[Scrapped] Ban on Overbooking

[Araraukar]

OOC: You've had this up for less than two days, forget anything about last call for now. Many people here don't log in daily, and it tends to be annoying needing to withdraw a submitted proposal simply because someone late to the party notices something important being amiss.

1. Why is overbooking significant enough a problem that you want to ban it unilaterally?

2. Banning overbooking is likely going to raise prices of these services because some people will always cancel and so there will be unnecessary vacancies.

3. What's the international importance of overbooking? This sounds more of a national problem.

4. Clause 2.b. refers to "illegal overbooking" when 2.a. makes all overbooking illegal, so it's unnecessary muddlement of what's meant.

5. Can you give an example (as a reply, not by editing the proposal) of what kind of thing clause 3 refers to? Like, what else kind of business even does overbooking other than those related to travel and tourism?

6. Clause 4 is kinda unnecessary too, given WA laws are to be made known to all WA citizens and in general wouldn't it only have any relevance on businesses, not private citizens, given definitions and clauses 2&3 talk about "companies"?

[Tinhampton]

4. Clause 2.b. refers to "illegal overbooking" when 2.a. makes all overbooking illegal, so it's unnecessary muddlement of what's meant.

Article 2(a) only bans "relevant companies" - not all companies - from overbooking.

[Molopovia]

OOC: You've had this up for less than two days, forget anything about last call for now. Many people here don't log in daily, and it tends to be annoying needing to withdraw a submitted proposal simply because someone late to the party notices something important being amiss.

1. Why is overbooking significant enough a problem that you want to ban it unilaterally?

2. Banning overbooking is likely going to raise prices of these services because some people will always cancel and so there will be unnecessary vacancies.

3. What's the international importance of overbooking? This sounds more of a national problem.

4. Clause 2.b. refers to "illegal overbooking" when 2.a. makes all overbooking illegal, so it's unnecessary muddlement of what's meant.

5. Can you give an example (as a reply, not by editing the proposal) of what kind of thing clause 3 refers to? Like, what else kind of business even does overbooking other than those related to travel and tourism?

6. Clause 4 is kinda unnecessary too, given WA laws are to be made known to all WA citizens and in general wouldn't it only have any relevance on businesses, not private citizens, given definitions and clauses 2&3 talk about "companies"?

1. The range of victimization, as stated, can affect up to the lower rich class, who can hold a significant amount of influence in the world. They could hire private jets, but consider the conservative types. Also, this is significant of a problem that it may set a precedent for businesses to find other methods to maximize their profits and no longer caring about the consumer itself. It would come at the unnecessary expense of the consumer just for a little more gain by the businesses. Why bother using overbooking when you're already rich and have a stable income flow?

2. That is up to national affairs to subsidize them for loss of profits *their discretion of course.) Companies won't simply fail or go bankrupt just by not employing this practice. It is merely used for additional capital gain, that should be limited in the long-term to provide a fairer life for all walks of life.

3. If the national governments do nothing about it, who would? The WA is a broad organizations with broad policies; this is one of them. I understand that this can be often viewed as a consumer-sided problem and, yes, there are other important policies, but I do not think this is insignificant enough to be dropped.

4. Addressed by Tinhampton

5. Mostly reservation-based and subscription-based businesses. 1.) Internet providers. 2.) Telephone, TV cable providers, and other telecommunications. 3.) Digital server hosting, not just databases but websites too.

6. I'm bound to clear that up as businesses and not companies. Also, businesses by definition are groups of people legally licensed and recognized by governments to operate as such, so technicalities prove that it is targetting the WA citizens running the businesses, not just the business.

[Separatist Peoples]

Okay so why does contract law not provide remedies for breach of the contract to provide a service?

Because more often than not, it takes a lengthy and inefficient bureaucratic process until the issue reaches the attention of the courts, let alone the filing and the legal costs. Under the enforcement of anti-overbooking with the WACC, the international court can both prosecute and encourage businesses around the world to decommission this practice.

As for the contract law, as said earlier, it is vulnerable to under-the-table deals or other forms of corruption that wouldn't be able to be discovered fast by a national judiciary, but can be with the WA.

"A breach of contract lawsuit is often one of the most simple ones, as there are rarely many, if any, facts in dispute. If a case even goes to trial, it goes to a bench trial. Generally it is addressed at summary judgment, which can be reached almost immediately after the complaints are answered. This is not correct."

[Barfleur]

In general: "While I am still not convinced this is a matter of international concern, I do not agree with the sentiment of many of my colleagues that domestic contract law is sufficient to address the issue of overbooking. Every nation has its own laws on sales and contracts, and in many nations, even ones with highly developed legal systems and with adequate protections for consumers, there are airlines, hotels, and hostels which offer the same seat or space to more than one buyer, at the same moment in time."

