Old Sep 18, 18, 2:12 pm
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 39,388
Originally Posted by rlnnpt View Post
Sorry to drag this back up, but I canít understand why BA are fighting so hard on issues with the Trent 1000 - surely these are just effectively billed back to RR en masse? Or have RR already reached their liability cap on this?
Unlike some other cases, the RR aspect is extraordinary circumstances, but what CEDR (and I have no doubts the courts) are suggesting is the bit that is under BA's control - dealing with customers and getting them from A to B at least approximately in line with what they booked - isn't being done properly. Or rather BA haven't presented the evidence to show they have taken all reasonable measures (done the planning, rebooked people adequately, run alternative services, hired in more lease aircraft etc) to mitigate the issue. It's a useful reminder that extraordinary circumstances isn't a full "get out of gaol" card on its own. The relationship between BA, Boeing and Rolls Royce need not detain the passenger, however knowing how BA operates, it wouldn't surprised me if BA took on some of the risk themselves, or perhaps reinsured it. But I suspect we will never know the specifics of this, this falls squarely under the ambit of commercial confidentiality.
corporate-wage-slave is online now