Well it didn't take the screamer long to get his lawyers lined up

[Fang]

I don't care what this man's past is. I don't care that he's Asian. I don't care if he called his lawyer while on the plane and his lawyer told him to stand his ground for the possibility of a huge lawsuit. I don't care if he's really unemployed and lied about being a doctor. At that moment when the security showed up he was just like any other passenger which could have been me or you. United and all airlines can take their "contract of carriage" and shove it up their collective asses. As paying customers we deserve better.

Why did you even bring up that he is Asian?

It's been brought up all over news that some think he was targeted because he is Chinese. Not to mention this has gone viral in China.

Ridiculous of course, but no surprise.

If course. It had nothing to do with him being Chinese. Which is sort of why I mentioned it.

 

[Pogo]

Thousands of people are removed off of planes every year and none make a big scene like this moron did.

He needs to bend over and just take it in the ass.....again.

And no, it doesn't work like that. You can't say "fuck a legal document." You are bound by contract. Now, I have no clue how this will end up if it goes to court, but a contract of carriage is a legally binding document that's going to bite him in the ass. As much as he might enjoy it...

Well then assume the position because here comes the contract of carriage that United Airlines said "fuck a legal document" ---- their own.

>> Like all airlines, United has a very specific (and lengthy!) contract for carriage outlining the contractual relationship between the airline and the passenger. It includes a familiar set of provisions for when a passenger may be denied boarding (Rule 25: “Denied Boarding Compensation”).

When a flight is oversold, UA can deny boarding to some passengers, who then receive compensation under specific guidelines. However, Dao was not denied boarding. He was granted boarding and then involuntarily removed from the airplane. What does the contract say about that?

It turns out that the contract has a specific rule regarding “Refusal of Transport” (Rule 21), which lays out the conditions under which a passenger can be removed and refused transport on the aircraft. This includes situations where passengers act in a “disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent” manner, refuse to comply with the smoking policy, are barefoot or “not properly clothed,” as well as many other situations.

There is absolutely no provision for deplaning a seated passenger because the flight is oversold.

An added complication here is that the flight wasn’t even oversold. The contract defines an oversold flight as “a flight where there are more Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets that check-in for the flight within the prescribed check-in time than there are available seats.”

In this case, the airline attempted to remove seated passengers to make room for airline staff requiring transport to another airport, not because it had sold more tickets than there were seats available.

In any event, this point is largely moot, because neither employee transportation nor oversold situations is listed as among the reasons that a passenger may be refused transport.

.... Bottom line is that if the airline wants to bump you from the aircraft, it must deny you boarding. After the crew grant you boarding, the number of conditions under which they may deplane you substantially decreases.

... All of this means that the airline may not have had the right to remove Dao from the aircraft.

What are the consequences of this breach? Rule 21 on Refusal of Transport states that “UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule” and that the sole remedy is a refund of the ticket.

In this case, however, United Airlines did not deplane the passenger “in accordance with this Rule” but probably acted contrary to the rule. So, the liability exclusion by its terms does not apply. << --- Why United was Legally Wrong
​

Oh and ----- "thousands of people are removed off of planes every year" are they? Pull out of your ass much?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The airlines is authorized to offer as much as $1350, without having to go to a boss asking for permission.... I heard they had only offered the high of $800 to see if they could get volunteers to give up their seats.

and went for BUMPING before they offered the maximum for someone to volunteer.

THAT was the Airline's FIRST MISTAKE.

Doesn't begin to make financial sense either --- giving up what, $3200 in potential fares to fly four people a distance they could have driven in a car for twenty-five bucks worth of gas.

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

 

[Pogo]

The airlines is authorized to offer as much as $1350, without having to go to a boss asking for permission.... I heard they had only offered the high of $800 to see if they could get volunteers to give up their seats.

and went for BUMPING before they offered the maximum for someone to volunteer.

THAT was the Airline's FIRST MISTAKE.

Doesn't begin to make financial sense either --- giving up what, $3200 in potential fares to fly four people a distance they could have driven in a car for twenty-five bucks worth of gas.

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

Obviously she didn't "give up her seat". That's not how bumping works. Again for you 'special' kids --- if an airline is going to bump you they have to do it BEFORE they board you. Meaning, at the gate, outside the aircraft. Once they have boarded and seated you they have entered the part of the contract where they have to transport you, unless some extreme circumstances present.

None of that happened here. Dao paid for his seat, was legitimately boarded and occupied his seat. The airline's got no ground to stand on changing its mind after it's already boarded him.

Understand?

 

[Care4all]

The airlines is authorized to offer as much as $1350, without having to go to a boss asking for permission.... I heard they had only offered the high of $800 to see if they could get volunteers to give up their seats.

and went for BUMPING before they offered the maximum for someone to volunteer.

THAT was the Airline's FIRST MISTAKE.

Doesn't begin to make financial sense either --- giving up what, $3200 in potential fares to fly four people a distance they could have driven in a car for twenty-five bucks worth of gas.

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

I was never boarded, they made announcements that they were overbooked and needed volunteers for those sitting at the gate but by the time my boss and I got to the gate they simply told us we would not be going out on that plane, I was on a business trip and on my way home and it was Valentine's day and I wanted to get home...Matt and I were newlyweds or within the first 3 years of being married!

My boss didn't care and took the voucher and had them also pay for her hotel and airport transfers the next day...and got out on a flight to Tampa on the 15th...

For me, I took the voucher and they found me a flight that evening on another airline, to West Palm Beach, and the limo service to my car at Tampa Airport....including the tip for the limo driver!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The airlines is authorized to offer as much as $1350, without having to go to a boss asking for permission.... I heard they had only offered the high of $800 to see if they could get volunteers to give up their seats.

and went for BUMPING before they offered the maximum for someone to volunteer.

