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

151–159 of 159 posts

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

#151

Post by telesilla »

whimsicalism wrote: post #129
telesilla wrote: post #4

Probably just whoever was reading the paperwork on the day. That's an unfortunate turnout for the poster. I've had exactly the same experience but different departure airport and won (flight didn't go, I bought am immediate replacement seat myself, didn't use the one that was reassigned to me so I could get there faster). I use https://refund.me , excellent success rate and very little effort. It would be amazing to…

> refund.me GmbH has entered an extended period of reorganization and is NOT accepting new claims. Seems like they too have thrown in the towel.

That's a shame, I can't imagine how their business isn't profitable.

Alternatives seem to be:

aireclaim.com

click2refund.com

flight-delayed.co.uk

Others?

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

#152

Post by renewiltord »

fy20 wrote: post #137
renewiltord wrote: post #26

You have to book through them rather than by yourself. In fact, I'm very surprised he retained the flight back. Usually they cancel your return leg if you no-show the outbound leg. It's shitty stuff from the airlines for sure. But AFAIK, they all do this at this level.

That's not the case with low cost airlines in Europe. Each leg of the journey is on a separate ticket. This also means if you are flying there and back the same day, if there is a delay on the outbound flight and you miss the return flight it's considered a no show, so they don't need to compensate you.

Whacky, I had EasyJet Plus for so long (the £200/yr thing) and flew practically every weekend and didn't know that.

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

#153

Post by AceyMan »

mehrdadn wrote: post #104
AceyMan wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>a flight number seems like an immaterial bookkeeping abstraction Not when it comes to airline operations. Crews are assigned to flight numbers; changing their assigned flight number, even to the same route/city-pair, constitutes a schedule change, which requires a recalculation of all their duty hours. When operations are all fubar and your crews are out of position you cannot afford to limit your options. Ergo, cha…

I meant immaterial to the passenger , not immaterial in absoluteness. If the airline changed the flight number but still flew the same passengers to the same destination at the same time, you wouldn't say the flight has gotten canceled, right? I'm saying caring about the flight number is breaking the abstraction relevant to the passenger. The passenger isn't purchasing a flight number; he's purchasing a flight. What…

I think you rubber-ducked yourself so well you obviated your initial question.

My answer still stands and may be considered authoritative (webarchive hint).

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

#154

Post by Hnrobert42 »

egypturnash wrote: post #84
maxsilver wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that class action has a "bad" reputation, just that in the US, it has a 'meaningless' reputation. The punishment is generally so absurdly minor, and the time frame so long, that it feels like it's not even a slap on the wrist for the offender. The popular perception of class action in the US, is something like, "yes, Kitchenpal knowingly sold thousands of Blenders that sparked out and caught fire, and burned…

"...and multiple millions of dollars to the lawyers who got you this victory"

Well, the lawyers usually work on contingency. If they don’t win, they worked for 10 years for free. So, the percentage of victory is compensation for their risk and fronting the money to work for a decade.

Further, as the parent post points out, the compensation to the individual is low. Even if the lawyers made nothing, what does the plaintiff care? $3 or $6? What does it matter? But the point isn’t compensating the plaintiff. The point is punishing the defendants and creating some kind of deterrent.

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

#155

Post by Hnrobert42 »

maxsilver wrote: post #77
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's not that class action has a "bad" reputation, just that in the US, it has a 'meaningless' reputation. The punishment is generally so absurdly minor, and the time frame so long, that it feels like it's not even a slap on the wrist for the offender. The popular perception of class action in the US, is something like, "yes, Kitchenpal knowingly sold thousands of Blenders that sparked out and caught fire, and burned…

The point of class action is not to make the plaintiffs while with a check for $3.22. The point is punishing the defendants and creating some kind of deterrent. Yes, such lawsuits take too long and inflict too little pain on defendants, but sadly they are all we’ve got.

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

#156

Post by Hnrobert42 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #47
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Does class action have a bad reputation? In the US at least they’re associated with companies preying on people and they never seem to actually achieve much in practice except for lawyers. I would say they are a consumer rights problem, not a solution to consumer rights problems.

I think the value of class action is as a deterrent not a remedy.

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

#157

Post by Hnrobert42 »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #112
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The value in class action lawsuits is as a deterrent to companies.

Also, most recipients of the 5 euro awards do literally nothing. The check just shows up.

What more do you want? Or more to the point, what alternative do you propose?

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

#158

Post by Hnrobert42 »

maxerickson wrote: post #48
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Living in the US, I don't feel like class action suits do me much good. Businesses are happy to send me $7 vouchers for shit I don't want.

Imagine a world without class action. It’s not hard. Think about your internet provider. If you are in the US, you undoubtedly waived your rights to class action and taking the company to court. And then you wonder why your provider raises rates despite you being under contract. Why they can advertise data-capped, throttled service as unlimited.

It’s because there is no way to sue them for an amount of money big enough to make a difference. The best you as an individual can do is sue for a few bucks. Who had time for that? So you assume that’s just the way things are. You get screwed.

But they don’t have to be that way. If only a lawyer could sue the company on behalf of all the customers for all those tiny injustices. All those injustices together would add up to real money that might make companies think twice. It would also add up to enough to motivate a lawyer to take the case with no upfront payment.

So I understand if you don’t care about $7 checks, but that’s not the point. The point is a check on bad corporate actors that screw you, but just gently enough to that you don’t personally sue them.

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

#159

Post by Hnrobert42 »

underseacables wrote: post #54
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, YMMV, but Southwest Airlines is very focused on customer service, and it is very successful.

I disagree. Southwest engages in a lot of white washing and PR to project this image of an airline that “cares” but in actuality they’re no better than any others. On airlines it’s not YMMV it’s “dignity comes with a price.”

On SW, they don’t charge baggage fees. They don’t charge change or cancellation fees up to minutes before departure. Their staff has always been more cheerful and humorous than AA or United or really any other carrier than maybe VietJet.

So I don’t know by what standard you are evaluating them as no better, but by both the objective and subjective standards I propose, they are better.

Post reply on HN