Originally Posted by
SavvyTravel
Judging by the EC261 thread, it does seem to me that the 'engine problem' also meets the criteria because (not being technical in the slightest), BA have had plenty of time to avoid cancellations. Even if BA disagrees, as seems the case.
Originally Posted by
Confus
BA are indeed claiming that planned cancellations (i.e. ahead of time, not on the day) are caused by the EASA ‘airworthiness directive’ and so not covered by EU261. That’s not to say it won’t be paid, just that it has to be fought for. They won’t want it to become a test case but will push their luck as hard as people are willing to accept.
My experience with CEDR, that I reported previously, is that they did not find in my favour over a 787 Trent cancellation. So, BA may be learning that it is worth pushing back and sometimes it'll work out for them, either because of a good CEDR result or claimants becoming weary.