THAT was the Airline's FIRST MISTAKE.

Doesn't begin to make financial sense either --- giving up what, $3200 in potential fares to fly four people a distance they could have driven in a car for twenty-five bucks worth of gas.

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

DigitalDrifter

"give up" your seat is different from getting the crap beat out of you.

Surely, by now you get just how true this is.

 

[Gracie]

If that happened to me, I would have refused to leave too. I paid for that seat. I am in my seat. They need it? Tough shit. Then when they dragged me off, you bet I'd get a lawyer.

 

[Pogo]

If that happened to me, I would have refused to leave too. I paid for that seat. I am in my seat. They need it? Tough shit. Then when they dragged me off, you bet I'd get a lawyer.

That's what I love about you Gracie. You don't take no shit.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The airlines is authorized to offer as much as $1350, without having to go to a boss asking for permission.... I heard they had only offered the high of $800 to see if they could get volunteers to give up their seats.

and went for BUMPING before they offered the maximum for someone to volunteer.

THAT was the Airline's FIRST MISTAKE.

Doesn't begin to make financial sense either --- giving up what, $3200 in potential fares to fly four people a distance they could have driven in a car for twenty-five bucks worth of gas.

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

Obviously she didn't "give up her seat". That's not how bumping works. Again for you 'special' kids --- if an airline is going to bump you they have to do it BEFORE they board you. Meaning, at the gate, outside the aircraft. Once they have boarded and seated you they have entered the part of the contract where they have to transport you, unless some extreme circumstances present.

None of that happened here. Dao paid for his seat, was legitimately boarded and occupied his seat. The airline's got no ground to stand on changing its mind after it's already boarded him.

Understand?

Yes Pugo, I know how it works (insert rolling eyes here).
I've never supported United in this story. They fucked up, I get it. They should have offered much more, and had they done so they would not only have had all the volunteers they needed, but they wouldn't be in this huge mess.
What I've been saying is even when you have boarded and taken your seat, once you've been selected to be removed and security and or police arrive, act like an adult and make the best of a lousy situation.
Instead, this man held on for dear life like a three year old, and not only ruined his day and made himself late, he also ruined it for everyone else aboard and made them late as well.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The airlines is authorized to offer as much as $1350, without having to go to a boss asking for permission.... I heard they had only offered the high of $800 to see if they could get volunteers to give up their seats.

and went for BUMPING before they offered the maximum for someone to volunteer.

THAT was the Airline's FIRST MISTAKE.

Doesn't begin to make financial sense either --- giving up what, $3200 in potential fares to fly four people a distance they could have driven in a car for twenty-five bucks worth of gas.

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

I was never boarded, they made announcements that they were overbooked and needed volunteers for those sitting at the gate but by the time my boss and I got to the gate they simply told us we would not be going out on that plane, I was on a business trip and on my way home and it was Valentine's day and I wanted to get home...Matt and I were newlyweds or within the first 3 years of being married!

My boss didn't care and took the voucher and had them also pay for her hotel and airport transfers the next day...and got out on a flight to Tampa on the 15th...

For me, I took the voucher and they found me a flight that evening on another airline, to West Palm Beach, and the limo service to my car at Tampa Airport....including the tip for the limo driver!

Yes I understand you never were boarded, I was just being a smartass.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The soon to be rich doctor already has his lawyers ready to sick 'em on the soon to be defendents.


Watch now: Dr. David Dao's lawyers, daughter speak to the media

Lawyers for Dr. David Dao, the Kentucky doctor who was violently pulled from a United Airlines flight on Sunday, have called a press conference for 11 a.m. Thursday in Chicago. His daughter, Crystal Dao Pepper, will also speak....

Watch now: Dr. David Dao's lawyers, daughter speak to the media

good for him. they had no business manhandling him, breaking his nose and giving him a concussion. and the thugs who dragged him off the fight were apparently not even allowed to remove a passenger....

and all so an employee could have a seat?

can't you get any issue correctly? you're wrong about everything .... always. i think your head doesn't work right.

Well that's your opinion Jillian, IMO you're wrong about everything.

 

[Pogo]

Doesn't begin to make financial sense either --- giving up what, $3200 in potential fares to fly four people a distance they could have driven in a car for twenty-five bucks worth of gas.

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

Obviously she didn't "give up her seat". That's not how bumping works. Again for you 'special' kids --- if an airline is going to bump you they have to do it BEFORE they board you. Meaning, at the gate, outside the aircraft. Once they have boarded and seated you they have entered the part of the contract where they have to transport you, unless some extreme circumstances present.

None of that happened here. Dao paid for his seat, was legitimately boarded and occupied his seat. The airline's got no ground to stand on changing its mind after it's already boarded him.

Understand?

Yes Pugo, I know how it works (insert rolling eyes here).
I've never supported United in this story. They fucked up, I get it. They should have offered much more, and had they done so they would not only have had all the volunteers they needed, but they wouldn't be in this huge mess.
What I've been saying is even when you have boarded and taken your seat, once you've been selected to be removed and security and or police arrive, act like an adult and make the best of a lousy situation.
Instead, this man held on for dear life like a three year old, and not only ruined his day and made himself late, he also ruined it for everyone else aboard and made them late as well.

And what I've been saying is YOU'RE WRONG. The airline has no basis to remove already-boarded passengers for its own convenience, period.

Who says so? United Airlines says so. Their own Contract of Carriage says so.

