Originally Posted by
Gatwick Alan
I agree that BA abuse their position of power, for example not paying flight compensation when they should. BA, or any company for that matter should fully compensate when they are at fault, but "milking" them when they may not be at fault is a slippery slope and a sad indictment on our society today.
By your logic BA best not serve any food in case someone has a faulty tooth or some other condition.
Sometimes we have to take ownership of our health and not try and pass the blame onto others.
Of course the problem you illustrate is that where compliance with the law becomes merely a business decision and non-compliance costs are compared with compliant costs, you make the law an .... Proper regulation, so much feared by right-wing free-traders, would punish harshly and disproportionately, those who made such judgement to wilfully flout the law.
However, such a regime would also expect and entail others including consumers to accept responsibility for themselves. I can see no evidence in what has been posted that the loss of a tooth was in any way other than coincidence BA's fault.
If the OP had dined at his parents and lost a tooth, would they now face a compensation claim?
There is no such thing as a free lunch and the more this sort of nonsense becomes a business cost, the more all of us will pay for it in ticket costs etc.