Beware of LOT - or a little story how to make sure customers don't come back..
#106
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,253
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.
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.
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).
another can of worms in the process, weakening consumer protection).
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.
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?
#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
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
#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.
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
#109
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SIN (with a bit of ZRH sprinkled in)
Posts: 9,442
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.
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 2:21 am Reason: removed comment on moderator action
#110
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,253
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.
The OP clearly stated he was okay with getting thrown of the plane and was only fighting against unfair treatment on the ground.
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.
#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
Have a nice day,
totti
Moderator M&M forum
#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.
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.
#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
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
#117
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: DTW
Programs: AA Gold, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 819
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