In particular: "Why does the prohibition on overbooking only extend to actions by companies? Can an individual, legally owning and operating a hostel or similar business, not do the exact same thing? Given the effort to 'close a loophole' with broad legislation, it seems counter-productive to leave a major loophole in place."

[Ardiveds]

Okay so why does contract law not provide remedies for breach of the contract to provide a service?

As for the contract law, as said earlier, it is vulnerable to under-the-table deals or other forms of corruption that wouldn't be able to be discovered fast by a national judiciary, but can be with the WA.

OOC: The WA doesn't have its own police or secret agents prowling the streets so if the national judiciary of members can't discover such corruption, the WA most probably can't either.

[Bananaistan]

In general: "While I am still not convinced this is a matter of international concern, I do not agree with the sentiment of many of my colleagues that domestic contract law is sufficient to address the issue of overbooking. Every nation has its own laws on sales and contracts, and in many nations, even ones with highly developed legal systems and with adequate protections for consumers, there are airlines, hotels, and hostels which offer the same seat or space to more than one buyer, at the same moment in time."

In particular: "Why does the prohibition on overbooking only extend to actions by companies? Can an individual, legally owning and operating a hostel or similar business, not do the exact same thing? Given the effort to 'close a loophole' with broad legislation, it seems counter-productive to leave a major loophole in place."

"See GAR#205, section 4."

[Separatist Peoples]

In general: "While I am still not convinced this is a matter of international concern, I do not agree with the sentiment of many of my colleagues that domestic contract law is sufficient to address the issue of overbooking. Every nation has its own laws on sales and contracts, and in many nations, even ones with highly developed legal systems and with adequate protections for consumers, there are airlines, hotels, and hostels which offer the same seat or space to more than one buyer, at the same moment in time."

"And to the extent a contract is formed, that contract can be enforced via extant contract law. If somebody is unwilling to fight the breach, that is on them. The law of a foreign nation is largely irrelevant in this case, a contract is generally enforceable under the law of it's formation under such circumstances. Barring a choice of law clause."

[Barfleur]

In general: "While I am still not convinced this is a matter of international concern, I do not agree with the sentiment of many of my colleagues that domestic contract law is sufficient to address the issue of overbooking. Every nation has its own laws on sales and contracts, and in many nations, even ones with highly developed legal systems and with adequate protections for consumers, there are airlines, hotels, and hostels which offer the same seat or space to more than one buyer, at the same moment in time."

"And to the extent a contract is formed, that contract can be enforced via extant contract law. If somebody is unwilling to fight the breach, that is on them. The law of a foreign nation is largely irrelevant in this case, a contract is generally enforceable under the law of it's formation under such circumstances. Barring a choice of law clause."

"Ambassador Bell, no doubt that is the case, but my point was merely that extent contract law does not necessarily cover the conduct intended to be prohibited by the proposal before us. It may in some nations, but it may not in others. Whether it is this Assembly's duty to standardize the national laws concerning overbooking, or whether the subject is so significant as to merit international attention in the first place, I am not quite sure."

[Imperium Anglorum]

If the contract is to provide carriage of a person on a ship from Dubris to Burdigala and the ship owners refuse to permit entrance because no cabin can be found for the traveller, surely there is a breach of contract to provide carriage.

[Molopovia]

It can be stated that this law is significant enough to provide for nations with underdeveloped legal systems, particularly with "No Judiciary." I understand the WA isn't some sort of omniscient secret police but if there truly is no way of accounting a business in national affairs, this law covers that circumstance.

[Molopovia]

"It is also worthwhile noting, that existing contract laws currently don't have specific and broadly-covered laws for unethical consumer-exploiting practices, and it just so happens overbooking/overselling is one of them. At court (national or international), this law can clear up any doubt about prosecuting companies who are liable in breach of contract, and give clarity to their exact offense."

[Bananaistan]

“A member state would have a hard time implementing the many resolutions dealing with both criminal and civil justice if it did not have some form of judiciary or an underdeveloped legal system.

“That overbooking is an unethical consumer-exploiting practice has not been proven.”

[Molopovia]

The core of what makes it unethical is the fact that you charge twice for the same resource. Apply it in an airline, hotel, medical facility, theme parks, anything that needs slots or reservations, and as previously said, it is still the same bottom line to sell one slot for more than the capacity of that slot (which is one.) From the consumer's view point, it's always not guaranteed if a consumer will show up, but what if they make the wrong call, and two people show up? Which is often the number 1 problem of overselling, there is truly no way of accurately 100% predicting whether the consumer will arrive or not, they just have to arbitrarily set a number of slots to oversell and hope their guess is right. Consumer-exploiting, because it gets those who are denied their slot not serviced, despite the clear intention of the business to do so. That is overbooking in it's full extent, and you can see why it is unethical, or morally unjust for some.

[Molopovia]

"As for the underdeveloped legal systems, I doubt there's more than ten thousand nations who have a really-beat down legal system. The majority of nations would have a decent, but not perfected, legal system. In those cases, this law would still be able to help."

