Darren Martin

Complaint 

1 of 19

BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF AVIATION ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEEDINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

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

) 

Darren Martin, ) 

 third-party complainant ) 

) 

v. ) Docket DOT-OST-2014-____ 

) 

American Airlines, Inc. ) 

) 

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

COMPLAINT OF DARREN MARTIN

Comments with respect to this document should be addressed to: 

Darren Martin

E-mail: 

Dated: March 1st, 2014 
Darren Martin

Complaint

2 of 19

BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF AVIATION ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEEDINGS

WASHINGTON, D.C.

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

)

Darren Martin, )

 third-party complainant )

)

v. ) Docket DOT-OST-2014-____

)

American Airlines, Inc. ) 

)

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

COMPLAINT OF DARREN MARTIN

1. This complaint arises out of American Airlines cancelling its earlymorning nonstop service BOS-ORD on which I had redeemed and ticketed two 

AAdvantage awards as part of a BOS-ORD-LHR itinerary. AA then refused to provide

alternative comparable transport unless I paid additional fees (repeatedly 

mischaracterized as “tax”), in violation of AA’s prior commitments to passengers and to 

the Department of Transportation.

I. My Ticket, AA’s Cancellation, and My Discussions with AA

A. Ticket Issuance

2. On February 2, 2014, I used AA.COM to redeem miles for one-way coach 

award travel BOS-ORD-LHR on 28 May. I chose the daytime departure to avoid 

unpleasant overnight flights. On net, the itinerary calls for departure from BOS at 6am 

and arrival to LHR at 10:45pm the same day. Travel was for my parents (two 
Darren Martin

Complaint

3 of 19

passengers), using miles from my AAdvantage account. I paid the $10 of taxes by credit 

card and received an itinerary and confirmation the same day. See Exhibit 1.

B. Flight Cancellation and Initial Rebooking

3. On February 16, I received a schedule notification email indicating 

rebooking on an alternate BOS-ORD flight on the afternoon of May 27, with a 

connection on the original daytime flight from ORD-LHR the following day. I called AA 

reservations to enquire about the change and was told the original BOS-ORD earlymorning flight had been cancelled and there was no alternative to get to ORD in time for 

the connecting flight to LHR leaving Boston the same day as the originally booked 

itinerary. I was also told I was responsible for my own accommodation for the proposed 

overnight stay in ORD. 

4. I proceeded to ask about the direct flight BOS-LHR on BA. The agent 

said there was award availability so this was possible, but there was an additional charge 

of approximately $250 per person to do so. I disagreed and asked whether this could be 

waived since AA had made a schedule change of more than nine hours. She checked, 

told me everything was updated in AA’s systems, and indicated that I should be able to 

check online later this afternoon for confirmation. I believe AA sent a confirmation 

email to my father at the email address associated with his AAdvantage account, but we 

no longer have access to this email account.

5. In the subsequent days, I used the AA.COM View Itinerary function to 

check the reservation. I was able to see both passengers booked on BA flight 238 direct 

from BOS-LHR on May 28th in X class with taxes listed as $0. I believed the trip was 

fully corrected, so I deleted the original change emails.
Darren Martin

Complaint

4 of 19

C. Second Attempt at Rebooking

6. On February 26, I received an email from AA asking me to call in. See 

Exhibit 2. I called AA reservations and spoke with an agent who informed me that he 

saw on my reservation that I would have to pay approximately $250 per person to fly on 

the BA flights that were listed in my itinerary. I told him I didn't want to pay anything 

additional, and it seemed inappropriate that he was asking me to pay that since this all 

resulted from an AA schedule change. He said AA had to collect additional taxes 

because I was traveling on BA. I argued with him about calling it taxes as I assumed (I 

believe correctly) that the additional cost was actually a YQ charge (which is not a tax). 

He responded by saying that his computer says they are taxes and we need to collect 

them. After discussing different flight options, and having the agent talk to his help desk, 

we realized that (after AA’s schedule change) there is no way to do a same day trip from 

BOS-LHR without flying on a flight operated by BA.