The complete UA Contract of Carriage Rule 21:

Rule 21 Refusal of Transport
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
4. Search of Passenger or Property – Whenever a Passenger refuses to submit to electronic surveillance or to permit search of his/her person or property.
5. Proof of Identity – Whenever a Passenger refuses on request to produce identification satisfactory to UA or who presents a Ticket to board and whose identification does not match the name on the Ticket. UA shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to require identification of persons purchasing tickets and/or presenting a ticket(s) for the purpose of boarding the aircraft.
6. Failure to Pay – Whenever a Passenger has not paid the appropriate fare for a Ticket, Baggage, or applicable service charges for services required for travel, has not paid an outstanding debt or Court judgment, or has not produced satisfactory proof to UA that the Passenger is an authorized non-revenue Passenger or has engaged in a prohibited practice as specified in Rule 6.
7. Across International Boundaries – Whenever a Passenger is traveling across any international boundary if:
   1. The government required travel documents of such Passenger appear not to be in order according to UA's reasonable belief; or
   2. Such Passenger’s embarkation from, transit through, or entry into any country from, through, or to which such Passenger desires transportation would be unlawful or denied for any reason.
8. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
   1. Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
   2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
   3. Passengers who assault any employee of UA, including the gate agents and flight crew, or any UA Passenger;
   4. Passengers who, through and as a result of their conduct, cause a disturbance such that the captain or member of the cockpit crew must leave the cockpit in order to attend to the disturbance;
   5. Passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed;
   6. Passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew (other than a qualified individual whose appearance or involuntary behavior may make them appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs);
   7. Passengers wearing or possessing on or about their person concealed or unconcealed deadly or dangerous weapons; provided, however, that UA will carry law enforcement personnel who meet the qualifications and conditions established in 49 C.F.R. §1544.219;
   8. Passengers who are unwilling or unable to follow UA’s policy on smoking or use of other smokeless materials;
   9. Unless they comply with Rule 6 I), Passengers who are unable to sit in a single seat with the seat belt properly secured, and/or are unable to put the seat’s armrests down when seated and remain seated with the armrest down for the entirety of the flight, and/or passengers who significantly encroach upon the adjoining passenger’s seat;
   10. Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
   11. Passengers who have resisted or may reasonably be believed to be capable of resisting custodial supervision;
   12. Pregnant Passengers in their ninth month, unless such Passenger provides a doctor’s certificate dated no more than 72 hours prior to departure stating that the doctor has examined and found the Passenger to be physically fit for air travel to and from the destination requested on the date of the flight, and that the estimated date of delivery is after the date of the last flight;
   13. Passengers who are incapable of completing a flight safely, without requiring extraordinary medical assistance during the flight, as well as Passengers who appear to have symptoms of or have a communicable disease or condition that could pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others on the flight, or who refuse a screening for such disease or condition. (NOTE: UA requires a medical certificate for Passengers who wish to travel under such circumstances. Visit UA’s website, united.com, for more information regarding UA’s requirements for medical certificates);
   14. Passengers who fail to travel with the required safety assistant(s), advance notice and/or other safety requirements pursuant to Rules 14 and 15;
   15. Passengers who do not qualify as acceptable Non-Ambulatory Passengers (see Rule 14);
   16. Passengers who have or cause a malodorous condition (other than individuals qualifying as disabled);
   17. Passengers whose physical or mental condition is such that, in United’s sole opinion, they are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an escort. The escort must accompany the escorted passenger at all times; and
   18. Unaccompanied passengers who are both blind and deaf, unless such passenger is able to communicate with representatives of UA by either physical, mechanical, electronic, or other means. Such passenger must inform UA of the method of communication to be used; and
   19. Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policy that prohibits voice calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.
   
   
9. Any Passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, consents and acknowledges that he or she shall reimburse UA for any such loss, damage or expense. UA has the right to refuse transport, on a permanent basis, to any passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, or who has been disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent. In addition, the activities enumerated in H) 1) through 8) shall constitute a material breach of contract, for which UA shall be excused from performing its obligations under this contract.
10. UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule. A Passenger who is removed or refused transportation in accordance with this Rule may be eligible for a refund upon request. See Rule 27 A). As an express precondition to issuance of any refund, UA shall not be responsible for damages of any kind whatsoever. The passenger’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be Rule 27 A).

Exactly ZERO (0) of these conditions applied to Dao and his wife.



Any days or travel that were ruined --- and there certainly were ruins ---- were solely and completely the fault of United Airlines, who perpetrated the entire incident. Again --- who says so? Again--- United Airlines.

 

[Pogo]

What would United have done if those four employees showed up at the gate ten minutes later?
They would have chartered a flight or driven them

I've been bumped on a LaGuardia (NYC) to Tampa and rebooked on a flight from NYC to another city in Florida, and the Airlines Paid a LIMO Driver to get me to the Tampa Airport where my car was, over 100 miles away.

Why did you give up your seat ? You're a coward according to the other retarded liberals here.

Obviously she didn't "give up her seat". That's not how bumping works. Again for you 'special' kids --- if an airline is going to bump you they have to do it BEFORE they board you. Meaning, at the gate, outside the aircraft. Once they have boarded and seated you they have entered the part of the contract where they have to transport you, unless some extreme circumstances present.

None of that happened here. Dao paid for his seat, was legitimately boarded and occupied his seat. The airline's got no ground to stand on changing its mind after it's already boarded him.

Understand?

Yes Pugo, I know how it works (insert rolling eyes here).
I've never supported United in this story. They fucked up, I get it. They should have offered much more, and had they done so they would not only have had all the volunteers they needed, but they wouldn't be in this huge mess.
What I've been saying is even when you have boarded and taken your seat, once you've been selected to be removed and security and or police arrive, act like an adult and make the best of a lousy situation.
Instead, this man held on for dear life like a three year old, and not only ruined his day and made himself late, he also ruined it for everyone else aboard and made them late as well.

And what I've been saying is YOU'RE WRONG. The airline has no basis to remove already-boarded passengers for its own convenience, period.

