Originally Posted by
Globaliser
How can such a failure be described as "within the control of the airline"? What more could the airline do to prevent such an occurrence? Buy and fit a new part every day, so as to avoid the risk of a later failure during the guarantee period?
I can see the argument that such a failure doesn't amount to exceptional circumstances. But surely it's beyond the proper boundaries of the language to suggest that such a failure was something within the airline's control?
It is within BA's control to build sufficient slack into the system in terms of aircraft and crew, to enable them to weather such day to day mechanical problems without causing delays / distress / monetary loss to their customers. If these parts are "guaranteed" BA can take the issue up with the manufacturer, but the customer should not be the one who has to bear the brunt of the problem.
If it were up to me, airlines would also be responsible for consequential losses in these situations. Why should they be able to take such a cavalier attitude to contracts for transportation on which a lot more can depend?