Originally Posted by
Alex Henebury
Update:
Ba finally got in touch after I made a claim they apologised but say the weather is out of their control and accept no liability. presumably the CEDR / CAA route it is.
I understand the weather is not their problem but they have failed too grasp the idea that the replacement flight we were on was already late as the initial plane was cancelled due to a technical fault. If we had left on the original flight on time we would not have subsequently been held up by the weather.
They would rather sit us on plane for hours and hours thinking they are not liable as its now a weather issue . Rathe than cancel the flight as they should have done and reschedule - which would obviously have cost them more.
would you sit passengers on for 12 hours , 24 hours , 36 hours ion the weather was bad?
They also knowingly sent us off into a storm and towards a destination with extreme heavy storms.
There has to come a fair point when you cancel a flight especially if theres no food and drinks on board.
Any advice welcome on the next steps and whether I have a valid case or not?
I would also ask advice on their email to me on the 17th august where they state it was due to a technical issue - is that not them admitting liability ? ( technical not weather - as we needed up on that delayed flight due to a technical fault):
Fromm BA:""We’re very sorry your flight needed to be diverted, which resulted in a significant delay and issues with catering. We know this isn’t what you expect when you travel with us and we understand the inconvenience this must have caused.Your flight was diverted due to a technical issue. We take all reasonable measures to avoid disruption to a flight and we always consider if there are any other alternative solutions before we make a decision. Please be assured that we’re using this experience to¿help us focus on where we need to improve""
thanks all
Originally Posted by
Alex Henebury
Hi , less than 8 weeks but I did the make the claim procedure and this is definitely in response to that as they then emailed me offering £95 for the taxis/food we spent. Not mentioned in other correspondence.
I agree , no point dealing with BA.
Big question - is it a technical fault ? ( as the initial plane was cancelled and we were moved to a replacement which flew later) or could they validly argue the weather issue?
To my mind at best a bit of both for Ba - given had they not had the initial plane fault we wouldn't have flown on the later plane and then hit those weather conditions.
And that email they sent stating technical faults has surely been admittance they cant now step back from?
perhaps all a question for CEDR
This is a classic example of firefighting in the deliberately understaffed 261 claims dept. You’ve had two different staff look at two different disruption files and the latest failing to look at the full file. The first person however, did indeed see it.
Yes the original email is all you need, ignore the email from someone who just brushed over the case and nearly saw the remark “DIV. WX @ DEST” and saw it as a cut and dry fob off.
‘RevmanOps’ and FLY both have disruption files for the flights(s) including details of the airframe change, crew change and no doubt all of the ATC slot updates too. I could see them in a system called FICO on the day too, hence my running commentary earlier in the thread.
BA will have to prove there was never an aircraft change and never a crew change after the swap. Technically you’ve had two crew changes as the IB airframe would be operated by IB crews.
So ignore the fob off about weather and stick to the facts of the day.
These two images show that even if you hadn’t diverted, you would have been in scope for UK/EU261 as the primary reason for the delay was a tech original aircraft and thena second crew change on the newly subbed aircraft and crew. This delay would have lead to a further updated Estimated Off Blocks Time (EOBT) and subsequent delay as start up delays were becoming onerous due to the WX. Without the tech delay you would have been fine and BA have admitted the root cause was indeed a tech aircraft.
As an aside I do take it that both you and the OP have written to the CAA reference the conditions and lack of food and water onboard? The more these events get ignored, the more BA wants to get a way with it, and believe me they do! I can’t understand why no one in global ops or ARC thought fit to activate disruption boxes to be delivered to the gate or aircraft side. Truly staggering and no doubt a prime example of how the damage of the cruz era will take forever to undo. I’d imagine the flight had several different IRS’/TRC/Ms whatever BA are calling them this month. And when crew changes happen messages never get passed on and seen through to a conclusion.
So do please inform the CAA via email.
[email protected] (from a health perspective) and
[email protected]
Let them know you are already in the CEDR/MCOL process and that this is about passenger welfare and not UK261. It really is completely unacceptable and the crews are just as sick of it as you are too.
As pointed out by CWS, cease emailing BA and just go down the process.
EDIT - jet lagged rant removed and more salient information added. BA admitted tech aircraft, that’s the information to use, all other delays are as a result of the tech aircraft. Any wether delay on the original departure time on the original aircraft would not have amounted to a delay long enough for EU261 triggers.