Originally Posted by
lizban
It's difficult to think of another area that if you pay for something and don't get it that you don't ask for your money back.
But you're ignoring the obvious: you
do get it.
Originally Posted by
lizban
In terms of this being seen as vexatious claim I don't see that as being remotely likely
On a technical level, given that you have no contratual relationship with the airport (as others have pointed out), what is your legal "cause of action"? Without one, your claim is legally doomed -and therefore vexatious (even if you leave aside the dubious merits). Can you think of any other situation in which A pays B for something, which is supposed to be provided by C but isn't, and in which A can directly sue C?