Communications with respect to this document should be sent to:

Mike Borsetti

1 Montgomery St Ste 2500

San Francisco, CA 94104

mike@borsetti.com

5 April 2013

BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

In Re

American Airlines

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0024

COMPLAINT AND MOTION TO JOIN COMPLAINT
Complaint and Motion of Borsetti

1

BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

In Re

American Airlines

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0024

COMPLAINT AND MOTION TO JOIN COMPLAINT

I, Mike Borsetti, is filing a Complaint against American Airlines for deceiving me 

under 49 U.S.C. § 41712 and for violations under 14 C.F.R. 399.84 (a), and wish to join 

the Complaint filed by Benjamin Edelman in this docket. Since Mr. Edelman’s Complaint is against the same party and involves the same subject and state of facts, the Department’s rules provide for complainants to join in a single complaint.1

COMPLAINT

In my Comments of 21 March 2013, Document ID DOT-OST-2013-0024-0010, 

amongst other things, I complain about and provide evidence of violations of 49 U.S.C. § 

 

1

14 C.F.R. § 302.404 (d) provides that “[t]wo or more complainants may join in one complaint if their

respective causes of complaint are against the same party or parties and involve substantially the

same purposes, subject or state of facts.”
Complaint and Motion of Borsetti

2

41712 and 14 C.F.R. 399.84 (a) (“American Airlines Telephone Representative Misrepresentation” and “American Airlines E-ticket Confirmations are Incomplete and Do Not 

Separate Carrier-Imposed Fees”).

In my Comments of 21 March 2013, Document ID DOT-OST-2013-0024-0011, I 

further complain about and provide evidence of violations of 49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 

C.F.R. 399.84 (a) as it pertains to redemption of AAdvantage “award” mileage credits. 

Armed with a better understanding of procedural matter, I believe it is in both the 

public and the Secretary’s best interest if these are made formal Complaints under 14 

C.F.R. § 302.404, allowing American Airlines the opportunity to provide formal answer

to them under 14 C.F.R. § 302.408. Permitting American Airlines to answer should 

sharpen the issues that will ultimately have to be resolved by the Department.

For simplicity’s sake, rather than submit additional duplicative and repetitive filings to this Docket, resubmitting the existing Comments as formal Complaints is preferred. 

JOINING THE COMPLAINT

My Complaint is against the same party and involves the same subject and state of 

facts, therefore joining the existing Complaint instead of opening new proceedings is 

beneficial to the Department.
Complaint and Motion of Borsetti

3

My joining the proceedings at this stage would not introduce any further delays

since American Airlines and original complainant have already agreed to additional replies and response2

, which have, to public record3, not taken place as of yet.

I discussed this Complaint and Motion to Join Complaint with Mr. Benjamin 

Edelman, the Complainant, via email on 4 April 2013 and Complainant has no objection 

to it.

WHEREFORE,

for all of the reasons set forth above, I

1. Respectfully resubmit as Complaints under 14 C.F.R. § 302.404 Document IDs DOT-OST-2013-0024-0010 and DOT-OST-2013-0024-0011 of 

21 March 2013, a copy of which I attach hereto.

2. As required by 14 C.F.R. § 302.4 (b) I certify that the contents of my 

Complaints as of the preceding paragraph and the attached exhibits are 

true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Pursuant to Title 

18 United States Code Section 1001, I Mike Borsetti, have not in any 

manner knowingly and willfully falsified, concealed or failed to disclose 

any material fact or made any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or 

knowingly used any documents which contain such statements in connection with the preparation, filing or prosecution of such Complaints. I un-

 

2

American Airlines, Agreed Motion for Leave to File Complainant’s Reply to American’s Answer to Complaint and to File American’ Response to Complainant’s Reply, posted 27 March 2013, Document ID DOTOST-2013-0024-0013

3

As per http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketBrowser;so=DESC;sb=postedDate;D=DOT-OST-2013-0024, 

retrieved at 12:00ET on 5 April 2013.
Complaint and Motion of Borsetti

4

derstand that an individual who is found to have violated the provisions of 

18 U.S.C. section 1001 shall be fined or imprisoned not more than five 

years, or both.

3. Request under 14 C.F.R. § 302.404 (d) to join the Complaint filed by 

Benjamin Edelman in this docket.

