The answer apparently is yes. That's what happened to Rabbi S. Binyomin Ginsberg, who got booted off the Northwest frequent flier program:
"It didn't make sense. Initially, when they contacted me on the phone I thought it was a prank call," Ginsberg said.
"When I pushed for a reason and clarification, they told me it was because I was complaining too much."In July 2008, Northwest sent the rabbi a letter noting that he had made 24 complaints in the past eight months, including nine incidents of his bag arriving late at the luggage carousel, according to court papers.
"You have continually asked for compensation over and above our guidelines. We have awarded you $1,925.00 in travel credit vouchers, 78,500 WorldPerks bonus miles, a voucher extension for your son, and $491.00 in cash reimbursements," the letter states, according to court papers.
"Due to our past generosity, we must respectfully advise that we will no longer be awarding you compensation each time you contact us."
Image: Complaint Department Grenade Mug from the NeatoShop
Lawyers under corporate contrat will generate as many billable hours as they can even if that means their client loses in the long run.
- 8 months = 24 complaints; an average of 3 complaints per month...
- already awarded with several compensations and continues to ask for MORE...
- continues to use the SAME company for such services (because it is cheap)...
Now fireaway at the stereotype jewish jokes...
The airline should have the right to deny service to someone based on the fact that they appear to be abusing the system. They could have just said, "We're not allowing you to accumulate any more points, and we're not giving you any more money if anything goes wrong."
They probably should have allowed him to use up his old points.
It's a free country; they shouldhave the right to sell to whomever they want, as long as it's not a civil rights case. Some people are just so darn cheap, they'll complain when good things happen to them, just to get money.
If you think about it this does not really make any sense. The relationship between a customer and a provider of a certain service should be one of mutual respect. The customer pays something for a certain service, but that does not imply one of the two parties is a king and the other is a slave. It's like a trade; if you trade 5 potatoes for 5 carrots you don't expect the other party to be subservient to your every demand do you? Today we trade money for some service, but the point remains the same.
The customer is NOT king. Try that for a change and everybody involved will be much happier.
Clearly he is not a profitable customer so why would the airline want him?