D. Discussions with a Reservations Supervisor

7. At this point I asked to speak to a supervisor. A lady came on the phone, 

introduced herself as a supervisor, and then immediately gave an explanation of how AA 

has to collect additional taxes for award tickets on the BA flight. I immediately pointed 

out that I believed the charges aren’t taxes at all but rather fuel surcharges. She 

responded by saying that whatever I want to call them, AA still needs to collect them if I 

wanted to fly on that particular flight. I told her I thought I should be treated exactly the 

same way as a revenue passenger and that a revenue passenger wouldn't be charged more 

if the passenger had to be moved from an AA flight to a BA flight. She rejected my 

argument without providing any detail and instead offered to cancel my ticket and return 

the miles to my account. I declined that offer and pointed out that I had a contract with 
Darren Martin

Complaint

5 of 19

AA to get me from Boston to London on May 28, and the only remaining option that 

could accomplish that was the direct BA flight, due to AA’s decision to cancel my 

confirmed BOS-ORD flight. She laughed and said, I don't know where you are getting 

the word contract from but we certainly don't have that. She laid out my options (as she 

saw them) which she said were to take an overnight connecting flight through ORD 

(which I refused saying my parents were elderly and preferred not to fly overnight), pay 

the extra ~$500 in taxes (she again used that word, then corrected it to “fuel surcharges”), 

or cancel the trip and receive a refund of my miles. I told her that I didn’t know the full 

details of any reconciliation between AA and BA, but felt that in this circumstance AA 

should absorb any additional fees, to which she responded that she wasn’t able to do that. 

I suggested that I should instead speak to someone who was. She said she'd have 

someone call me back later that day. 

E. Discussions with the Duty Manager

8. That evening, I received a follow up call from a man who explained he 

was the evening duty manager and he would try and help me with my issue. He 

explained that he understood that there were additional taxes which I didn't want to pay 

on the alternate BA flights my parents had been booked on. Again I immediately pointed 

out that the charges weren't taxes but surcharges. He then stated that, however I wanted 

to phrase it, AA is required to collect all additional taxes and carrier imposed surcharges 

for partners. He noted that AA reserved the right to make schedule changes and that 

different rules were in effect since this cancellation occurred well before travel. He also 

said the rules for award tickets and revenue tickets were different and that award travel 

can only be protected on AA metal, whereas AA is more prepared to deal with revenue 

protection on other airlines. If I wanted to stay on the BA flight, he said I would have to 
Darren Martin

Complaint

6 of 19

redeposit my miles (and taxes) and then book an award ticket on BA with the appropriate 

taxes and surcharges applied. 

9. By this point I had found AA’s web site statements about cancellation 

(discussed in paragraphs 17-19 below), so I asked the duty manager why this situation 

wasn’t covered by rule 240/80. He said those rules only dealt with revenue flights. (I 

later reviewed that page in greater detail, as discussed in paragraph 19, and noticed that in 

fact the page says it also covers AAdvantage flights.) 

10. I asked the duty manager why AA issued a ticket on the BA flight for my 

parents which I had been able to see on AA.COM until today. He said that reservations 

are reviewed by internal systems and it brought to their attention that there was an issue 

with the reservation and hence I had been asked to contact them to rectify the situation. 

11. After back and forth about options, the duty manager repeated his position 

that my only options were to pay the additional money to fly on the BA operated flight, 

refund the miles or take a different AA routing through either ORD or JFK. I enquired 

about the current status of my booking, I.E. which flights were actually held and 

confirmed. The duty manager indicated that my PNR was in limbo until we reached a 

satisfactory outcome. I indicated that I would discuss with my parents the options 

offered and call back at some point. At this time I do not know the current status of my 

booking.

F. Discussions with a AA Representatives on Twitter

12. Later that evening I tried posting to AA’s representative on Twitter. Our 

exchange was as follows:

Dazza02129: So AA canceled my award flight, replaced it with BA flight but now 

wont let me fly without paying increased "taxes" - help
Darren Martin

Complaint

7 of 19

AmericanAir: “Darren, if your flight was canceled due to a schedule change, 

you're able to refund your ticket.”

Dazza02129: “It was, but I still have to get my parents home - and the only 

oneworld option same day as original itin is AA*/BA.”

AmericanAir: “Our apologies, Darren, we're unable to waive the taxes. Perhaps 

check alternate travel dates?”

Dazza02129: “Aren't the additional BA fees a surcharge, not a tax? And rule 80 

doesn't say anything regarding additional charges!”

AmericanAir: “Darren, we're unable to waive other carrier taxes or charges. Our 

apologies for your disappointment.”

