Victory for the Dickersons!

January 20, 2011 8:53 pm

As many of you probably recall, Jess and I drove to Texas in protest of the TSA grope-a-thon required to fly these days. Before the new, creepier security screening processes were put in place we had purchased airplane tickets with Southwest. When the change occurred I was particularly unhappy. I called Southwest and asked for a refund, which they refused to provide because “we don’t control the TSA; it’s not our fault.”

So I moved to plan B: I filed a charge dispute with my credit card company (CitiBank) and carefully detailed why I considered the scenario to be a breach of contract. They conditionally refunded the money and sent the dispute to Southwest which had 60 days to reply. The reply just came through and my refund has been made permanent! Hooray!

——————–

On a related note, an update about the letters we sent to the airlines and government officials. Every airline responded with a written answer. Most were along the lines of “it’s not our fault, we can’t do anything about it.” But the response from American Airlines was very simple and direct:

Thank you for taking the time to contact us about the recent changes that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has made to checkpoint security screening procedures. We are monitoring our customers’ feedback on this issue very closely, and we thank you for providing us with your impressions.

They’re the only airline that didn’t simply deflect the issue away from themselves. I appreciate that. The airlines claim they have no control over the matter and, ostensibly, they don’t. However, they do have rather influential lobbying efforts which could certainly be brought to bear on the situation. And that’s the goal I’m going for. If they get enough pressure and begin losing enough customers they will find a way to reign in the TSA.

Now for the responses I got back from the government officials. We wrote letters, (physical letters!), to our two Senators, our House Representative, the TSA, the FAA, and the President. We received exactly zero replies. In over two months not a single person, organization, or office responded to our concerns. No form letters, no acknowledgement of any kind. That really kind of bothers me.

The fact that no part of the government could be bothered to even acknowledge our concerns is why I have very little faith that anything will change until the airlines start lobbying for it. I’ve now learned very poignantly how little my opinion matters to the people who are elected to represent my interests.

Thanks America, you’re really doing a bang-up job with that democratic republic business.

—————-

So the scores are:
-1 to Southwest for denying me the refund when I asked for it on the phone.
+1 to Southwest for not denying the charge dispute when I filed it with my credit card company.
+1 to CitiBank for taking care of this for me (using a credit card does have some great benefits).
-100 to the TSA for implementing stupid “security” rules.
+2 to the Dickersons who successfully received a refund from a large company.
+5 to airlines for acknowledging my complaint.
-20 to government officials/organizations for not acknowledging my existence.

Baby Burro

December 18, 2010 3:36 pm

We’re crossing Arizona today. We detoured across Route 66, taking the scenic route through Oatman. Just before town we came across some Christmas trees:

IMGP4030a

I include the car and surrounding area just to provide a proper sense of the middle-of-nowhere-ness of the location.

Then when we got into Oatman we had to wait for the daily gunfight to clear the road. So while we waited we got out and bought some kettle corn and watched the baby burro:
IMGP4036aThat basically made the scenic route worth it.

Freedom of the Press

December 7, 2010 8:12 am

President Obama while in China – November 16, 2009:

But I am a big believer in technology and I’m a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information. I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable. They can begin to think for themselves. That generates new ideas. It encourages creativity. (emphasis mine)

Hillary Clinton – January 1, 2010:

[President Obama] spoke about how access to information helps citizens hold their own governments accountable, generates new ideas, encourages creativity and entrepreneurship. The United States belief in that ground truth is what brings me here today.

Hillary Clinton about WikiLeaks – November 29, 2010:

It is an attack on the international community…

Sarah Palin about Julian Assange – November 30, 2010:

Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders?

Senator Joe Lieberman – December 7, 2010:

It sure looks to me that Assange and WikiLeaks have violated the Espionage Act.

Philip Crowley (State Department Spokesman) – December 7, 2010:

What WikiLeaks has done is a crime under US law.

So much for Freedom of the Press and holding our own governments accountable. Also, as much as people are clamoring to charge Assange with a crime there’s the small problem of him not being a U.S. citizen. Seems rather extraordinary to charge someone with a crime under a law in a country in which they neither live nor have citizenship. But Palin apparently has the answer to that, just call him a terrorist and kill him where he stands.

Regardless of how you feel about the leaked information WikiLeaks needs to be protected the same way any other news organization would be, including the New York Times which collaborated with WikiLeaks in processing the documents and deciding what to publish.

Christmas time is here

December 4, 2010 10:22 pm

Per Jess’ traditions we needed to decorate the tree today (today being the first Saturday in December). This, of course, necessitates having a tree to decorate. So we had to go and get a tree. Per Dickerson traditions this requires cutting our tree down ourselves after trudging around in the snow at least until you can’t feel your toes, preferably until someone is crying. Unfortunately, California weather doesn’t really cooperate with those requirements (though I suppose we could drive into the mountains far enough if necessary).

