Every airline disability complaint under the ACAA answered within 30 days, from what actually happened
Every disability complaint answered within 30 days, with the facts rebuilt and cited.
See one case, screen by screen ↓ACAA Disability Complaint Management runs every airline disability complaint under the ACAA — the Air Carrier Access Act and its rule, 14 CFR Part 382 — from intake to the 30-day dispositive reply and the DOT annual report. Seven agents start the clock, rebuild the passenger's journey from the airline's own systems, decide each Part 382 section and draft a reply with every fact cited; the Complaints Resolution Official decides and signs.
How to choose AI for airlines: a buyer's guide to agentic AI solutions →
Updated
Every written airline disability complaint under the ACAA needs a dispositive reply within 30 days of receipt: it must admit or deny a Part 382 violation, summarize the facts, state the steps the airline will take and tell the passenger of the right to pursue DOT enforcement. The facts sit in the reservation and its SSR codes, departure control, the gate history, the wheelchair contractor's dispatch log, the cabin report and the station's call log. So the Complaints Resolution Official chases stations by email, waits days for a log, and too often answers from the passenger's letter.
Complaints arrive by web form, email, letter, social, the call center, the airport CRO and DOT referrals through ACERS, and not every one says the word "disability". A clock missed on one channel or a reply missing one element is a violation DOT can count. A station failing the same way for months often shows up only in the year-end DOT report, and the carrier answers for its contractors' failures under 382.15.
Estimated split for a typical written wheelchair assistance complaint at a network carrier, by hand and with the solution.
Seven specialist agents rebuild each journey, decide each Part 382 section and draft the cited reply; the CRO decides and signs.
Joanna Whitcombe, 71, flew Corvane Airways flight CV 1422 from Chicago O'Hare to Phoenix on October 6, with a wheelchair request (SSR WCHR) on her reservation since she booked. Three days later she wrote that in Phoenix nobody came. Here is what happens next, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Nadia owns about 70 open disability complaints. Her Today screen shows 6 that need her, 5 due in 7 days and 99.8% answered on time in 2026. In the last 24 hours the agents read 24 messages, opened 17 complaints and drafted the reply to Joanna Whitcombe; a station alert for PHX and a case where two agents disagree wait beside it.
“Journey builder rebuilt the journey for DC-2026-1187 from 7 sources: attendant dispatched to B22 after the 12:51 gate change to B26; 48-minute wait.”
The intake agent reads 24 items from 7 channels and decides which are disability complaints, even when the word is never used. A DOT referral through ACERS is flagged “reply required, copy DOT”; a letter sent 51 days after the flight is marked late under 382.155(c), with a reply sent anyway by policy; a cabin-bag complaint read as a baggage issue keeps a “Treat as a disability complaint” button. Joanna's web form came in Oct 9 at 21:40 CT, three days after the flight: day 0 of 30, due Sun, Nov 8.
The intake agent never closes a complaint: every routing decision is logged and a person can override it.
The case opens on her journey, rebuilt from 7 systems: curb at ORD 10:22, check-in, TSA, gate C17, preboarded 11:18 — all assisted. At 12:51 MST, while she was in the air, PHX moved the arrival from B22 to B26. Meridel Ground Services' job still said B22. On block at 13:46; she walked to the jet bridge with the purser at 13:58 and waited 48 minutes, until 14:46.
The journey builder never fills a gap with an assumption: where a system has no record, it says so.
Every number in the strip and the letter opens its source with the words it came from. The Meridel PHX dispatch log reads: job created 12:10 from the schedule feed, gate B22; 14:05 closed “passenger no show”; 14:31 re-dispatched to B26; 14:46 attendant at the B26 jet bridge. Nine sources sit in one viewer, and one click asks PHX for the jet bridge camera log.
Five findings, each with reasons and confidence: a violation of 382.95(a), prompt deplaning assistance (94%); no separate 382.91(a) violation (88%); Corvane answers for Meridel under 382.15 (97%); a reply due Nov 8 (99%). On 382.11(b), safe and dignified assistance, Joanna says she stood “for a long time”; the purser says a chair came at 14:09, 11 minutes in. Nadia decides: no separate violation, acknowledged in the reply, and approves the other four with reason code A1.
“Both can be true; the records cannot settle how long she stood. I will not decide this — it changes what the reply admits.”