II. AA is Obliged to Provide Transportation on BA without Additional Charge

A. AA General Tariff

13. I believe the situation at issue may be appropriately considered as a 

change in schedule. AA’s International General Tariff provides as follows: 

When a passenger will be delayed because of a change in its schedule, carrier will 

arrange to:

transport the passenger over its own lines to the destination, next stopover point or 

transfer point shown on its portion of the ticket, without stopover at no additional 

cost to the passenger, provided that a passenger who paid an Economy Class fare 

will be transported on one of its First Class flights only if such flight will provide 

an earlier arrival than its next Economy Class flight on which space is available.

endorse the unused ticket for the purpose of rerouting over another carrier; or

refund in accordance with Rule 90 (REFUNDS).

14. I believe the three listed options are intended to be alternatives, separated 

by “or.” (I note that the first option does not end in the word “or”, and the second option 

is not a complete sentence. I take this to be a drafting error.) 

15. The section is ambiguous as to who gets to choose among the three 

options. Following the standard principle of contract law that an ambiguous contract is 

construed in favor of the party that did not draft it, I interpret the section to allow the 

passenger to make that choice. (That interpretation also matches the options enumerated 

in AA’s Schedule Change page, discussed in paragraph 17 and onwards below.)
Darren Martin

Complaint

8 of 19

16. I choose the second of these options. Specifically, I choose to be endorsed 

to the nonstop BA operated service BOS-LHR. Note that the second option makes no 

mention of any obligation to pay any difference in fare, tax, or surcharge.

B. AA “Schedule Change” Web Page and Rule 240/80

17. I also reviewed AA’s Schedule Change page which, according to AA, 

gives the “Rule 240/80” rules for schedule irregularities. At heading AA Schedule 

Change, the page provides as follows:

[schedule change of] 91 minutes and greater

Or the flight changes from a non-stop to a connecting flight

 If original inventory is not available may book an AA flight next lowest 

available inventory, same cabin, up to and including B inventory.

 If no AA flights are available may select an alternate flight on AA* (AA 

codeshare) maintaining same inventory, origin/destination, fare and fare basis as 

originally ticketed.

Restricted to oneworld® codeshare partners: If no AA flights are available may 

select an alternate flight on a oneworld AA*, if original inventory is not available 

may book next lowest available inventory, same cabin, up to and including B 

inventory, excludes W inventory for premium economy on AA*.

18. The proposed schedule change is a change of more than 11 hours, which 

of course is far more than the 90 minutes that triggers the quoted provisions. I am 

therefore entitled to the benefits of this section. I elected to use either the second or third 

option. I note that when the February 16 agent booked me onto the BOS-LHR flight (and 

subsequently on Feb 26th), there was award inventory on that flight, which I take to 

satisfy the second-listed option (“maintaining same inventory”). Furthermore, even if 

that inventory was not available, the third-listed option provides that I could be booked 

into a higher available inventory since 1) no AA flights are available within a reasonable 

period of time, and 2) BA is a Oneworld codeshare partner.
Darren Martin

Complaint

9 of 19

19. As discussed in paragraph 7, an AA duty manager indicated to me that 

Aadvantage tickets are not protected by rule 240/80 or AA’s web site statements about

reaccommodation. I note that AA’s Schedule Change page indicates exactly the contrary. 

Specifically, the top of the page indicates that “Rule 240 protects all ticketed customers 

including AAdvantage, AA codeshare and Travel Agents free/reduced rate” and “Rule 80 

protects all ticketed customers including AAdvantage, AA codeshare and Travel Agents 

free/reduced rate.”

C. AA Commitments to DOT in Its Request for Antitrust Immunity with BA 

and Others

20. AA’s request for additional fees, when reaccommodating me after AA’s 

cancellation, is inconsistent with the representations and commitments AA and BA made 

to DOT when seeking antitrust immunity. See their Joint Application for Antitrust 

Immunity, docket DOT-2008-0252, which lists as the supposed sixth benefit of the JBA: 

“The Joint Applicants will offer reciprocal frequent flyer programs to allow members of 

one carrier’s frequent flyer program to accrue mileage and redeem awards on the services 

of another” (p.15, emphasis added) including “full reciprocity of frequent flyer benefits 

between American and British Airways” (p.16, emphasis added) and indeed “metal 

neutrality” (p.22). Here, even in response to a cancellation of ticketed and confirmed 

travel, AA is not treating BA flights in a “reciprocal” or “neutral[]” manner (not to 

mention “full reciprocity”)—although AA had specifically promised all of these benefits. 

