Bartinbrook

A friend of a friend, taking advantage of the ex-EU option, was due to fly to Schiphol then back to Heathrow for a flight later that day to Hong Kong. He had allowed a few hours at AMS between the outbound and return flights. However, BA cancelled his outbound flight from LHR – AMS and he wouldn’t have had time to get a later flight to AMS to get him back to LHR in time for the HKG flight. Apparently he had to debate with BA staff at LHR for quite some hours to pursue them to allow him onto the LHR – HGK flight. He argued that it was BA’s fault he couldn’t start his trip from AMS, as they failed to get him there in the first place. Eventually they conceded, but only after a lot of hassle for him.

Has anyone had first-hand experience of what happens when BA cancels your outbound flight, it being the first step in an ex-EU booking (albeit on a separate booking)?

chris1979

Same situation for me a few years ago (have wisened up since). Outbound to AMS delayed to mean I would miss AMS LCY and then LCY JFK.

First check in agent very much told me that it was my problem as they would get me to AMS - just late. Eventually and offered WT and WTP to JFK on a later flight but combination of persistance, charm, insistence on a supervisor eventually got me booked in CW on ex LHR flight.

That doesn't need to be the case though - BA could play hardball.

Downside of ex EU and mitigated by same-plane turn-around, night in ex EU airport or previous day position and first leg rotation.

Globaliser

I haven't had this happen myself, but the technical position is clear. Even if it's a cancellation or a delay to the LHR-AMS, that's a separate and unconnected journey from the AMS-LHR or LHR-HKG flights. There have been posts here about this from people who have similarly had to push to be allowed to fly the LHR-HKG (or equivalent) when they couldn't get out to AMS (or wherever) or couldn't get there in time.

This is a known risk. Options for reducing it inckude flying LHR-AMS the day before AMS-LHR-HKG, or flying LHR-AMS and AMS-LHR on the same aircraft. In the latter case, if the LHR-AMS is cancelled, the AMS-LHR will be cancelled too, so BA will have to try to reaccommodate the passenger on some other AMS-LHR in any event. So the passenger at LHR could (say) ask to be rebooked onto the next LHR-AMS and the next AMS-LHR, which would likewise be the same aircraft out and back.

angatol

.....

corporate-wage-slave

The quote above suggests this was not a back to back turnaround in AMS. In that situation just allowing a few hours is actually pretty risky. Either do it back to back or allow for more than one thing to go wrong, or accept the risk. So in this case s/he should have allowed for the following flight to the one cancelled to also maintain the long haul connection.

KARFA

I am very surprised your friend managed to get BA to agree to that. This is partly why you should follow cws's advice and do a back-to-back, or leave plenty of time so that there are other flight options in case your positioning flight gets cancelled. I think the only saving grace is that the positioning flight was with BA. Had it been with another carrier I don't think any leniency would be shown.

The exEU fares are great, I do them myself. However, I do worry when inexperienced people just see the fare and don't take account of the practicalities or the risks.

Magic01273

I do get what you are saying here - and whilst "technically" correct - I disagree strongly with any suggestion that, due to the fact these are separate bookings, BA do not maintain any responsibility for your entire journey in a case like this.

Don't get me wrong, I completely accept that in situations where the positioning flight is not with BA, BA would not have any responsibility (beyond goodwill) to sort this out. And I also agree with following C-W-S's advice (in the interest of a stress-free life). However if both positioning and subsequent flights are with BA, their case for leaving a passenger high-and-dry in these circumstances is, in my view, extremely weak.

angatol

.....

Andriyko

This is something that AA chooses to do on its own, and it has nothing to do with OneWorld as it is not a OW benefit or requirement.

When travel is on separate tickets BA owes nothing but is known to accommodate passengers in such cases.

KARFA

BA really doesn't have responsibility. This may sound blunt, but the fact that you disagree or feel strongly about it is irrelevant. You can't have your cake and eat it here. Either you book it as one ticket and you get protection (and pay a much higher price!) or you don't and you need to de-risk it yourself. This is not one entire journey as far as your booking is concerned.

Globaliser

It's either technically correct or it isn't. The policy to which angatol refers to isn't one which has had much airing here, so it would be interesting to know whether that has been accurately reported because it could change our common understanding.

If it is technically correct, then there are good reasons that BA could rely on to try to defend to the hilt any legal challenge to its approach. Flights are not guaranteed to operate and schedules are not guaranteed to be met, and that's all that's happened in the OP's friend's case. He didn't buy a LHR-AMS-LHR-HKG ticket, but chose instead a LHR-AMS ticket and a separate AMS-LHR-HKG ticket. What obliges BA to treat the latter in the same way as the former?

As it happens, I believe that BA has policies to deal with failed BA-BA "connections" on separate tickets (and I have had to make use of these myself), but I would personally put these into the "goodwill" category.

angatol

.....

headingwest

I have a couple ex-EU trips early next year where I will need positioning flights. Rather than take a risk, I have booked positioning flights for the day before the main trips. It may cost a little more to stay overnight in a hotel but I just don't want the stress and hassle if flights are cancelled/delayed. I can see why people do these back to back flights but it can cause all sorts of problems and I don't like grovelling to airport staff

KARFA

I think you have misunderstood positioning tactics. Back-to-back is fine usually since if your positioning flight is delayed the first leg of the exEU will be similarly delayed since the plane still has to go there and turn around. Equally going he day before is fine as you have said. However, the OP's friend was doing neither of those things so left themselves in a very precarious position.

Often1

There are threads here on FT about a much simpler and more cut & dry situation. The pax for one reason or another has an internal ticket XXX-LHR, e.g. MAN-LHR. He then has another ticket for a long-haul, LHR-YYY, e.g. LHR-HKG. The first flight is delayed such that the pax misses the long-haul and due to ticket fare rules is told that he must buy a new ticket as BA satisfied its contract by getting the pax to LHR albeit late.

The examples of BA simply allowing the pax to fly an xEU, commencing at LHR, having nothing to do with fault are luck.

It is wholly unclear to me whether a carrier handling this situation online, e.g. BA-BA, applies its own rules or those of OW which might -- and I stress might -- only apply to offline, e.g. OW-BA or BA-OW.