The reply drafter wrote 11 sentences with the four elements 382.155(d) requires and a $250 travel credit inside her authority. The second reader checked every fact against its source, then suggested one change: sentence 4 blamed the contractor, but under 382.15 the failure is Corvane's. Nadia softens it — “That was our failure, not only our contractor's, and I am sorry” — and the second reader rechecks it against the gate change and the dispatch log.
“Rechecked sentence 4: it still matches the gate change and the dispatch log, and the facts element stays complete.”
Sign-off shows every finding decided, the second reader's check of all four elements, and the $250 credit inside her $300 authority under remedy policy CR-POL-12 — $400 would go to Gregory Hale, Director of Consumer Affairs. She signs with its meaning and sends it by email, as Joanna asked, on day 6 of 30.
“I have reviewed the facts, the findings and the reply, and I sign it as Corvane's dispositive response under 14 CFR 382.155(d).”
Corrective action notice CAN-PHX-26-019 is drafted with the evidence: the attendant reached the aircraft door 60 minutes after on-block against the 5-minute standard in contract §7.1, a $350 service credit under §7.3, and a root cause and fix due in 10 business days. It waits for Teresa Quan, the PHX airport customer service manager, to approve and send it.
The agent never sends to a contractor: the station manager approves.
Four a month is normal at PHX. The agent traced 7 of the 11 to gate changes the wheelchair dispatch never saw — Meridel reads gates from an hourly schedule feed — and ranks stations per 10,000 assisted passengers: PHX 6.1, ORD 1.6. It recommends sending gate changes to dispatch as they happen, owned by Teresa Quan by Nov 30, and one click opens a station review with her.
When the reply goes, the case's Appendix A code locks: mobility, failure to provide adequate or timely assistance — wheelchair. The 2026 report already counts 2,231 complaints by nature and type of disability; 4 codes below 85% confidence wait for Darnell Brooks, and Gregory Hale files through ACERS by Mon, Jan 25, 2027.
The report coder never files: low-confidence codes go to the analyst, and the Director files.
The same complaint, seen by the four people who carry it, from the CRO to the analyst who owns Part 382 compliance reporting — what it looked like before, and what it looks like now.
Seven specialist agents rebuild each journey, decide each Part 382 section and draft the cited reply; the CRO decides and signs.
Reads every channel — web form, mailboxes, scanned letters, social, call center notes, airport CROs and DOT referrals through ACERS — decides whether a message is a disability complaint, de-duplicates, starts the 30-day clock and applies the 45-day rule.
Rebuilds the passenger's trip stop by stop from the reservation and SSR history, check-in and boarding scans, gate changes and on-block times, the contractor's dispatch log, cabin reports and station logs, and marks where assistance broke.
Tests the rebuilt journey against each relevant section of Part 382 and gives a finding, its reasons with sources and a confidence.
Drafts the dispositive reply in plain language with the four 382.155(d) elements, every factual sentence footnoted, in the passenger's chosen format, with a remedy from the airline's policy.
Reads every reply against 382.155(d) and against the evidence, and challenges the drafter and the determination agent where they are wrong — including rechecking every sentence the CRO edits.
Codes each case by type of disability and nature of complaint under Appendix A to Part 382 and builds the annual DOT report for filing through ACERS.
Drafts cited corrective-action notices to contractors with the contract standard and service credit, and watches complaints by station, gate, contractor and cause, raising an alert when one repeats.
Decide every finding, sign every reply. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask about any complaint, station, contractor or rule, in plain words — the agents answer with sources and can act for you.
Which complaints are closest to day 30?
5 complaints are at day 23 or later. Closest: DC-2026-1158, Grace Holloway, day 27 — waiting for MIA's seat map change log (Philip Ward); and DC-2026-1163, Henry Lam, day 24 — reply ready, no violation (Ana Ruiz). None is past day 30.
Why is PHX getting more wheelchair complaints?
PHX had 11 disability complaints in 30 days, against 4 a month normally; 7 came within 60 minutes of a gate change. Meridel's dispatch reads gates from the hourly schedule feed, so late changes never reach it — as on CV 1422, sent to B22 after the move to B26.
Did she really stand?
Two accounts. Ms. Whitcombe: “I had to stand for a long time.” The purser: on the jet bridge 13:58, chair brought 14:09 — 11 minutes. Both can be true. I can't settle it from the records; the jet bridge camera log at PHX could. You decide whether it is a separate 382.11(b) violation.
