9 Responses

  1. Boraxo
    Boraxo at |

    This is a fair result for those of us who fly on BS tickets. Many times we travel early in the day and nobody wants a beer at 8am when they have to deliver a powerpoint at 1pm.
    To be fair to WN they were forced to implement the overly restrictive “same day use” rule when a few criminal types decided to xerox their boarding passes to redeem for unlimited free drinks. But there must be a better way to deter fraud.

  2. Tim
    Tim at |

    Please let us know when the claim site goes live.

  3. Golfingboy
    Golfingboy at |

    When I am in a similar situation, I would just order a mini -liquor anyway and stuff it in my bag for a later time. I hate seeing free things or a perk go to a waste when it requires little or almost no effort on my part.

  4. The Weekly Flyer
    The Weekly Flyer at |

    Are there really old ones expired? The ones you could receive when you redeemed for awards under the old program?

  5. The Weekly Flyer
    The Weekly Flyer at |

    I have a bunch of the old ones still lying around. Would be great if they are still honored. They don’t have an expiration date on them.

  6. Cook
    Cook at |

    OK, it is settled. Since the BC consumer w as ‘harmed’ in only a tiny way, as is usually the case with Class Action suits, it is the scheming attorneys that reap the profits. Short of a major loss (one that I cannot perfectly define) I stay away from Class Action suits, believing that in the vast majority of cases they accomplish nothing other than enriching the opportunistic lawyers. One has to wonder just how many ‘injured parties’ suffered a loss greater than $25.
    Of course Southwest blew it – in two ways: First, those original coupons should have specified same day (or 48 hour?) use and second, changing the rules well into the promotional benefit was a seriously stupid move. That said, do $5 drink coupons warrant a 2+ year Federal Court case? I don’t think so. The lead plaintiff and his attorney should have more important business on their calendars. If the lead plaintiff was smart, his contract with the principal attorney should have included a 30% rebate of fees collected, but I suspect that the Federal Bar frowns on such agreements. In this case, Lawyers +2 and consumers -1. The original Federal Judge should have thrown this out (dismissed the case) and told the plaintiff to not grace his door again. In the end, it is the lawyers that cause the problems, not the plaintiff victims or the defending corporations. Nuff said.

  7. Bits ‘n Pieces for December 15, 2012 - View from the Wing

    […] Aramean reports that Southwest has settled a lawsuit over its drink chits. Anyone who purchased a Business Select fare and didn’t redeem their free drink (and had the […]