CERTIFICATION

The contents of this motion and the attached exhibits are true and correct to the 

best of my knowledge and belief. Pursuant to Title 18 United States Code Section 1001, I 

Mike Borsetti, have not in any manner knowingly and willfully falsified, concealed or 

failed to disclose any material fact or made any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or 

knowingly used any documents which contain such statements in connection with the 

preparation, filing or prosecution of this motion. I understand that an individual who is 

found to have violated the provisions of 18 U.S.C. section 1001 shall be fined or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Respectfully submitted,

___________________________

Mike Borsetti

5 April 2013
Complaint and Motion of Borsetti

5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A copy of the foregoing has been served as required by 14 C.F.R. § 302.7 this day

of 5 April 2013 upon the following parties via electronic mail, and no indication was received that any transmission had failed:

 Samuel Podberesky, Esq., Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement & 

Proceedings, U.S. Department of Transportation: sam.podberesky@dot.gov

 Robert P. Silverberg, Esq., Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP, Attorneys for 

American Airlines: rsilverberg@sgbdc.com

 Benjamin Edelman, Esq.: ben@benedelman.org

___________________________

Mike Borsetti
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

American Airlines

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0024

COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF DOT INVESTIGATION INTO AMERICAN AIRLINES 

INC VIOLATIONS AND ADDITIONAL FACTS

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to:

Mike Borsetti

1 Montgomery St Ste 2500

San Francisco, CA 94104

mike@borsetti.com

21 March 2013
1

BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

American Airlines

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0024

COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF DOT INVESTIGATION INTO AMERICAN AIRLINES 

INC VIOLATIONS AND ADDITIONAL FACTS

I strongly encourage the Secretary to exercise its authority under 49 U.S.C. § 41712 to 

investigate and impose sanctions on American Airlines for the unfair and deceptive practices 

described in Mr. Edelman’s complaint, Document DOT-OST-2013-0024-0001, and in doing so 

fulfill its mission.

In addition, I would like to provide the following additional information to the Secretary 

in aiding its decision making.

AMERICAN AIRLINES TELEPHONE REPRESENTATIVE MISREPRESENTATION

On 31 January at approximately 6:30PM PT I called American Airlines to change ticketed 

award travel involving carriage on British Airways. The representative misstated the price of the 

new itinerary to me as “taxes”, when in reality the vast majority of it was in fuel surcharges.
2

AMERICAN AIRLINES E-TICKET CONFIRMATIONS ARE INCOMPLETE AND DO NOT SEPARATE 

CARRIER-IMPOSED FEES

The emailed e-ticket I received as a result of the abovementioned change did not break 

apart taxes from carrier-imposed fees: all was lumped-in under “Additional Fare Collection”.

American Airlines, unlike most other airlines, no longer provides customers with the 

information that has been historically provided to all travelers in the ticket, specifically fare 

calculation, individual tax breakdown, and restrictions/endorsements.

I urge the DOT to require American Airlines (and all airlines should such requirement not 

be in existence) to continue to provide such complete disclosure to their customers with their eticket confirmation/receipt so that passengers know exactly what they have purchased. The 

current disclosure “boilerplate”1is so vague to be irrelevant without further details such as the 

restriction line of the ticket.

 

1

The disclosure as it appears in the email, at 100% its original size:
3

RELEVANT COMMENTS IN A DIFFERENT DOCKET

I would like to alert the Secretary that some of the comments filed in Docket DOT-OST2013-0025 contain evidence of misrepresentation by American Airlines, and should therefore be 

considered in this Docket. These comments include, to date, those of Ann Shooshani in DOTOST-2013-0025-0029 and Deirdre Elizabeth Seim in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0041, but this list is 

probably incomplete.

RESOLUTION

In view of the preponderant evidence and ample public support, the Secretary should 

open an investigation on American Airlines under 49 U.S.C. § 41712 without further ordering

the required resolution from the complaint.

I further urge the DOT to require American Airlines (and all airlines should such 

requirement not be in existence) to provide complete ticket details in their email 

confirmation/receipt.

Furthermore, the complaint provides evidence that American Airlines was first made 

aware of the violations on 31 December 2011, over 15 months ago, and is continuing to engage 

in the unfair and deceptive manners described. I strongly urge the Secretary to take into account 

each day from that date as a separate violation when imposing a civil penalty as per 49 USC § 

46301.

