Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Lufthansa, Austrian, Swiss, Brussels, LOT and Other Partners | Miles & More
Reload this Page >

Beware of LOT - or a little story how to make sure customers don't come back..

Beware of LOT - or a little story how to make sure customers don't come back..

Old Jul 28, 2014, 7:55 pm
  #106  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,253
Originally Posted by Lack
I mentioned it earlier in the thread. Didn't end up well for the drunkard, but I'm not sure if his long term memory even registered the event - sadly w/o bankrupting a guy for emergency landing costs and such, the fines for just unruly behavior are even lower then airlines IDB compensation AFAIK.
AFAIR the standard of proof in a court when you bring down a plane are very, very high, as the airline needs to demonstrate that there was no alternative.
My experience with UA is quite the opposite. I was once even offered a bottle of bubbly to take home after I used my yearly drink-chit allowance for fellow pax.
Yes UA has no standards - my seat neighbor on the infamous LAX-SYD hat an army of 12+ mini bottles on his drink tablet when I ordered my 5th diet coke. Seconds later the purser stomped over to me and barked "you are cut off! No more drinks for you and if you show up near the galley, you will be reported".

I had a hard time getting more to drink as "she cut me off". In the end I got my diet coke, she reported me ... but the Aussie authorities showed zero interest in "the case".
Probably thats why Europe is moving to PIN-based authentication (opening
another can of worms in the process, weakening consumer protection).
A next new income scheme for skilled scammers ...
Yep, and it's would have been a no-risk for OP. Test came up negative - OP was sober and can strengthen his case. Come up positive - just ditch it.
Maybe to a bacteria culture back in ZRH ... then all loopholes are closed ...
And if the plane catches some rough air and shakes up OP stomach content during the flight like a short jog does, would you suggest the pilot took a different route?
My experience is that airlines don't care much about that. I was on vomit bombers before and while the crew was helpful, the pilots made no major evasive maneuvers.
weero is offline  
Old Jul 29, 2014, 7:20 am
  #107  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Programs: OW Emerald, *A Gold
Posts: 6,910
Dear fellow FTers,

I just deleted 10 posts that were either OT, personal, offensive or violated the FT rules in another way. Please stay on topic and respect the FT rules.

Kind regards,
totti
Moderator M&M forum
totti is offline  
Old Jul 29, 2014, 11:18 am
  #108  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: AGH
Posts: 5,951
While I do agree that airlines and their employees sometimes do not act into everyone best interests I think it is a pretty ridiculous accusation that crew members boot pax based on "personal dislike", "feeling of ultimate supremacy", to make room on an overbooked flight or whatever.

The OP clearly stated he was okay with getting thrown of the plane and was only fighting against unfair treatment on the ground.

As said before, I do sympathize with him and they should have accommodated him better but if he admits that he was unloaded due to good reason he also has to see that the airline has no obligation to do anything for him anymore.

Telling the world "this is so unfair, the airlines scams you buy booting you off planes and selling you new tickets" is a quite strange view on the events from my point of view.

Last edited by totti; Jul 30, 2014 at 2:20 am Reason: removed comment on moderator action
fassy is offline  
Old Jul 29, 2014, 11:25 am
  #109  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SIN (with a bit of ZRH sprinkled in)
Posts: 9,442
Originally Posted by fassy
The OP clearly stated he was okay with getting thrown of the plane and was only fighting against unfair treatment on the ground.

As said before, I do sympathize with him and they should have accommodated him better but if he admits that he was unloaded due to good reason he also has to see that the airline has no obligation to do anything for him anymore.

Telling the world "this is so unfair, the airlines scams you buy booting you off planes and selling you new tickets" is a quite strange view on the events from my point of view.
To be exact, I was okay with the crew deciding to remove me from their flight, as this is within their rights. I would have been OK to fly, and had they asked me, I could have explained to them what happened. Not asking me what's the matter, removing me from the flight with the promise of putting me on a later flight and then totally refusing any cooperation at the transit counter all together made this little tale happen..

Last edited by totti; Jul 30, 2014 at 2:21 am Reason: removed comment on moderator action
YuropFlyer is offline  
Old Jul 29, 2014, 7:55 pm
  #110  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,253
Originally Posted by fassy
You might have deleted also #107. While I do agree that airlines and their employees sometimes do not act into everyone best interests I think it is a pretty ridiculous accusation that crew members boot pax based on "personal dislike", "feeling of ultimate supremacy", to make room on an overbooked flight or whatever.

The OP clearly stated he was okay with getting thrown of the plane and was only fighting against unfair treatment on the ground.
This is why my post wasn't addressed to the OP but to Oliver's reassertion that whomever is deemed unfit to fly by the crew is at fault. That is the only link to the legal implication of the OP's odyssey and the only one I quoted.

And while it could be that the crew acted out of personal dislike or the OP could have been tanked like a sailor I did and do not make reference to any of these suspicions.