Who says so? United Airlines says so. Their own Contract of Carriage says so.

The complete UA Contract of Carriage Rule 21:

Rule 21 Refusal of Transport
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
4. Search of Passenger or Property – Whenever a Passenger refuses to submit to electronic surveillance or to permit search of his/her person or property.
5. Proof of Identity – Whenever a Passenger refuses on request to produce identification satisfactory to UA or who presents a Ticket to board and whose identification does not match the name on the Ticket. UA shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to require identification of persons purchasing tickets and/or presenting a ticket(s) for the purpose of boarding the aircraft.
6. Failure to Pay – Whenever a Passenger has not paid the appropriate fare for a Ticket, Baggage, or applicable service charges for services required for travel, has not paid an outstanding debt or Court judgment, or has not produced satisfactory proof to UA that the Passenger is an authorized non-revenue Passenger or has engaged in a prohibited practice as specified in Rule 6.
7. Across International Boundaries – Whenever a Passenger is traveling across any international boundary if:
   1. The government required travel documents of such Passenger appear not to be in order according to UA's reasonable belief; or
   2. Such Passenger’s embarkation from, transit through, or entry into any country from, through, or to which such Passenger desires transportation would be unlawful or denied for any reason.
8. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
   1. Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
   2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
   3. Passengers who assault any employee of UA, including the gate agents and flight crew, or any UA Passenger;
   4. Passengers who, through and as a result of their conduct, cause a disturbance such that the captain or member of the cockpit crew must leave the cockpit in order to attend to the disturbance;
   5. Passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed;
   6. Passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew (other than a qualified individual whose appearance or involuntary behavior may make them appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs);
   7. Passengers wearing or possessing on or about their person concealed or unconcealed deadly or dangerous weapons; provided, however, that UA will carry law enforcement personnel who meet the qualifications and conditions established in 49 C.F.R. §1544.219;
   8. Passengers who are unwilling or unable to follow UA’s policy on smoking or use of other smokeless materials;
   9. Unless they comply with Rule 6 I), Passengers who are unable to sit in a single seat with the seat belt properly secured, and/or are unable to put the seat’s armrests down when seated and remain seated with the armrest down for the entirety of the flight, and/or passengers who significantly encroach upon the adjoining passenger’s seat;
   10. Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
   11. Passengers who have resisted or may reasonably be believed to be capable of resisting custodial supervision;
   12. Pregnant Passengers in their ninth month, unless such Passenger provides a doctor’s certificate dated no more than 72 hours prior to departure stating that the doctor has examined and found the Passenger to be physically fit for air travel to and from the destination requested on the date of the flight, and that the estimated date of delivery is after the date of the last flight;
   13. Passengers who are incapable of completing a flight safely, without requiring extraordinary medical assistance during the flight, as well as Passengers who appear to have symptoms of or have a communicable disease or condition that could pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others on the flight, or who refuse a screening for such disease or condition. (NOTE: UA requires a medical certificate for Passengers who wish to travel under such circumstances. Visit UA’s website, united.com, for more information regarding UA’s requirements for medical certificates);
   14. Passengers who fail to travel with the required safety assistant(s), advance notice and/or other safety requirements pursuant to Rules 14 and 15;
   15. Passengers who do not qualify as acceptable Non-Ambulatory Passengers (see Rule 14);
   16. Passengers who have or cause a malodorous condition (other than individuals qualifying as disabled);
   17. Passengers whose physical or mental condition is such that, in United’s sole opinion, they are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an escort. The escort must accompany the escorted passenger at all times; and
   18. Unaccompanied passengers who are both blind and deaf, unless such passenger is able to communicate with representatives of UA by either physical, mechanical, electronic, or other means. Such passenger must inform UA of the method of communication to be used; and
   19. Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policy that prohibits voice calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.
   
   
9. Any Passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, consents and acknowledges that he or she shall reimburse UA for any such loss, damage or expense. UA has the right to refuse transport, on a permanent basis, to any passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, or who has been disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent. In addition, the activities enumerated in H) 1) through 8) shall constitute a material breach of contract, for which UA shall be excused from performing its obligations under this contract.
10. UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule. A Passenger who is removed or refused transportation in accordance with this Rule may be eligible for a refund upon request. See Rule 27 A). As an express precondition to issuance of any refund, UA shall not be responsible for damages of any kind whatsoever. The passenger’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be Rule 27 A).

Exactly ZERO (0) of these conditions applied to Dao and his wife.



Any days or travel that were ruined --- and there certainly were ruins ---- were solely and completely the fault of United Airlines, who perpetrated the entire incident. Again --- who says so? Again--- United Airlines.

From the other thread:

>> Like all airlines, United has a very specific (and lengthy!) contract for carriage outlining the contractual relationship between the airline and the passenger. It includes a familiar set of provisions for when a passenger may be denied boarding (Rule 25: “Denied Boarding Compensation”).

When a flight is oversold, UA can deny boarding to some passengers, who then receive compensation under specific guidelines. However, Dao was not denied boarding. He was granted boarding and then involuntarily removed from the airplane. What does the contract say about that?

It turns out that the contract has a specific rule regarding “Refusal of Transport” (Rule 21), which lays out the conditions under which a passenger can be removed and refused transport on the aircraft. This includes situations where passengers act in a “disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent” manner, refuse to comply with the smoking policy, are barefoot or “not properly clothed,” as well as many other situations.

There is absolutely no provision for deplaning a seated passenger because the flight is oversold.

An added complication here is that the flight wasn’t even oversold. The contract defines an oversold flight as “a flight where there are more Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets that check-in for the flight within the prescribed check-in time than there are available seats.”

In this case, the airline attempted to remove seated passengers to make room for airline staff requiring transport to another airport, not because it had sold more tickets than there were seats available.