21. AA and BA sought a significant concession from DOT in waiving 

antitrust laws as to their joint operation. For years, DOT was appropriately hesitant, 

noting the significant risks to pricing and service. AA and BA made forceful 
Darren Martin

Complaint

10 of 19

commitments in order to attempt to address DOT’s concerns and other concerns. AA and 

BA must now uphold the plain and literal meaning of their commitments.

III. AA Continues to Mischaracterize Carrier-Imposed Fees as “Taxes”

22. Each and every AA representative I have spoken with on and after 

February 26 has used the term “taxes” to describe the fees at issue. During my 

discussions with AA agents, I spoke by telephone with three AA agents, and I 

communicated by Twitter with a fourth. See the discussions summarized in section I 

above. Each of the agents used the word “taxes” to describe the charges at issue. Each 

used that term until I corrected them. I provide my summaries of the discussions from 

memory, and I do not have call recordings. But in this respect I am quite certain: I knew 

the difference before the discussion began, and I am confident that I corrected all four 

agents. As to the AA staff using Twitter, the false statement (and my correction of that 

false statement) are well preserved in the written record.

23. I note that these practices are ongoing and recent. My experiences 

occurred during February 2014. I received mischaracterizations from both a reservations 

supervisor and a person who described himself as a duty manager.

A. My Experiences Matches Others’ Reports

24. I have reviewed the complaints of Benjamin Edelman as to American 

employees mischaracterizing carrier-imposed surcharges as “tax.” My experience is 

similar. I note that Mr. Edelman’s initial complaint flagged the problem of 

reaccomodation after cancellation as one of the circumstances in which AA staff 

mischaracterize carrier-imposed surcharges as tax. Reviewing subsequent briefing, I see 

that AA argued Mr. Edelman did not have standing to bring such a complaint because he 

did not personally suffer such a cancellation. I do.
Darren Martin

Complaint

11 of 19

25. I reviewed the formal comment of Shawn Cole, who describes an AA 

agent who was hostile to him (indeed, disconnected his call) after Mr. Cole noted that a 

carrier-imposed surcharge is not a “tax.” My experience is similar. I was not 

disconnected when I brought this error to each and every agents’ attention. But agents 

repeatedly acted belligerently towards me after my comment, including making

disparaging remarks along the lines of “whatever you want to call them.” The agents did 

not seem to recognize the important difference between an amount retained by a carrier 

versus an amount paid to a government, airport, or similar authority.

B. DOT’s Prior Ruling on Similar AA Practices

26. In its Consent Order of December 11, 2013, DOT affirmed that AA has 

misrepresented carrier-imposed surcharges as “tax,” and that doing so is unfair and 

deceptive. DOT ordered AA to cease these practices, and AA confirmed having done so. 

Inexplicably, and contrary to its representation in the Consent Order, AA continues 

similar practices to this day.

C. AA’s Special Duties In Light of Its JBA with BA 

27. AA used the word “taxes” and otherwise indicated that it “must” and 

“has” to collect the taxes. These claims are particularly puzzling in light of American’s 

special relationship with British Airways. Just six years ago, American and British 

Airways sought and received DOT permission to coordinate pricing for their joint 

services. See Joint Application for Antitrust Immunity, DOT-OST-2008-0252-0001 at 

p.14 (“The Joint Applicants will cooperate in establishing fares, rates and pricing 

strategies for services provided under their alliance agreements and the JBA”). American 

and British Airways also indicated that they would “broadly shar[e] revenue on a metal 

neutral foundation” (Id. at p.11). There can be no serious dispute that carrier-imposed 
Darren Martin

Complaint

12 of 19

surcharges and fuel surcharges are “revenue” and “fares, rates and pricing” within the 

meaning of these statements. Thanks to the full antitrust immunity DOT provided to 

American and British Airways based on their representations in the 2008-0252 docket, 

American both influences and benefits from British Airways surcharges. Having sought 

these privileges from DOT and represented to DOT that it would use them, AA cannot 

now disavow them by claiming that all fees are the responsibility of BA or otherwise 

outside AA’s control.

IV. The Scope of the Problem 

28. I gather that AA staff are uniformly applying their demand for additional 

payments (“taxes”) when award passengers are reaccommodated after cancellation of 

ticketed and confirmed AA flights. On the popular discussion forum FlyerTalk, I quickly 

found another passenger (username “robbiesam”) with the same problem. He was 

ticketed on an AA day flight JFK-LHR which AA cancelled. He sought 

reaccommodation on the BA day flight JFK-LHR. Instead AA insisted that he fly JFKRDU-LHR or pay additional fees to fly on BA. Robbiesam also indicated that AA staff 

mischaracterized surcharges as taxes (“they repeated that the taxes had to be paid”). 