Submitted via regulations.gov on 21 March 2013

/s/
4

Mike Borsetti
BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

American Airlines

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

British Airways

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0024

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0025

COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF DOT INVESTIGATION INTO AMERICAN AIRLINES 

INC AND BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC VIOLATIONS AND REQUEST FOR JOINT 

INVESTIGATION OF IMMUNIZED INTEGRATED JOINT VENTURE PARTNERS

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to:

Mike Borsetti

1 Montgomery St Ste 2500

San Francisco, CA 94104

mike@borsetti.com

21 March 2013
1

BEFORE THE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

American Airlines

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

British Airways

Multiple Price Advertising Violations of

49 U.S.C. § 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84(a)

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0024

Docket DOT-OST-2013-0025

COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF DOT INVESTIGATION INTO AMERICAN AIRLINES 

INC AND BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC VIOLATIONS 

AND 

REQUEST FOR JOINT INVESTIGATION OF IMMUNIZED INTEGRATED JOINT 

VENTURE PARTNERS

MATTER OF PUBLIC DECEPTION IN DOCKET COMMENTS

In reading the comments to date in these docket it is difficult not to notice how many 

people have been deceived by surcharges applied by British Airways or its DOT-immunized 

integrated joint venture partner American Airlines when redeeming their award mileage credits 

for free flights.

These comments include, to date, those of Sam Khatib in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0003, 

Kevin James O'Connor in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0005, Michael Ferris in DOT-OST-2013-0025-
2

0008, Sean Thornton Seelinger in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0022, Anonymous in DOT-OST-2013-

0025-0023, Zak Rakrouki in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0024, J P in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0026,

Margaret Ann Shooshani in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0029, Alex Goldberg DOT-OST-2013-0025-

0030, Aaron Reese in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0032, Kevin Morrison in DOT-OST-2013-0025-

0036, Anonymous in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0038, John Bishop in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0040, 

Regan Eliston Wright in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0039, Deirdre Elizabeth Seim in DOT-OST2013-0025-0041, Jack Short in DOT-OST-2013-0025-0048, and Kathleen Voss in DOT-OST2013-0025-0056, as well as Alex Goldberg in DOT-OST-2013-0024-0003, Anonymous in DOTOST-2013-0024-0006 and Shawn Cole in DOT-OST-2013-0024-0009.

By way of background, prior to the implementation of the integrated joint venture in 

which American, British Airways, and Iberia would cooperate on all of their transatlantic flights 

and services, approved by the DOT in 2010-7-8 Final Order (DOT-OST-2008-0252-3406), the 

(currently) approximately 72 million1 members in the American Airlines AAdvantage program 

were precluded from redeeming their award mileage credits for transatlantic travel on British 

Airways.

With the implementation of the thusly approved integrated joint venture on 1 October 

2010, American Airlines extended the ability to redeem AAdvantage award mileage credits for 

 

1

American Airlines, Inc, Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. Retrieved 21 March 2013 from http://phx.corporateir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9NDk2MDc4fENoaWxkSUQ9NTM0ODgyfFR5cGU9MQ==&t=1
3

transatlantic travel on British Airways, posting on an online F.A.Q.2that British Airways would 

“assess an added surcharge”

3

, the fuel surcharge.

1) AMERICAN DIRECTLY BENEFITS FROM THE “BRITISH AIRWAYS” FUEL SURCHARGE IT 

CHARGES ON AWARDS

It appears that American Airlines directly benefits from the fuel surcharge revenue 

assessed on these redemptions since, as it itself states4, American Airlines and British Airways 

“share the revenue and treat customers the same regardless of which airline actually flies the 

aircraft” (emphasis added). Fuel surcharge is a carrier-imposed fee, and indisputably a form of 

revenue for the carrier.

2) AADVANTAGE MEMBERS HURT BY REPLACEMENT OF AA “METAL NEUTRAL” AIRCRAFT 

WITH BA’S

AAdvantage members have been irreparably hurt by the post- integrated joint venture

substitution of “metal neutral” American Airlines-operated aircraft with “metal neutral” British 

Airways-operated aircraft on routes to London. While American Airlines and British Airways

reap the benefits of the integrated joint venture, AAdvantage members are no longer be able to 

obtain non-stop award travel from Boston from 31 March without paying an additional $458 per 

 

2

There was no mention of any surcharges on the email communications to members sent on 1 October 2010 and 

signed by Maya Liebman.

3

From http://www.aa.com/i18n/utility/jba-faqs.jsp, Retrieved 21 March 2013: “Q. Will I have to pay an added 

surcharge when I use my miles for travel on American Airlines? A. No. American Airlines does not assess additional 

charges beyond required government taxes and fees for passengers traveling on American on AAdvantage award 

tickets. Q. How much are the added charges assessed by British Airways and Iberia? A. British Airways and Iberia 

assess an added surcharge which varies based on the origin, destination, cabin etc. At the time of booking, the 

reservation agent will be able to provide you with the amount of the surcharge that applies to the itinerary you've 

chosen.”