In any event, this point is largely moot, because neither employee transportation nor oversold situations is listed as among the reasons that a passenger may be refused transport.

.... Bottom line is that if the airline wants to bump you from the aircraft, it must deny you boarding. After the crew grant you boarding, the number of conditions under which they may deplane you substantially decreases.

... All of this means that the airline may not have had the right to remove Dao from the aircraft.

What are the consequences of this breach? Rule 21 on Refusal of Transport states that “UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule” and that the sole remedy is a refund of the ticket.

In this case, however, United Airlines did not deplane the passenger “in accordance with this Rule” but probably acted contrary to the rule. So, the liability exclusion by its terms does not apply. << --- Why United was Legally Wrong​

Their own contract, Quisling.

 

[Divine Wind]

And what I've been saying is YOU'RE WRONG. The airline has no basis to remove already-boarded passengers for its own convenience, period.

Who says so? United Airlines says so. Their own Contract of Carriage says so. Which is why I posted that very document in (again) post 842 of the other thread. The post you don't dare read or respond to because it PROVES YOU WRONG.

Any days or travel that was ruined --- and there certainly were ruins ---- were solely and completely the fault of United Airlines, who perpetrated the entire incident. Again --- who says so? Again--- United Airlines.

Wrong, again. Additionally, Dao is guilty of violating FAR 121.580.

Disagreed. You read the Reader's Digest version and, even then, are quoting it out of context. Try reading the full document drawn up by fucking lawyers and tell me Dao still didn't violate the CoC he agreed to when buying his discount ticket.

Besides, don't you drive everywhere and refuse to fly? Why do you care?

 

[Pogo]

And what I've been saying is YOU'RE WRONG. The airline has no basis to remove already-boarded passengers for its own convenience, period.

Who says so? United Airlines says so. Their own Contract of Carriage says so.

The complete UA Contract of Carriage Rule 21:

Rule 21 Refusal of Transport
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
4. Search of Passenger or Property – Whenever a Passenger refuses to submit to electronic surveillance or to permit search of his/her person or property.
5. Proof of Identity – Whenever a Passenger refuses on request to produce identification satisfactory to UA or who presents a Ticket to board and whose identification does not match the name on the Ticket. UA shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to require identification of persons purchasing tickets and/or presenting a ticket(s) for the purpose of boarding the aircraft.
6. Failure to Pay – Whenever a Passenger has not paid the appropriate fare for a Ticket, Baggage, or applicable service charges for services required for travel, has not paid an outstanding debt or Court judgment, or has not produced satisfactory proof to UA that the Passenger is an authorized non-revenue Passenger or has engaged in a prohibited practice as specified in Rule 6.
7. Across International Boundaries – Whenever a Passenger is traveling across any international boundary if:
   1. The government required travel documents of such Passenger appear not to be in order according to UA's reasonable belief; or
   2. Such Passenger’s embarkation from, transit through, or entry into any country from, through, or to which such Passenger desires transportation would be unlawful or denied for any reason.
8. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
   1. Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
   2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
   3. Passengers who assault any employee of UA, including the gate agents and flight crew, or any UA Passenger;
   4. Passengers who, through and as a result of their conduct, cause a disturbance such that the captain or member of the cockpit crew must leave the cockpit in order to attend to the disturbance;
   5. Passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed;
   6. Passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew (other than a qualified individual whose appearance or involuntary behavior may make them appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs);
   7. Passengers wearing or possessing on or about their person concealed or unconcealed deadly or dangerous weapons; provided, however, that UA will carry law enforcement personnel who meet the qualifications and conditions established in 49 C.F.R. §1544.219;
   8. Passengers who are unwilling or unable to follow UA’s policy on smoking or use of other smokeless materials;
   9. Unless they comply with Rule 6 I), Passengers who are unable to sit in a single seat with the seat belt properly secured, and/or are unable to put the seat’s armrests down when seated and remain seated with the armrest down for the entirety of the flight, and/or passengers who significantly encroach upon the adjoining passenger’s seat;
   10. Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
   11. Passengers who have resisted or may reasonably be believed to be capable of resisting custodial supervision;
   12. Pregnant Passengers in their ninth month, unless such Passenger provides a doctor’s certificate dated no more than 72 hours prior to departure stating that the doctor has examined and found the Passenger to be physically fit for air travel to and from the destination requested on the date of the flight, and that the estimated date of delivery is after the date of the last flight;
   13. Passengers who are incapable of completing a flight safely, without requiring extraordinary medical assistance during the flight, as well as Passengers who appear to have symptoms of or have a communicable disease or condition that could pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others on the flight, or who refuse a screening for such disease or condition. (NOTE: UA requires a medical certificate for Passengers who wish to travel under such circumstances. Visit UA’s website, united.com, for more information regarding UA’s requirements for medical certificates);
   14. Passengers who fail to travel with the required safety assistant(s), advance notice and/or other safety requirements pursuant to Rules 14 and 15;
   15. Passengers who do not qualify as acceptable Non-Ambulatory Passengers (see Rule 14);
   16. Passengers who have or cause a malodorous condition (other than individuals qualifying as disabled);
   17. Passengers whose physical or mental condition is such that, in United’s sole opinion, they are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an escort. The escort must accompany the escorted passenger at all times; and
   18. Unaccompanied passengers who are both blind and deaf, unless such passenger is able to communicate with representatives of UA by either physical, mechanical, electronic, or other means. Such passenger must inform UA of the method of communication to be used; and
   19. Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policy that prohibits voice calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.
   