[Separatist Peoples]

"As for the underdeveloped legal systems, I doubt there's more than ten thousand nations who have a really-beat down legal system. The majority of nations would have a decent, but not perfected, legal system. In those cases, this law would still be able to help."

"One doesn't need a perfected legal system to adequately manage breach of contract. Which overbooking would lead to axiomatically. This entire concept is absurd, ambassador."

[Molopovia]

"With all due honesty, I'd say this resolution is still in a theoretical stage, and it's still not proven to work in practice, but it still could. There's a chance this proposal would get in queue, but not a large one. The delegation will continue its efforts to push for the proposal and continue to use the previously-stated points for any questions regarding the matter. I've run out of argumentative points."
-Ambassador Tarlishak

[Separatist Peoples]

"With all due honesty, I'd say this resolution is still in a theoretical stage, and it's still not proven to work in practice, but it still could. There's a chance this proposal would get in queue, but not a large one. The delegation will continue its efforts to push for the proposal and continue to use the previously-stated points for any questions regarding the matter. I've run out of argumentative points."
-Ambassador Tarlishak

"Ambassador, this sounds a great deal like you are losing faith in the idea. Are you familiar with the sunken cost fallacy?"

[Molopovia]

"I still stand firm that this idea can be rolled out, and all I am anticipating is an increased opposition. Nevertheless, I will still keep up my honorable front to defend this policy until it goes out to vote, because at that stage, the real test would've only begun."

[Old Hope]

The core of what makes it unethical is the fact that you charge twice for the same resource. Apply it in an airline, hotel, medical facility, theme parks, anything that needs slots or reservations, and as previously said, it is still the same bottom line to sell one slot for more than the capacity of that slot (which is one.) From the consumer's view point, it's always not guaranteed if a consumer will show up, but what if they make the wrong call, and two people show up? Which is often the number 1 problem of overselling, there is truly no way of accurately 100% predicting whether the consumer will arrive or not, they just have to arbitrarily set a number of slots to oversell and hope their guess is right. Consumer-exploiting, because it gets those who are denied their slot not serviced, despite the clear intention of the business to do so. That is overbooking in it's full extent, and you can see why it is unethical, or morally unjust for some.

Well, if the above happens then the business has to pay - whatever the consumer paid, plus any damages and possibly fines. Which could be quite expensive so companies won't overbook too much.

[Molopovia]

As stated in the resolution, it will penalize, so yes you are correct in that sense.

[Molopovia]

Thread's running dry, but I think I can give this a couple more days.

[Ardiveds]

Thread's running dry, but I think I can give this a couple more days.

OOC: Trust me 12 hrs is hardly a dry spell for proposal threads. I have seen successful proposals stay dead for weeks or months before sunddenly becoming active and passing. Be patient, give it a couple days.

[Molopovia]

Got it thanks for the advice

[Barfleur]

If the contract is to provide carriage of a person on a ship from Dubris to Burdigala and the ship owners refuse to permit entrance because no cabin can be found for the traveller, surely there is a breach of contract to provide carriage.

"You certainly know more about contract law than I do, but is it not possible for a contract to explicitly allow the seller to rescind the product or service to one buyer if another buyer shows up claiming the same product or service? That could hardly leave the seller liable for breach of contract, as they were well within their contractual rights."

The core of what makes it unethical is the fact that you charge twice for the same resource. Apply it in an airline, hotel, medical facility, theme parks, anything that needs slots or reservations, and as previously said, it is still the same bottom line to sell one slot for more than the capacity of that slot (which is one.) From the consumer's view point, it's always not guaranteed if a consumer will show up, but what if they make the wrong call, and two people show up? Which is often the number 1 problem of overselling, there is truly no way of accurately 100% predicting whether the consumer will arrive or not, they just have to arbitrarily set a number of slots to oversell and hope their guess is right. Consumer-exploiting, because it gets those who are denied their slot not serviced, despite the clear intention of the business to do so. That is overbooking in it's full extent, and you can see why it is unethical, or morally unjust for some.

Well, if the above happens then the business has to pay - whatever the consumer paid, plus any damages and possibly fines. Which could be quite expensive so companies won't overbook too much.

"Not every nation--not even my own, which prohibits the practice in question--treats overbooking as a criminal offense, so fines would likely not apply. As to the first two things listed, that would only be the case if every single person aggrieved by overbooking filed suit and had a sympathetic judge or jury, when a great many unscrupulous businesses rely--often correctly--on the assumption that most people do not have the resources, time, and/or interest to file a lawsuit, or will just accept a settlement for less than the value of the loss. With all that in mind, overbooking would still be quite a profitable activity, which is why normal breach of contract and other civil laws will not be enough, and why separate legislation is generally required. Which leads me back to my original point--I am not convinced such legislation needs to be done on the international level."