I certainly agree that the notional agreement of consumer to non-negotiated terms of complex contracts is a fiction, not just in the superficial sense that a majority of consumers does not read them but in the more fundamental sense that our economic system is largely premised on consumers not reading them. It is rather nonsensical to proceed on the assumption that all individuals are expected to read terms when this is patently not the case. This is even more obvious in the case of airline contracts since, until the rise of the internet, it was largely infeasible to access those T&Cs. Moreover, even now, we are supposed to be bound by rules contained in tariffs to which we, as ordinary passengers, simply do not have access. So, I agree with you to that extent.

That said, however, we are not talking here about some obscure or new rule, or one specific to BA, but well-established, near universal principles applicable to the whole airline industry that do not require immense efforts to discover.


Yes, there is no need to be sanctimonious or rude, I agree.

Yes, they do, and unavoidably up to a point. I am, however, a little suspicious of over-reliance on "common sense" being used as a replacement for making a modicum of efforts to inform oneself. Ultimately, it is a question of different perceptions as to what efforts can reasonably be expected of different persons in different contexts to evaluate the legitimacy of a particular complaint.

I hasten to add that I am not passing any judgment on the legitimacy of the OP's complaint here which seems to me to have a rather reasonable approach overall.