Benjamin Edelman Complaint

1 of 10 BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF AVIATION ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEEDINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

---------------------------------------------------- -- ) ) Benjamin Edelman, ) third

- party complainant ) )
v. ) Docket DOT

- OST

- 2013

-

____ ) American Airlines, Inc. ) )

------------------------------------------------------ )

COMPLAINT OF BENJAMIN E DELMAN Comments with respect to this document should be addressed to: Benja min Edelman 169 Walnut St. Brookline, MA 02445 E

- mail: ben@benedelman.org

Dated: December 12 , 2013Benjamin Edelman Complaint

2 of 10 BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF AVIATION ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEEDINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

------------------------------------------------ --------------- ) ) Benjamin Edelman, ) thir d

- party complainant ) )
v. ) Docket DOT

- OST

- 2013

-

____ ) American Airlines, Inc. ) )

--------------------------------------------------------------- )

COMPLAINT OF BENJAMIN EDELMAN
1. In my complaint of February 4, 2013 , I alleged that American Airlines staff and systems repeatedly mischaracterize certain carrier

- imposed fees as “tax.” I
substanti ated that allegation with screenshots, receipts, email correspondence, call recordings, my personal first

- hand experience, and the experience of others.
2. In its Cons ent Order of December 11, 2013 , DOT affirmed that the practices at issue are indeed unfair and deceptive. DOT ordered AA to cease these practices , and AA confirmed having d one so . Inexplicably, and contrary to its
represen tation in the Consent Order, AA continues similar practices to this day.
3. Specifically, in my testing, AA.COM now s ystematically m ischaracterizes

c arrier

- i mposed s urcharges as “ t ax” on a ward bookings, and AA.COM further systematically falsely states that t hese bookings have zero “carrier imposed surcharges”
when that is not the case.Benjamin Edelman Complaint

3 of 10 4. On December 11, 2013, I requested one

- way business class award travel from Boston to London. I was quoted a price of 50,000 miles plus $438.20. See Exhibit
1. I clicked “Sho w Trip Details” and received the screen shown in Exhibit 2. The resulting itemization declared that “Taxes” were “$438.20” and “Carrier

- Imposed Fees” were “$0.00.” On information and belief, the overwhelming majority of the $438.20 is
carrier

- imposed sur charge, not “tax.” For paid travel o n the same routing, the ITA
Matrix tool indicates that AA charges a $414 YR surcharge.
5. On December 11, 2013, I requested one

- way coach award travel from
Boston to London. I was quoted a price of 20,000 miles plus $253.20. I clicked “Show Trip Details” and received the screen shown in Exhibit 3 . The resulting itemizati on declared that “Taxes” were “$253.20” and “Carrier

- Imposed Fees” were “$0.00.” On information and belief, the overwhelming majority of the $253.20 is carrier

- imposed surcharge, not “tax.” For paid travel o n the same routing, the ITA Matrix tool indicates that AA charges a $ 2 29 YR surcharge.
6. On December 12, 2013, I requested round

- trip coach award travel f rom Washington Dulles to London. I was quoted a price of 40,000 miles plus $692.30. I clicked “Show Trip Details” and received the screen shown in Exhibit 4. The resulting itemization declared that “Taxes” were “$692.30” and “Carrier

- Imposed Fees” were “$0.00.” On information and belief, the overwhelming majority of the $692.30 is carrier

imposed surcharge, not “tax.” For paid travel o n the same routing, the ITA Matrix tool indicates that AA charges a $ 458 YR surcharge.
7. All of the statements at issue were literally false. They were not merely unfair or deceptive; rather, they were false . Specifically, the A A .COM f are quoteBenjamin Edelman Complaint

4 of 10 unambiguously claimed that taxes a pply in an amount that is simply not t rue
. Furthermore, the A A .COM f are quote unambiguously claimed that carrier

- imposed fees

are not charged when that, too, is not correct

. 8. Others have noted the same proble m. Specifically, on the popular discussion forum FlyerTalk, a user with username “billgrates3” reported substantially the
same false statements on AA.COM. See http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/21950356

- post15.html

. 9. The misrepresentations at issue cause consumers to believe that their AAdvantage miles are more valuable than is actually the case. If a reasonable consumer were told that his redemption required paym ent of a carrier

- imposed surcharge of several hundred dollars, the consumer would place a reduced value on AAdvantage miles

. 10. The Consent Order in DOT

- OST

- 2013

- 0024 (order 2003

- 12

- 6) provides in part that “ American consents to the issuance of an order to cease and desist from future similar violations of 49 U.S. C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a) ” (emphasis added). These obligations apply immediately , and American is not in compliance

. 11. Compared to the conduct flagged in my prior complaint, the practices here at issue are importantly worse. The practices here at issue are entirely automated and
cannot be attributed to a gent error. (In contrast, a portion of my prior compliant resulted from agents’ oral statements.) The practices here at issue are statements prior to purchase , more likely to influence consumers ’ purchases . (In contrast, a portion of my prior complaint resulted from receipts provided after purchase and customer correspondence occurring after purchase

. ) The practices here at issue include both a falseBenjamin Edelman Complaint

5 of 10 statement of tax and an affirmative false statement of (lack of) carrier

- imposed fees. (In contrast, my prior complaint resulted only from false statements of tax.)
12. I ask that the Department of Transport ation: (1) Exercise its authority under 49 USC 41712 to open an investigation of American Airlines for having engaged in, and continuing to engage in, the unfair or deceptive practices described above; (2) Pursuant to such investigation, o rder American Airlines to refund to ticket purch asers all monies represented to ticket purchasers as “taxes” or government

- imposed fees, but not actually remitted to governments; (3) Impose appropriate civil penalties on American Airlines; and (4) Refer this matter to appropriate US and foreign tax col lection agencies for investigation of possible tax fraud or other violations of tax law in

non
- payment to governments of monies collected as “taxes” or government

- imposed fees.

I suggest that when DOT imposes monetary penalties for this further violation,
DOT should consider the fact that the 2013

- 12

- 6 C onsent O rder specifically requires that AA permanently cease and desist from precisely these practices. A heightened penalty is appropriate in light of American’s sophistication and size, the duration of t he practices at issue, the continuation of these practices after consumer complaints, the continuation of these practices after DOT inquiry, the continuation of these practice after AA had specifically promised DOT that these practices had ceased (an d had entered into a formalBenjamin Edelman Complaint

6 of 10 binding consent order to that effect) , and AA’s ongoing refusal to refund affected passengers the amounts which AA has falsely characterized as “tax.”

Respectfully submitted , /s/ Benjamin EdelmanBenjamin Edelman Complaint

7 of 10 Attachment 1Benjamin Edelman Complaint

8 of 10 Attachment 2Benjamin Edelman Complaint

9 of 10 Attachment 3

Attachment 4Benjamin Edelman Complaint

10 of 10 Certificate of Service

I h ereby certify that I have, this 12 th day of December , 2013 caused a c opy of the foregoing Complaint to be served by electronic mail on the following persons: Robert Silverberg , Esq. rsilverberg@sgbdc.com Samuel Podberesky, Esq. sam.podberesky@dot.gov

/s/

_____________________ Benjamin Edelm an