29. I understand that AA canceled the JFK-LHR day flight for most of 2014. 

AA’s JFK-LHR previously had 777-200ER service, accommodating 247 passengers per 

flight. If 8.8% passengers on these flights were on award tickets (based on a recent AA 

SEC filing), that would be 650 affected passengers per month in each direction. Even 

crediting that not all passengers book far in advance, there are surely thousands of 

passengers affected by that cancellation. The closest alternative eastbound flight is the 

BA day flight. But by all indications AA is refusing to reaccommodate passengers on 
Darren Martin

Complaint

13 of 19

that flight. AA’s refusal to reaccommodate affected JFK-LHR passengers is particularly 

troubling because AA admitted cancelling its JFK-LHR day flight purely for commercial 

reasons (“so we can consistently offer a fully lie-flat product”). This is far from the 

passenger benefits AA promised when seeking JBA approval from DOT. After joining 

the JBA, AA likewise cancelled all of its nonstop BOS-LHR flights, instead preferring to 

advise passengers to fly on an AA-marketed BA-operated equivalent, which both reduces

choice and causes additional cost for passengers attempting to redeem miles to travel this

route.

30. The amount at issue is substantial. AA staff told me that I would need to 

pay a surcharge of approximately $250 per person one-way to fly BOS-LHR on the flight 

operated by BA. On the same period, on the same routing, I see that round-trip tickets

including all taxes and fees are as little as $1300. So a $500 round-trip surcharge is more 

than one third of the value that passengers expect to be covered by award point 

redemption.

31. I ask that the Department of Transportation:

(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) Order American Airlines to provide to the DOT and to me all notes, 

PNR annotations, call recordings, and other records prepared by its 

systems and its staff in the course of the discussions herein; 
Darren Martin

Complaint

14 of 19

(3) Pursuant to such investigation, order American Airlines to refund to 

ticket purchasers all monies represented to ticket purchasers as “taxes” 

or government-imposed fees, but not actually remitted to governments;

(4) Order American Airlines to honor its general tariff, published policies 

for reaccommodation after cancellation and significant schedule 

changes, without exception for award ticket redemptions and without 

requiring any additional payment of any carrier-imposed surcharges;

(5) Order American Airlines to provide heightened and remedial training 

to all agents, including specific corrective training to the agents who 

spoke with me;

(6) Require American Airlines to post a clear notice on its web site to alert 

award passengers of their rights in this circumstance and to assist such 

passengers in vindicating those rights even if American employees 

mistakenly attempt to deny those rights;

(7) Require American to search its records for other customers similarly 

situated, including those who complained about related matters and 

those who suffered similar schedule changes and cancellations, and 

require American to provide the details of such customers and 

complaints to DOT;

(8) Impose appropriate civil penalties on American Airlines; and 

(9) Refer this matter to appropriate US and foreign tax collection agencies 

for investigation of possible tax fraud or other violations of tax law in 
Darren Martin

Complaint

15 of 19

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 Consent Order 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 the 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 (and had entered into a formal 

binding consent order to that effect), and the continuation of these practices even by AA 

supervisors and duty managers.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/

Darren Martin
Darren Martin

Complaint 

16 of 19

Attachment 1
Darren Martin

Complaint 

17 of 19
Darren Martin

Complaint 

18 of 19

Attachment 2

FROM: Sro, Qrd

Feb 26 at 1:18 PM

Please contact American Airlines at 1-800-882-8880, regarding your 

upcoming reservation.

When you call, please refer to Record Locator: 

Thank you,

American Airlines

*** THIS IS AN INFORMATION ONLY EMAIL ***

*** PLEASE DO NOT REPSOND TO THIS EMAIL ***

*** EMAIL NOT MONITORED FOR RESPONSES ***

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the exclusive and 

confidential use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not an 

intended recipient, please do not read, distribute, or take action in 

reliance upon this message. If you have received this in error, please 

notify me immediately by return email and promptly delete this message 

and its attachments from your computer.
Darren Martin

Complaint

19 of 19

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that I have, this 1st day of March, 2014 caused a copy of the foregoing 

Complaint to be served by electronic mail on the following persons:

Robert Silverberg, Esq. rsilverberg@sgbdc.com

Robert Gorman, Esq. robert.gorman@dot.gov

/s/

_____________________

Darren Martin