   
9. Any Passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, consents and acknowledges that he or she shall reimburse UA for any such loss, damage or expense. UA has the right to refuse transport, on a permanent basis, to any passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, or who has been disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent. In addition, the activities enumerated in H) 1) through 8) shall constitute a material breach of contract, for which UA shall be excused from performing its obligations under this contract.
10. UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule. A Passenger who is removed or refused transportation in accordance with this Rule may be eligible for a refund upon request. See Rule 27 A). As an express precondition to issuance of any refund, UA shall not be responsible for damages of any kind whatsoever. The passenger’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be Rule 27 A).

Exactly ZERO (0) of these conditions applied to Dao and his wife.

Any days or travel that was ruined --- and there certainly were ruins ---- were solely and completely the fault of United Airlines, who perpetrated the entire incident. Again --- who says so? Again--- United Airlines.

Wrong, again. Additionally, Dao is guilty of violating FAR 121.580.

Disagreed. You read the Reader's Digest version and, even then, are quoting it out of context. Try reading the full document drawn up by fucking lawyers and tell me Dao still didn't violate the CoC he agreed to when buying his discount ticket.

Besides, don't you drive everywhere and refuse to fly? Why do you care?

Oh fucking bullshit. Number one, FAR 121.580 has to do with 'interfering with crew members'. Nothing in taking the seat one paid for and was boarded into can be defined as "interfering" with jack shit. The only 'interfering" was done by United and its servants.

Fucking bullshit number two --- that's the same document I just quoted. The link for it is in the intervening post. Same thing. And it's the same post you ran away from because it proves you wrong.

And fucking bullshit three --- no I've never "refused to fly". I've been flying since the Truman Administration. I like to drive for the independence but when your assignment is in, say, Hawaìi, the toll bridge tends to be expensive. Why do I care? Because somebody's got to stand up for the victim while you authoritarian-worshipers drool on the side going "he was asking for it", that's why.

 

[Divine Wind]

....

When a flight is oversold, UA can deny boarding to some passengers, who then receive compensation under specific guidelines. However, Dao was not denied boarding. He was granted boarding and then involuntarily removed from the airplane. What does the contract say about that?.....​

​

Nice jailhouse lawyering, but the fact remains that Dao, regardless of actually being on board or not, was denied "boarding". IE, his seat aboard a flight.

When he interfered with the flight crew and the airline operation by his refusal to vacate the aircraft, he violated several laws, including FAR 121.580. When he disobeyed the lawful orders of Chicago's aviation authorities, he violated more laws. When he resisted, he violated those laws. When he ran back onboard the aircraft without authorization, he violated Federal law.

 

[Divine Wind]

And what I've been saying is YOU'RE WRONG. The airline has no basis to remove already-boarded passengers for its own convenience, period.

Who says so? United Airlines says so. Their own Contract of Carriage says so.

The complete UA Contract of Carriage Rule 21:

Rule 21 Refusal of Transport
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
4. Search of Passenger or Property – Whenever a Passenger refuses to submit to electronic surveillance or to permit search of his/her person or property.
5. Proof of Identity – Whenever a Passenger refuses on request to produce identification satisfactory to UA or who presents a Ticket to board and whose identification does not match the name on the Ticket. UA shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to require identification of persons purchasing tickets and/or presenting a ticket(s) for the purpose of boarding the aircraft.
6. Failure to Pay – Whenever a Passenger has not paid the appropriate fare for a Ticket, Baggage, or applicable service charges for services required for travel, has not paid an outstanding debt or Court judgment, or has not produced satisfactory proof to UA that the Passenger is an authorized non-revenue Passenger or has engaged in a prohibited practice as specified in Rule 6.
7. Across International Boundaries – Whenever a Passenger is traveling across any international boundary if:
   1. The government required travel documents of such Passenger appear not to be in order according to UA's reasonable belief; or
   2. Such Passenger’s embarkation from, transit through, or entry into any country from, through, or to which such Passenger desires transportation would be unlawful or denied for any reason.
8. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
   1. Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
   2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
   3. Passengers who assault any employee of UA, including the gate agents and flight crew, or any UA Passenger;
   4. Passengers who, through and as a result of their conduct, cause a disturbance such that the captain or member of the cockpit crew must leave the cockpit in order to attend to the disturbance;
   5. Passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed;
   6. Passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew (other than a qualified individual whose appearance or involuntary behavior may make them appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs);
   7. Passengers wearing or possessing on or about their person concealed or unconcealed deadly or dangerous weapons; provided, however, that UA will carry law enforcement personnel who meet the qualifications and conditions established in 49 C.F.R. §1544.219;
   8. Passengers who are unwilling or unable to follow UA’s policy on smoking or use of other smokeless materials;
   9. Unless they comply with Rule 6 I), Passengers who are unable to sit in a single seat with the seat belt properly secured, and/or are unable to put the seat’s armrests down when seated and remain seated with the armrest down for the entirety of the flight, and/or passengers who significantly encroach upon the adjoining passenger’s seat;
   10. Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
   11. Passengers who have resisted or may reasonably be believed to be capable of resisting custodial supervision;
   12. Pregnant Passengers in their ninth month, unless such Passenger provides a doctor’s certificate dated no more than 72 hours prior to departure stating that the doctor has examined and found the Passenger to be physically fit for air travel to and from the destination requested on the date of the flight, and that the estimated date of delivery is after the date of the last flight;
   13. Passengers who are incapable of completing a flight safely, without requiring extraordinary medical assistance during the flight, as well as Passengers who appear to have symptoms of or have a communicable disease or condition that could pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others on the flight, or who refuse a screening for such disease or condition. (NOTE: UA requires a medical certificate for Passengers who wish to travel under such circumstances. Visit UA’s website, united.com, for more information regarding UA’s requirements for medical certificates);
   14. Passengers who fail to travel with the required safety assistant(s), advance notice and/or other safety requirements pursuant to Rules 14 and 15;
   15. Passengers who do not qualify as acceptable Non-Ambulatory Passengers (see Rule 14);
   16. Passengers who have or cause a malodorous condition (other than individuals qualifying as disabled);
   17. Passengers whose physical or mental condition is such that, in United’s sole opinion, they are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an escort. The escort must accompany the escorted passenger at all times; and
   18. Unaccompanied passengers who are both blind and deaf, unless such passenger is able to communicate with representatives of UA by either physical, mechanical, electronic, or other means. Such passenger must inform UA of the method of communication to be used; and
   19. Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policy that prohibits voice calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.
   