So instead we headed out to the Christmas tree farm that we went to last year in the 50 degree sunshine. We found a fairly decent looking tree and I cut it down. And yes, it’s on the side of a hill, which is why the fence is crooked.
IMG_0018
In no time at all we had Beatrice (last year’s tree was named Albert, this year’s is Beatrice) tied onto Chloe and ready to travel.
IMG_0025
The main difference from last year being that we actually went during the day and not as the sun was setting. Easier to work when you have light. We got the tree home and set it up. TADA!
IMGP3998
Check out that spotlight work on the angel.

Jess cheated and slipped some new ornaments into the ornament box as presents for me. Then tried to make me feel stupid for not recognizing them at all. But they are pretty neat. She used a Linux program which will convert a picture into a cross-stitch pattern for you. This one is my Mii from the Wii:
IMGP4020
And this is the Linux Penguin, named Tux:
IMGP4021

Since I had the camera out and on the tripod already (since I needed the tripod to get decent shots) I started playing with things. Here’s my abstract art of our tree:
IMGP4009
And this is what happens when you zoom in on the tree while the exposure is being taken:
IMGP4016

We spent some time watching the Livermore Christmas Parade (I suppose it’s probably called the “Holiday Parade” or “Winter Parade” or something, but it does end with Santa). And we watched The Muppet Christmas Carol while decorating.

Oh! And we hung up our stockings! Jess’ mom made her children stockings and last year made one for me too, so Jess and I have matching stockings. They’re quite lovely.
IMG_0026

The Quest for a Refund

November 22, 2010 10:36 am

Jess and I have decided we will travel by land for our Christmas travel in order to not be subjected to the invasive, demeaning, and/or cancer-causing security requirements of flying. Luckily my work schedule is such that we can spend the extra time traveling to and from Texas without cutting into the time we planned to actually be there. Regardless, as part of this decision I’ve been seeking a refund for the tickets we purchased in September.

My opinion is that when I purchased the tickets on September 25 I did so with the understanding that passing through security was required in order to receive the service I paid for (namely, being flown from A to B). At the time there was a security screening option which I considered tolerable. Therefore I accepted that screening requirement as an implied condition of the transaction.

On October 28, more than a full month after my purchase, the TSA changed the requirements of the security process and all the options became intolerable. To me it seems fair to say that the implied condition of my transaction with the airline changed without my consent. Since the terms of our contract changed without my consent I should be entitled to a refund because I reject the new terms of the agreement.

Of course, the Southwest customer service representative didn’t agree with my position. While she agreed that passing through security was a requirement to receiving the service I paid for, her position was that because Southwest doesn’t control the TSA I wasn’t entitled to a refund from Southwest because of something that the TSA did.

I think this is entirely bogus. Southwest’s contract of carriage makes no mention of security screening requirements, however I think it’s fairly obvious that they must be included in any discussion of the contract as an implied condition—refusing to comply will result in you being denied boarding, being removed from the airport, and potentially being arrested and fined up to $11,000. I’ve also checked the contracts of carriage for Delta, American Airlines, and US Airways. None of which make mention of requiring conformity with security screening requirements except to say it is the passenger’s responsibility to arrive with enough time to undergo any such requirements. JetBlue’s, however, explicitly says “Passengers and their baggage are subject to inspection with or without the Passenger’s consent or knowledge.” So if you fly JetBlue you should be aware that you’ve agreed to be inspected without your consent or knowledge. Not cool JetBlue.

In contrast. Amtrak’s conditions of transportation explicitly state “Passengers failing to consent to security procedures will be denied access to trains and refused carriage, and a refund will be offered.” So it is clearly not unreasonable to suggest that the carrier should refund the ticket when the passenger refuses to comply with security procedures.

After getting nowhere with the Southwest CSR I asked to speak with a supervisor and was told that she was a supervisor. So I told her I’d be pursuing this further, which she, of course, didn’t care about.

[INTERMISSION]

My next step was to log on to my credit card company (Citi Bank)’s website and file a charge dispute. I explained my position, why I felt I was entitled to a refund, and how Southwest responded to my request. As I was about halfway through the form I got a popup suggesting I could chat with a CSR about my dispute. So I did that which got me nowhere. I know why they have that option because they want to nip disputes in the bud when it’s someone making a fruitless claim. But I explained to that CSR what my dispute was about and was directed to submit the online dispute form. And I did so.

I’ve since received notification that the dispute has been supported by Citi Bank which means that they provided a conditional refund on the charge and have sent the dispute to Southwest. So now I’m waiting to hear Southwest’s response.

If Southwest denies the refund I’m planning to send what’s known as an Executive Email Carpet Bomb. Which is essentially sending an email of complaint to any and all executives for which an email address can be found. This is a fairly popular move with the Consumerist.org website and can be successful when other methods fail.

If that does fail, however, I am fully grumpy enough and ready to take the matter to small claims court. I don’t see how anyone could reasonably consider this to amount to anything but a change in the terms of our contract.

The truth of the matter is this:
Southwest: If you buy this ticket, in order to use it you have to be cleared by the TSA.
Me: TSA, what do I have to do to be allowed on the plane?
TSA: You have to do X.
Me: OK.
[33 days later]
TSA: Oh, by the way you now have to do Y to board your plane. We don’t allow X anymore.
Me: No way.
Southwest: Too bad, thanks for the money.

So much for the “Southwest Difference.”