4

American Airlines, Inc, Background Information: Antitrust Immunity Application process. Retrieved 21 March 

2013 from http://www.aa.com/content/images/aboutUs/newsroom/ATIBackgrounder.pdf
4

roundtrip (at current Economy class fuel surcharge levels)5. This development is clearly against 

the public interest.

Before

(29 March)

After

(31 March)

3) HARM TO THE PUBLIC

Thirdly, the unreasonably high level of fuel surcharges has harmed the 72 million 

AAdvantage members by devaluing the purchasing power of their award mileage credits of up to 

75% as per the comment by Ms. Voss (DOT DOT-OST-2013-0025-0056)

6

. This is the 

equivalent of wiping out the value of up to 457 billion outstanding AAdvantage award mileage 

 

5

On that date the flight formerly operated as AA 108 will be replaced by an additional BA-operated flight, 

maintaining the same total integrated joint venture frequency but completely eliminating AA-operated service. 

Source: search on http://aa.com performed on 21 March 2013

6

In my experience on the NYC-LHR route in low season redeeming an Economy class award costs as much as 86% 

of purchasing the ticket, with the vast majority of this being fuel surcharges. American still wants 100% of the

agreed to award mileage credits in addition to this.
5

credits, which is clearly against the public interest since most of the public holds award mileage 

credits.

4) ANECDOTAL DISTORTION IN AWARD AVAILABILITY BASED ON “METAL NEUTRAL”

CARRIER

The vast majority of award space on the integrated joint venture is anecdotally available 

only on those flights where the integrated joint venture partners charge fuel surcharges, i.e. those 

“metal neutral” ones operated by British Airways. Fewer than 35% of the award seats to London 

seems to be available on American Airlines, 35% being AA’s approximate market share to 

London. This anecdotal information can be confirmed by a quick analysis of the traffic as 

reported to the DOT, and, if true, should be investigated further.

ACTION TO BE TAKEN

I encourage the Secretary to listen to the commenters and include these issues in its 

investigations, which are a deceptive practice of the integrated joint venture airlines involved. 

Award mileage credits are an integral part of what the public purchases with an airline ticket, and 

are marketed by the airlines as means to be awarded with aspirational free travel, often to pristine 

sandy beaches or far-away placesi. The name itself, award, is synonym of reward, and in the 

English language it means something that is given or bestowed7, not sold. With the imposition 

of fees that are as high as 75% (and higher), it is neither given nor bestowed, and to call it an 

award is, a prima facie, deceitful.

 

7

Sources: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/award and 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/award 
6

RESOLUTION

In view of the preponderant evidence and public support, the Secretary should open a

joint investigation under 49 U.S.C. § 41712 without further delay into the deceitful practice by 

the DOT-immunized integrated joint venture partners American Airlines and British Airways as 

it pertains to fuel surcharges on, at a minimum, transatlantic routes.

The Secretary should also exercise its duty under 49 USC § 41309 (b) (1) and start a 

periodic review of Final Order 2010-7-8 (DOT-OST-2008-0252-3406) to end its approval on the 

basis of the failure of the applicants to implement fully the application approved, specifically the 

“full reciprocity of frequent flyer benefits between American and British Airways” listed in the 

section entitled “The Proposed Alliance Will Create Significant New Consumer Benefits”

8

.

Submitted via regulations.gov on 21 March 2013

/s/

Mike Borsetti

 

i

American Airlines currently markets its program with a video appearing at 

http://www.aa.com/i18n/AAdvantage/programInformation/main.jsp and available directly at

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1335016593001?bckey=AQ~~,AAABDmhAyHE~,UBpv5ReJC5dAwUeG7ebCLCtymWCHLb-&bctid=1416302117001

As typical with the marketing of these programs, just the first minute of the video contains all of these aspirational 

messages

 

8

Joint Application of AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC, FINNAIR OYJ, IBERIA LÍNEAS AÉREAS DE 

ESPAÑA, S.A, ROYAL JORDANIAN AIRLINES under 49 U.S.C. §§ 41308 and 41309 for approval of and antitrust 

immunity for alliance agreements (Document DOT-OST-2008-0252-0001), Page 16. Same statement repeated on 

page 23.
7

 
8

 

\
9