Cymru Fach

Hi all,

I'm currently going through a "situation" with BA over a compensation claim, and having read up quite a bit on the background to the EU regs, it looks like we are falling in to a bit of a grey area in the exemptions of responsibility for BA. However my dealing with them so far, as well as the extent of this thread, is bringing a fair amount of cynicism and doubt to me about their integrity, and I'm wondering whether anyone else has shared a similar experience or can advise on the best course of action?

Basically our flight BA115 Heathrow to JFK scheduled for departure at 16:10 on the 14th March 2015 was cancelled at circa 3am on the day of scheduled travel. When I read the text message alerting me of this in the morning I rang the helpline number given, I was told very specifically by the representative that it was due to "operational" reasons. I asked him several times what exactly this meant, and he couldn't provide any kind of sensible or useful answer, only make alternative flight arrangements for us (we flew the next day and landed in JFK 15 hours and 22 minutes later than scheduled).

Anyway, post holiday I completed a standard EC Regulation 261/2004 letter making a claim for the €600 (x2 passengers) plus £207.24 in other expenses incurred for hotel/food etc. I heard nothing back for 18 days, phoned them to chase it up, and it transpired they had apparently sent an email and got my address wrong. They have now changed their story completely, stating the following:

"Your claim’s been refused because BA0115 on 14 March 2015 was cancelled because of aircraft damage which wasn’t caused by us, which prevented the aircraft operating as scheduled. Under EU legislation, I’m afraid we’re not liable for a compensation payment in this situation."

Over the phone they also denied any record of it being an "operational" issue, and have stated it has been forwarded to the line manager of the individual who gave me incorrect information.

What's more infuriating however is they are extremely cocksure that they are absolved of any responsibility, however they cannot back ​this up immediately with even the slightest bit of evidence or further details as to what exactly this damage was in nature or who it was caused by. It will be a further "month or more" until a detailed report is available to them, because their staff "are very busy". The definition of "us" is also a bit flakey. If the damage was caused by a “third party”, then arguably that third party could hypothetically be a contractor within BA’s supply chain, and arguably their activities would fall under ​the ultimate responsibility of BA for contracting with them in first place.

They have also tried to settle just for the £207.24, which I am cautious of doing at this stage in case it is deemed as waving any right to a further claim for the full amount.

The several mentions of "our legal teams are experts and have looked in to this" instead of reasonable and solid information does leave me with the impression this is nothing other than strong handed wrangling to reduce their liabilities.........or am I being unreasonable?