How many complaints will we report to DOT for 2026?
So far 2,231, every one coded to Appendix A: 1,138 wheelchair assistance (51%), 241 devices, 176 seating and 676 others. 4 codes wait for review. Due Mon, Jan 25, 2027 through ACERS.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
The rules your airline disability complaint management runs on are settings; changes are on the audit trail, and the 30-day clock and the ones that keep a person in charge are locked.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Reply due | 30 days from receipt, every channel (382.155(d)) | Locked |
| First warning | Day 20, then day 25 | Any day from day 10 to day 25 |
| Reply to complaints sent after 45 days | On — reply anyway | On · Off (a reply is not required by 382.155(c)) |
| CRO credit authority | $300 | $100 to $500, in $50 steps |
| Injury or legal risk goes to Legal | On — reviewed before the CRO signs | Locked on |
| Reason codes | A1–A4 approve · J1–J4 reject · E1–E3 credit change | Locked on |
| Agents may send replies or admit a violation | Off — a CRO signs every reply | Locked off |
| Letter templates | Admit · Deny · Partly admit · CRO airport statement | Email, letter, large print; braille for admit and deny; airport statement printed at the airport |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (U.S. DOT 2023 summary report of disability-related complaints received by airlines — 49,082 complaints, 51% wheelchair assistance; DOT Order 2024-10-15 — $50,000,000 civil penalty; 14 CFR 382.15, 382.151–.157 and Appendix A to Part 382). Corvane Airways, its contractors, stations' cases and the people named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
ACAA Disability Complaint Management runs every airline disability complaint under the ACAA — the Air Carrier Access Act and its rule, 14 CFR Part 382 — from intake to the 30-day dispositive reply and the DOT annual report. Seven agents start the clock, rebuild the passenger's journey from the airline's own systems, decide each Part 382 section and draft a reply with every fact cited; the Complaints Resolution Official decides and signs.
Under 14 CFR 382.155(d), a dispositive written response is due within 30 days of receiving a written disability complaint under the Air Carrier Access Act. A reply is not required for a complaint sent more than 45 days after the incident unless DOT referred it (382.155(c)). The intake agent starts the clock at receipt on every channel and applies the 45-day rule; whether to reply to late complaints anyway is a setting.
It must specifically admit or deny that a Part 382 violation occurred, summarize the facts, state the steps the airline will take if it admits a violation, and tell the passenger of the right to pursue DOT enforcement. The reply drafter writes all four, and the second reader checks every reply against them and against the evidence before the CRO signs.
The journey builder rebuilds the trip stop by stop from the reservation and its SSR codes, check-in and boarding scans, the airport's gate history, the wheelchair contractor's dispatch log, cabin reports and station logs. Each stop carries its time and source, the stop where assistance broke is marked, and where a system has no record it says so rather than guess.
Under 14 CFR 382.15 the carrier must make sure its contractors meet Part 382 as if it provided the service itself, so the finding is the airline's. The contractor and pattern agent drafts a cited corrective-action notice with the contract standard and service credit for the station manager to approve, and raises an alert when the same wheelchair assistance complaint repeats at a station.
The DOT report coder codes each case by type of disability and nature of complaint under Appendix A to Part 382, and the code locks when the reply is sent, so every count traces to its case. Codes below 85% confidence go to the compliance analyst, and the Director files through ACERS by the last Monday in January; the agent never files.
Yes. The agents never send a reply, admit a violation, send a contractor notice or file the DOT report. A CRO approves, edits or rejects every finding with a reason code and signs every reply; credits above the CRO's authority need the Director, and any injury or legal risk goes to Legal first.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your remedy policy, letter templates, contractor contracts and a sample of past disability complaints — and connects the systems the journey is rebuilt from. It goes live once every quality gate has passed; we walk you through it on your own complaints first.
Every damaged chair traced to where it happened, remedied the same day, and counted right.
1-min demoTarmac Delay ComplianceEvery return to the gate started in time, and every DOT report ready the same day.
1-min demoAirline Passenger Rights ComplianceEvery passenger's refund, care and compensation, planned before the gate improvises.
1-min demoWe'll run ACAA Disability Complaint Management on a sample of your own past disability complaints and the systems behind them.