I find it bewildering that you cling so hard to the "OP was booted for just and fair reasons" narrative that my point escaped you. It was merely to show how flawed the CoC's POV is.
weero is offline  
Old Jul 30, 2014, 2:23 am
  #111  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Programs: OW Emerald, *A Gold
Posts: 6,910
Another reminder of the FT TOS: Please do not discuss moderator actions. Feedback via PM is certainly welcome.

Have a nice day,

totti
Moderator M&M forum
totti is offline  
Old Nov 10, 2014, 3:55 pm
  #112  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ZRH/SFO
Programs: A3*G - AZ CFP- HH DIA
Posts: 3,666
Hi YuropFlyer,

wer're looking for any news in your case with LOT...

Tell us what's going on and what the reaction of the CH BAZL is ;-)
Air Rarotonga is offline  
Old Nov 11, 2014, 8:16 am
  #113  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SIN (with a bit of ZRH sprinkled in)
Posts: 9,442
Given your post in #11, all I can say is that you won't be much pleased with the current standings.

Oh, and BAZL is only used as a messenger in this case, as it's upon the Polish Authorities to judge (and so far, they don't seem very happy with LOT's answers from what I can tell)

This said, as I've handed in all the paperwork and it's a progress ongoing, there is nothing I can do right now but wait till the funds hit my account.
YuropFlyer is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2015, 5:11 am
  #114  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: AGH
Posts: 5,951
As this just surfaced through the discussion around the drunken party on LOTs Dreamliner...

@Yuropflyer
How did it end for you? Got any refund?
fassy is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2015, 5:21 am
  #115  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SIN (with a bit of ZRH sprinkled in)
Posts: 9,442
I read about that LOT party too.. seems in Business class, other rules applies..

Due to a deal with LOT, I can't disclose details how it finally went, but lets say I am satisfied with the outcome. But still won't recommend LOT to anyone
YuropFlyer is offline  
Old Sep 25, 2015, 6:24 am
  #116  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: AGH
Posts: 5,951
Ah, ok interesting... so whatever they did, they settled with you which is surprising to hear but good for you!
fassy is offline  
Old Sep 25, 2015, 8:22 am
  #117  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: DTW
Programs: AA Gold, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 819
Originally Posted by YuropFlyer
Still, you basically ignore the point, that LOT throw me off the plane / IDB'd me, then happily sold me a fresh ticket.
This thread is old news but it has brought up some questions:

If the passenger was taken from the plane because the crew deemed him unfit to fly I wonder what made them conclude it was due to intoxication as opposed to, let's say, have the flu, ate tainted food, etc. It seems there must have been something that made them come to this conclusion.

But without going to all the different scenarios let's just say it was over drinking, over eating and over delay to get to the gate. All of these would be a lack of discernment on the part of the passenger which led to the removal. By his own admission it was a failure to be discerning with all three. He's been removed for good reason. The crew's responsibility seems to be to get passengers settled and get the plane to a stage for departure. In his first post the passenger says he was told ". . . and that I'll be taken care off (OP's misspelling) at the gate." It would be common sense that it's not really the part of the crew to ask if he felt better or assess if he's now well enough to be fit to fly. Yes, you can feel better after vomiting but then the ailment can be ongoing and you will find yourself back in that blackhole needing to vomit again. In their short time to prepare the plane for departure they needed to get him to the gate for any assessment of what was going on with him. At this stage let's call him Passenger A.

Here's my questions:

First, the flight is at 5 p.m. We've been told about the undiscerning behavior of the passenger during +/- the 2 hours before the flight. Because of this, I can't help but to question what other eating and drinking behavior took place earlier in the day.

The ground agents can assess it was the inclusion of alcohol to the situation that made the passenger unfit to fly. By his own admission there's no argument from the passenger about that. But let's say it was just overeating? Wouldn't any failure to be discerning about how you're going to feel on a flight be enough reason for the airline to deny flying? Would it be reasonable to eat a quart of collards shortly before a flight just because you had a craving for it and expect fellow passengers and crew to deal with the consequences? Or that it was the running to the plane that caused the vomiting? If the passenger has just landed on a delayed LOT connection and had to run that would be a different situation. But it wasn't. The passenger was in the lounge waiting until the last possible minute to get to the gate. By his own words he said he knew it was Gate 44 at the end of the airport. So the ground personnel deem the ticket invalid because of actions on the part of the passenger. Case closed. No need for arguing. No need for discussion. As the FA said, he was "taken care off at the gate." End of story for Passenger A.

Now as Passenger B he returns to buy a ticket. The ticket agent is selling tickets. Not necessarily assessing fitness to fly. That's for others at the gate and on the flight. He buys ticket. Because of recent events he has enough discernment during flight to forego the offer of wine and makes it to work. Had he vomited again on the outset of this flight, Passenger B would once again have reasonably been declared as unfit to fly.

Last edited by gardengirl; Sep 25, 2015 at 8:28 am
gardengirl is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.