Lack

LOT deemed him unfit to fly. What happened next doesn't prove anything to the contrary.

I think the OP has made it clear that he doesn't seek IDB compensation.
I do agree they shouldn't have sold him the ticket. Seeing his signature on the slip should result in the transaction voided on the spot.

And then you'll pick the other for the sake of the argument?

Well, thats why credit card companys are working on a built in breathalyzer in the card terminal. And a pee cup.

Time stamp of almost two hours after the plane incident. From the same party being accused of essentially extortion. And the OP is doing a public service, not shielding his interest.

Please don't deflect like that. Just saying your assumption on the crew testimony could be false on the merit.

You want to go where?

One of the big flaws in all of these arguments about whether the OP was intoxicated or not rest on a false assumption - that the legal limits for driving a car have any relevance when the OP was not driving a car. The concerns have to be based on behavior, not some limit which it cannot even be proved he had reached.

Given the fact that the OP ate a lot at the time, this is likely to have slowed the absorption of alcohol into his bloodstream and it is quite possible that his blood alcohol level was nowhere or just at the legal limit.

It really does fall on LOT to give some evidence (beyond his throwing up) that he was too impaired to fly.

In the end, the real question is: a) what behavior, other than throwing up did the OP demonstrate which suggested drunkenness, and if none, b) does a traveler who is denied boarding because he is ill, retain any right to transporation on his ticket?

Lack

I've said it a couple of times already, will say it again - it's just a point of reference, not an argument of it's own.

I think the website OP linked to already takes that into the equation.
Either way, that would mean his BLA would rise during the flight...

And is still in his best interest to show evidence to the contrary. Easy done at any hospital or police station.

I already raised question about the whole general procedure, would love to hear some details from anyone in the know.

IAN-UK

I realise we get only one side of these stories, but I wonder why some are so eager to construct an entirely house-of-cards argument for the other side.

After catching a whiff of the hysteria about drunkenness developed in this thread, I read the original posting quite carefully.

I'm not sure where in the tale other readers shifted "unfit to fly" into "drunk". I understand the former term is often a euphemism for enebriated, but the OP reported vomiting - an activity not always linked to drunkeness, but one generally unwelcomed in an aircraft. My understanding is that he was ejected from the flight because crew believed him to be unwell.

I'm sure the OP was shaken by his upchuck: from his report, he seemed resigned, if not totally happy, to be off-loaded and wait for a later flight. Again, from his report, he was assured he would be accommodated.

The first mention of alcohol-induced incapacitation came from the lady at the LOT desk. For whatever reason she accused the OP of being drunk. Then sold him a ticket.

The OP doesn't complain about being kicked-off the aircraft, but at having to buy a new ticket.

Obliging him to purchase a completely new ticket was heavy-handed, and I doubt that any reasonable ombudsman/mediator/citizens advocate would be much in sympathy with LOT's action. Of course, by this time, there may well be documents supporting the actions of the LOT employee ....

YuropFlyer

IAN-UK, spot on ^

As said, there are always two sides of the medal, however in their answers to my requests LOT has not denied any part of the story, just stating that their point of view is that they can deny you to fly, and don't need to take care of you afterwards. So, I doubt their story goes much different than mine, when they don't question my side apparently.

I think everything here has been said for the moment (and to be honest, I truly did expect comments like the one from kamel123 to show up - after all, this is FT, and the customer is always wrong in some people's minds )

No worries, no heartbreak here - I'll go and see what the judges will say, the process obviously taking some time.

Going for the country to watch the F1 race now of which's national airline fate hopefully will be the one for LOT soon too

mmff

Keep us posted on further developments!

weero

It absolutely does as elaborated on umpteen times.
Making up ad hoc tales to salvage the "terminally drunk" narrative?
To continue the argument I would have to. But given in order for LOT to be at fault any pick will do, I will probably rest my case.
Hardly two hours and yes, first hand evidence of extortion.
Oh I see. You use your secret source of facts unbeknownst to us. You somehow know that the OP was drunk beyond repair (for a short while) and that he merely invented the statement the crew members made.
It is 2014 ... there is no such thing as decency and well behaviour. Drinkers, smokers, people with minor disabilities and first and foremost parents all behave in a comparably intoxicated way.

And you too are assuming the OP was drunk despite his word to the contrary.

Lack

There's no hysteria. I'm sure we've all been there. The question is about handing the situation afterwards.

Walks like a duck, quacks like I duck... Polish President once claimed his drunk-like behavior was caused by a "Philippine Tropical Illness". Maybe the OP was to the Philippines recently and caught that virus?

In his report, the reassurance of accommodation was coming from the agent, post the events on the plane.

Two different ladies accusing and selling.

Seems like sometimes he complains about just being able to buy a new ticket.

Like I said, the incident probably didn't go unreported in the airline system. And them denying emailed claims might have been due to that report.

Oliver already they're well within their right according to the COC.

What did you expect them to question?

Just missing the cultural difference maybe? Do you get a field sobriety test with every purchase in ZRH/SIN? Do you get cut off after first drink at the bar?

You can now rest your case officially. I agree LOT should have not sold a new ticket to a customer signing a credit card slip "SCAM". His BAL being irrelevant.

You started. The OP didn't state the crew promised him being rebooked on a later flight.

It's also age of entitlement.

The OP himself provided a link to a site that put him in that legally defined territory.
I imagine I didn't take much to draw that conclusion for anyone present on the scene and subject to speaking with an individual after five beers and recent barf - but I wasn't there and I'm only operating based on the facts and tools provided by the OP.

You want to go where?

No. The OP provided a link to a site which suggested that he might have been too impaired to operate a vehicle legally. Don't overstate what the OP did.

IAN-UK

Thirteen quotes, to three independent posters, each quote carrying a tailored reply? To me, that smacks of hysteria. Or desperation.


Why are you so worked up about this ?

YuropFlyer

I didn't provide that link in the first place..

But anyway, off to Palatschinken now

Lack

Right now he claims he didn't even do that...

I think it's just good manners. But if you were raised otherwise, feel free o call me hysterical or desperate.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/23248532-post20.html

You want to go where?

Don't eat too many!

YuropFlyer

Well, apparently you are drunk now, as you can't even read correctly

I'd check post #37 in this very thread, where Rambuster posted it..

Lack

Well, I'm not going on a plane for another couple days, so I think I'll be alright. Unless I'll be declared unfit-for-bus/subway, then I'll an appropriate forum to rant and shift blame :-).

You provided a link, data and results of your potential BAL at that points. Rambuster provided a link to interpret those results, not come to them (and proving what I've been saying about the legal definition in Poland earlier).