Originally Posted by
craz
Had to step away for awhile, on this you are correct. and thats why many a person will patch up a damaged suitcase so that it gets by the agent tagging it and not put any valuables in it.That way when it comes out at the arrival airport, low and behold its damaged and the carrier will fix it or replace it and then all off a sudden he sees some very expensive items are missing once the baggage office accepts the claim.Same with a stroller. The carrier has no choice but to ante up even if they think a fast one is being pulled and they know this
thats why to make up for it they press hard when a claim wasnt made according to their T&Cs.I know you dont like the analogy but same with a rental car they know some damage will get by them eg leaning your bag against the car in the back if thats where it got damaged.They close you out you go on your way and bingo they find the damage after its being cleaned. they too know they wont catch a problem every time and thusly unless you can prove it was damaged when you drove out of the lot , its your fault
Now I have no idea if your stroller was in fact damaged when you left it on the jetway or if some ground personal or the plane itself damaged it as you claim. Thats partially no longer important and both sides cant prove what they say is the truth. what it comes down to is OSs T&Cs and they say a person must put in a claim while at the airport and not afterwards. You admit you didnt do that (with good reason) but the T&Cs dont say its OK not to make the report if you have good reason or didnt notice it. I guess if you can show why the T&Cs arent correct or reasonable maybe you will have a leg to stand on, my gut and decades of experiences with the airlines says otherwise.
If they were gonna throw you a bone they would have already as has been done to many folks even when the carrier had its T&Cs to fall back on OS decided in your case no bone, would this have been the 1st bone they would have thrown you? Or do you have a nice file of complaints with them till now?
Thanks for a constructive comment, although must admit that I am still puzzled/don't quite understand your rent-a-car analogy. Just to clarify - I don't remember saying rental car analogy does not apply (albeit in an opposite direction). As far as TCs go, Austrian themselves say you can claim within seven days 'if you can prove it'. Well, I can't. Other than sending them photos taken very next morning. Similarly, as you mentioned, reporting it at the airport would not have provided any proof either. The only way to prove it if you wish to go to that detail, would be to take photos before and after each trip. So whatever they say in their TCs, it is a total BS (how do you prove something that is unprovenable; the same would apply to each piece of luggage on every flight - how can passengers ever prove it happened on their particular flights, unless there were CCTVs in cargo holds, and airlines willingly gave that footage to passengers? Or let's use even better imagination - shall we now equip each and every piece of luggage with cameras and all sorts of other sensors?
So, TCs saying 'prove that this happened on our flight' is just plain BS.
Originally Posted by
Often1
It takes at least two parties to make a contract and this is OP's contract (COC) as well. If he thought that a Vienna court was the wrong venue for a petty, spiteful, and vindictive lawsuit, he should have found an air carrier willing to agree to a venue amenable to such lawsuits.
A 'willingness' of a party has nothing to do with a court declaring itself competent to hear the case.