) things because they are right?

If such a business exists, than it's hard to see how Darwinian capitalism would lead to its destruction and replacement, given the aforementioned popular interest.

In theory, if some individuals do things because they are right, and some of those individuals are business owners, than transitively, some businesses that do things because they are right should exist.

In practice, there are plenty of non-profit foundations motivated by doing things because they are right, and which operate for-profit businesses in direct or indirect support of their motives. Management is appointed by ownership and tasked to execute the business as ownership intends, which at least occasionally means that sometimes, things are being done because they are right.

As a practical example, it's hard to imagine a (hypothetical) mosquito net manufacturing business owned by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation operating in violation of the foundation's ethical position.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#114

Post by techsupporter »

mehrdadn wrote: post #81
tomcam wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if they tell you to make the change on the website, and the website tells you to make the change with the gate agent, and there isn’t a gate agent? I fly maybe half a dozen times a year and I’ve had this happen more than once.

Can't you just go to the nearest gate agent for another flight of the same carrier? I feel like they could point you to the right direction.

Realistically, no.

I write this in the gentlest manner possible, not directed solely at you: a lot of the "see a gate agent and they'll sort you" advice seems to be coming from a place of people who either don't travel very much at all, or who travel so much that an airline employee can practically feel their level of Airline Status(tm) from half a kilometer away and will race to their aid.

I fall in the third bucket, people who travel just enough to have seen a lot of things but not so much that any particular airline gives a rat's hindquarters about me. Gate agents largely do not have the authority--or the inclination--to help with much past their own flights. Anything you need done outside of that is usually handled at a customer service desk elsewhere in the airport, if such a desk is staffed by that airline. Most low-cost carrier (LCC) airlines do not staff help desks in the airport. And, in many circumstances, the gate agents wearing the uniform and logos of a LCC are contractors who hop from gate to gate, wrangling flights as they come and go.

An unexpected circumstance happening two days before Christmas in a busy airport on a LCC? I would do the exact same as the author of the linked article and get my traveling party where we needed to be with a minimum of fuss and handle the rest later.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#115

Post by freshbob »

joneholland wrote: post #21

Rather than booking the replacement flight directly the author should have had easyjet rebook him. The author did no-show on the replacement flight provided by easyJet, and all of the griping will get them nowhere. You can’t take things into your own hands and then expect the company to refund you, the company would have provided the free alternative flight (earlier than the one the next day) and the EU fine had they…

> Rather than booking the replacement flight directly the author should have had easyjet rebook him.

Lol! I had experiences similar to OPs two or three times. Agents will actively refuse to rebook, if you can get a hold of them at all. They will tell you all kinds of stories: "you booked through a third party, so your contract is with them and they need to rebook", or "I'm not allowed to rebook", or (another classic) "cannot be rebooked and you forfeit your compensation if you rebook yourself".

Honestly, at this point, I consider people suggesting rebooking through an agent as people who rarely or never fly and therefore are very naive about what actually happens in these types of situations.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#116

Post by ativzzz »

joneholland wrote: post #21

Rather than booking the replacement flight directly the author should have had easyjet rebook him. The author did no-show on the replacement flight provided by easyJet, and all of the griping will get them nowhere. You can’t take things into your own hands and then expect the company to refund you, the company would have provided the free alternative flight (earlier than the one the next day) and the EU fine had they…

The discount airlines tend to not allow you to do this easily, or at all. I've never had a bad experience doing this with normal priced airlines however.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#117

Post by londons_explore »

dataflow wrote: post #86

I think I disagree on the flight having been canceled. I'd have assumed the distinguishing factor between a flight cancellation vs. rescheduling isn't the flight number (a flight number seems like an immaterial bookkeeping abstraction?), but rather, whether a replacement flight offers seats to all of the passengers of the first flight . It seems they did this, as they say in their text message. As far as semantics is…

I believe in this case the difference should be immaterial... A delay of over 3 hours, and a cancellation have the same compensation amount.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#118

Post by londons_explore »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #103

> potentially catastrophic consequences of the cabin pressure system failing at cruising altitude, I considered that everyone on the plane had been very lucky. The cabin pressurization system failing at cruising altitude is one of the more common types of aircraft incidents. That's why planes are equipped with systems to handle it. While a catastrophic outcome is not impossible, it is exceedingly unlikely. As to the…

The simple modification to the rules should be "compensation a court finds to have not been properly paid (even if the victim did not request compensation), shall be paid at double the original rate. If the victim cannot be located, the compensation must be paid at triple the original rate to the government".

That means compensation shall not require the victim having to ask for it. It also means if the airline claims they can't track down the victim to make payment, they have to pay extra.

Re: Lawyers automate this, so why don't airlines?

#119

Post by londons_explore »

I like the fact these compensation rules have massive loopholes.

If they didn't, I think it would more than double the price of some tickets.

Sometimes I fly hundreds of miles for 10 euros (all taxes and fees included). There is no way a business can offer a refund of 300 euros if that flight is delayed.

Compensation should be an optional feature - I should be able to spend an extra 30 euros on my flight to get compensation in case of delay. Ask me when I book. Just like other insurance.

Post reply on HN