   
9. Any Passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, consents and acknowledges that he or she shall reimburse UA for any such loss, damage or expense. UA has the right to refuse transport, on a permanent basis, to any passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, or who has been disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent. In addition, the activities enumerated in H) 1) through 8) shall constitute a material breach of contract, for which UA shall be excused from performing its obligations under this contract.
10. UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule. A Passenger who is removed or refused transportation in accordance with this Rule may be eligible for a refund upon request. See Rule 27 A). As an express precondition to issuance of any refund, UA shall not be responsible for damages of any kind whatsoever. The passenger’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be Rule 27 A).

Exactly ZERO (0) of these conditions applied to Dao and his wife.

Any days or travel that was ruined --- and there certainly were ruins ---- were solely and completely the fault of United Airlines, who perpetrated the entire incident. Again --- who says so? Again--- United Airlines.

Wrong, again. Additionally, Dao is guilty of violating FAR 121.580.

Disagreed. You read the Reader's Digest version and, even then, are quoting it out of context. Try reading the full document drawn up by fucking lawyers and tell me Dao still didn't violate the CoC he agreed to when buying his discount ticket.

Besides, don't you drive everywhere and refuse to fly? Why do you care?

Oh fucking bullshit. Number one, FAR 121.580 has to do with 'interfering with crew members'. Nothing in taking the seat one paid for and was boarded into can be defined as "interfering" with jack shit. The only 'interfering" was done by United and its servants.

Fucking bullshit number two --- that's the same document I just quoted. The link for it is in the intervening post. Same thing. And it's the same post you ran away from because it proves you wrong.

And fucking bullshit three --- no I've never "refused to fly". I've been flying since the Truman Administration. I like to drive for the independence but when your assignment is in, say, Hawaìi, the toll bridge tends to be expensive.

Fine. Let's see how it works out, Mr. Aviation Expert.

BTW, how did you come to know so much about aviation law?

 

[Pogo]

Nice jailhouse lawyering, but the fact remains that Dao, regardless of actually being on board or not, was denied "boarding". IE, his seat aboard a flight.

NO. HE. WAS. NOT.
If he'd been denied boarding ---- then he wouldn't have been physically in the seat he was yanked out of because he wouldn't be on the plane, because the laws of physics demand that a body cannot exist in two places at the same time.

Holy SHIT, engage brain.

Dao was boarded, as was everybody else on the plane. At that point --- the airline can't just bump you because they didn't think of it at the gate. That was United's first fuckup.

When he interfered with the flight crew and the airline operation by his refusal to vacate the aircraft, he violated several laws, including FAR 121.580.

BULLSHIT. Find me anywhere in that document that gives the airline the right to extricate a passenger they've already boarded.

'Fraid not Gummo. If they're going to bump you they need to do it before boarding --- not after.

When he disobeyed the lawful orders of Chicago's aviation authorities, he violated more laws. When he resisted, he violated those laws. When he ran back onboard the aircraft without authorization, he violated Federal law.

Again, fucking bullshit. He doesn't even have a memory of returning, nor was he aware of his own condition --- ALL of which are the result of those "aviation authority" thugs. Who apparently must be minimum-wage rent-a-cops, since three of them couldn't control a 69-year-old man they had just knocked unconscious with a concussion and broken teeth. Some "security force" that is.

 

[Divine Wind]

Nice jailhouse lawyering, but the fact remains that Dao, regardless of actually being on board or not, was denied "boarding". IE, his seat aboard a flight.

NO. HE. WAS. NOT.
If he'd been denied boarding ---- then he wouldn't have been physically in the seat he was yanked out of because he wouldn't be on the plane, because the laws of physics demand that a body cannot exist in two places at the same time.

Holy SHIT, engage brain.

Dao was boarded, as was everybody else on the plane. At that point --- the airline can't just bump you because they didn't think of it at the gate. That was United's first fuckup.

When he interfered with the flight crew and the airline operation by his refusal to vacate the aircraft, he violated several laws, including FAR 121.580.

BULLSHIT. Find me anywhere in that document that gives the airline the right to extricate a passenger they've already boarded.

'Fraid not Gummo. If they're going to bump you they need to do it before boarding --- not after.

When he disobeyed the lawful orders of Chicago's aviation authorities, he violated more laws. When he resisted, he violated those laws. When he ran back onboard the aircraft without authorization, he violated Federal law.

Again, fucking bullshit. He doesn't even have a memory of returning, nor was he aware of his own condition --- ALL of which are the result of those "aviation authority" thugs. Who apparently must be minimum-wage rent-a-cops, since three of them couldn't control a 69-year-old man they had just knocked unconscious with a concussion and broken teeth. Some "security force" that is.

Nice jailhouse lawyering. So where did you come by all this expertise?

 

[Pogo]

And what I've been saying is YOU'RE WRONG. The airline has no basis to remove already-boarded passengers for its own convenience, period.

Who says so? United Airlines says so. Their own Contract of Carriage says so.

