I’m posing this as a legal puzzler, though I may actually act on my situation.
I was delayed for more than six hours on a JetBlue flight in February, as part of JetBlue’s notorious meltdown. After that collapse, JetBlue announced a “Customers’ Bill of Rights,” (CBOS) and stated that it would apply retroactively to the events of February.
Under the terms of the CBOS:
My roundtrip flight cost around $600, but JetBlue has only offered me a $100 voucher.
Here is their explanation. I was traveling from Palm Beach to Boston, and returning the next day. The initial leg of my outbound travel was from Palm Beach to NYC, with a connecting flight to Boston. The initial leg departed and arrived on time. It was the connecting flight (NYC to Boston) that was delayed. According to JetBlue, the cost of that leg of my flight on the day I purchased my tickets was $50. They doubled that to come up with my $100 voucher.
So, do I have a claim? I have thought of several subsidiary issues, but the nub of the case is that there was no CBOS when I booked my flight. JetBlue has decided to apply the CBOS retroactively, but is that decision merely gratuitous, or does it form some sort of contract (executory or otherwise)?
You put this in GQ, which requires a factual answer, so I’ll say yes, you can file a law suit against almost anyone, for almost anything. You will have to calculate the cost of doing so, your chances of success and whether you’re prepared to absorb the costs in the event your suit is unsuccessful.
Well if you go to Jet Blue’s website and book a ticket now from JFK to Boston it comes in a $155. So you might want to call them and mention that. But what I would do is tell them that with such a short trip, the six hour delay ruined the entire trip and you feel you should get $1200 ($600 x 2) back. I can see where they’re coming from, but what good is a CBOS if they’re still gonna screw you. Make sure they know you’re going to fly with someone else next time.
Yeah. And, of course, like you, my fellow attorney, I know the answer to every legal question right off the top of your head.
This question is well outside my area of practice. I probably learned the answer in first-year contracts, but that was a loooong time ago.
I suspect the previous question was directed more at the fact that, as an attorney, you should know better than to ask for free legal advice on a message board, unless you like reading essentially worthless responses.
Subject to the usual caveats (I’m not your lawyer, you know better than to listen to any of the crap I’m spewing, etc.), I think you may have a problem with consideration, among the other contract formation issues you mention.
As you know, to form a contract each side must give consideration, that is giving something of legal value in exchange for something else of legal value. Under the original terms of your airline ticket, JetBlue was not required to give you anything for a flight delay. However, subsequent to the delay, JetBlue offered you a voucher that it was under prior no obligation to give. Presumably JetBlue did this under the hope (with no obligation on your part) that it would inspire you to travel on JetBlue again.
Because all of the airline’s obligations to you and your obligations to the airline were discharged after the flight was completed, you gave up nothing in exchange for the offer of the voucher. As such, you have given no consideration and thus have no right to obtain enforcement of the offer. You can, of course, sue all you want, but you would likely lose, not to mention facing the possibility of frivolous litigation sanctions.
Note that this is not a unilateral contract, like an offer of a reward for the return of a lost item, which is both accepted and completed by the performing party giving the consideration that was requested in the offer. JetBlue is just giving you the voucher, not asking you to do anything to get the voucher.
Sorry, but I guess you’ll have to find another outlet for your litigiousness.
Bingo. I don’t know the answer to many legal questons off the top of my head, but I do know how to find them or how to call people who can.
My question wasn’t snarky, BTW. I genuinely wondered if I had misremembered your profession. Not that I disrespect you or your right to ask, but it strikes me being like a plumber asking a plumbing question to a bunch of non-plumbers.
You can always attempt to negotiate. Especially if you have any documentable losses, such as missed reservations, missed connections, etc. I doubt that you would lose the hundred bucks by writing a letter asking for more. If they say no, drop it, but you’ll, at least, have the satisfaction of having tried. Who knows, they might up the ante, just for your perseverance.
Yeah, I was going to put in all the caveats (“will not act in reliance upon opinions given”, “will not form an a/c relationship”, etc.), but I didn’t feel like typing that much.
As for why I posted I posted my question here: I’ve previously been members of a few attorney BBs, and have found them either unresponsive or overly meandering. On these boards, while there are plenty of non-plumbers, there are scads of plumbers, and I figured the plumbers would respond (and more intelligently and quickly than on an attorney BB).
And Billdo, thanks for the answer, and I agree. Whether or not it was a unilateral contract was what was nagging at me.
Sua was not “restrained” in any legal sense of the word.
She was kept on the plane either to allow her to move somewhere or for her own safety. She agreed to this. She may not have liked it, but she wasn’t under any kind of intimidation or physical force.
She was not kept on the plane unlawfully- flight regulations, which have the operation of law, restrict where the plane can go, whether it can go back to the terminal, when and where it can let people off, etc.
UI in the second degree would be if Sua were restrained. She was not.
UI in the first degree would be if Sua were restrained in a way that would expose her to a risk of physical injury. She was not.
The fact is that the definition of “restrained,” as put forth in the statute, does not apply to Sua’s situation
Remember, I am not your lawyer and this is not legal advice.
Often times companies will “give in” from a well worded letter from a lawyer just to stop the potential of a lawsuit even if they know they’ll win the suit.
Of course that would only work if you had access to an attorney that would help you for no cost. I found a lot but not all companies will help you if they believe you are earnest. Avoid words saying “I will never fly your airline again,” because such strong statements say to the company “Why should I help you since you made up your mind NOT to use us.”