The complete UA Contract of Carriage Rule 21:

Rule 21 Refusal of Transport
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
4. Search of Passenger or Property – Whenever a Passenger refuses to submit to electronic surveillance or to permit search of his/her person or property.
5. Proof of Identity – Whenever a Passenger refuses on request to produce identification satisfactory to UA or who presents a Ticket to board and whose identification does not match the name on the Ticket. UA shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to require identification of persons purchasing tickets and/or presenting a ticket(s) for the purpose of boarding the aircraft.
6. Failure to Pay – Whenever a Passenger has not paid the appropriate fare for a Ticket, Baggage, or applicable service charges for services required for travel, has not paid an outstanding debt or Court judgment, or has not produced satisfactory proof to UA that the Passenger is an authorized non-revenue Passenger or has engaged in a prohibited practice as specified in Rule 6.
7. Across International Boundaries – Whenever a Passenger is traveling across any international boundary if:
   1. The government required travel documents of such Passenger appear not to be in order according to UA's reasonable belief; or
   2. Such Passenger’s embarkation from, transit through, or entry into any country from, through, or to which such Passenger desires transportation would be unlawful or denied for any reason.
8. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
   1. Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
   2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
   3. Passengers who assault any employee of UA, including the gate agents and flight crew, or any UA Passenger;
   4. Passengers who, through and as a result of their conduct, cause a disturbance such that the captain or member of the cockpit crew must leave the cockpit in order to attend to the disturbance;
   5. Passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed;
   6. Passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew (other than a qualified individual whose appearance or involuntary behavior may make them appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs);
   7. Passengers wearing or possessing on or about their person concealed or unconcealed deadly or dangerous weapons; provided, however, that UA will carry law enforcement personnel who meet the qualifications and conditions established in 49 C.F.R. §1544.219;
   8. Passengers who are unwilling or unable to follow UA’s policy on smoking or use of other smokeless materials;
   9. Unless they comply with Rule 6 I), Passengers who are unable to sit in a single seat with the seat belt properly secured, and/or are unable to put the seat’s armrests down when seated and remain seated with the armrest down for the entirety of the flight, and/or passengers who significantly encroach upon the adjoining passenger’s seat;
   10. Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
   11. Passengers who have resisted or may reasonably be believed to be capable of resisting custodial supervision;
   12. Pregnant Passengers in their ninth month, unless such Passenger provides a doctor’s certificate dated no more than 72 hours prior to departure stating that the doctor has examined and found the Passenger to be physically fit for air travel to and from the destination requested on the date of the flight, and that the estimated date of delivery is after the date of the last flight;
   13. Passengers who are incapable of completing a flight safely, without requiring extraordinary medical assistance during the flight, as well as Passengers who appear to have symptoms of or have a communicable disease or condition that could pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others on the flight, or who refuse a screening for such disease or condition. (NOTE: UA requires a medical certificate for Passengers who wish to travel under such circumstances. Visit UA’s website, united.com, for more information regarding UA’s requirements for medical certificates);
   14. Passengers who fail to travel with the required safety assistant(s), advance notice and/or other safety requirements pursuant to Rules 14 and 15;
   15. Passengers who do not qualify as acceptable Non-Ambulatory Passengers (see Rule 14);
   16. Passengers who have or cause a malodorous condition (other than individuals qualifying as disabled);
   17. Passengers whose physical or mental condition is such that, in United’s sole opinion, they are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an escort. The escort must accompany the escorted passenger at all times; and
   18. Unaccompanied passengers who are both blind and deaf, unless such passenger is able to communicate with representatives of UA by either physical, mechanical, electronic, or other means. Such passenger must inform UA of the method of communication to be used; and
   19. Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policy that prohibits voice calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.
   
   
9. Any Passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, consents and acknowledges that he or she shall reimburse UA for any such loss, damage or expense. UA has the right to refuse transport, on a permanent basis, to any passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, or who has been disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent. In addition, the activities enumerated in H) 1) through 8) shall constitute a material breach of contract, for which UA shall be excused from performing its obligations under this contract.
10. UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule. A Passenger who is removed or refused transportation in accordance with this Rule may be eligible for a refund upon request. See Rule 27 A). As an express precondition to issuance of any refund, UA shall not be responsible for damages of any kind whatsoever. The passenger’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be Rule 27 A).

Exactly ZERO (0) of these conditions applied to Dao and his wife.

Any days or travel that was ruined --- and there certainly were ruins ---- were solely and completely the fault of United Airlines, who perpetrated the entire incident. Again --- who says so? Again--- United Airlines.

Wrong, again. Additionally, Dao is guilty of violating FAR 121.580.

Disagreed. You read the Reader's Digest version and, even then, are quoting it out of context. Try reading the full document drawn up by fucking lawyers and tell me Dao still didn't violate the CoC he agreed to when buying his discount ticket.

Besides, don't you drive everywhere and refuse to fly? Why do you care?

Oh fucking bullshit. Number one, FAR 121.580 has to do with 'interfering with crew members'. Nothing in taking the seat one paid for and was boarded into can be defined as "interfering" with jack shit. The only 'interfering" was done by United and its servants.

Fucking bullshit number two --- that's the same document I just quoted. The link for it is in the intervening post. Same thing. And it's the same post you ran away from because it proves you wrong.

And fucking bullshit three --- no I've never "refused to fly". I've been flying since the Truman Administration. I like to drive for the independence but when your assignment is in, say, Hawaìi, the toll bridge tends to be expensive.

Fine. Let's see how it works out, Mr. Aviation Expert.

BTW, how did you come to know so much about aviation law?

I'm observant. In the case of FAR 121.580 I have this super-secret decoder ring I employ whenever some stuffed shirt is trying to effect a snow job. It's called "Google".

The funny thing is -- the day before this incident, Saturday 4.8 -- I was literally sitting in a room with four aviation attorneys, one of which is retained by United. Too bad it wasn't the day after.