Originally Posted by
prestonh
It is my understanding the pax accepted the LHR-IAD itinerary after the LHR-EWR cancellation. 2 questions 1)Why would the pax not have arranged for a IAD-EWR flight at that point? 2) if pax knowingly accepted diversion to IAD without IAD-EWR flight and now complaining about not having one, perhaps this was a bad decision by the OP (regretting their choice of going to IAD without a connection). Why would the pax accept an itinerary in LHR that did not have confirmed seats all the way into EWR? I must be missing something.
you are
This is was all one discussion with one agent.
my OP on this thread was actually about the impact on the schedule and an anecdote on what I thought and still think was bad service recovery.
the pax will submit the taxi and Acela tickets as expenses under EC261 in addition to the compensation claim as is very common under EC261 when someone has to fly to another destination and make their own way as the fastest/most reasonable way of getting home.
UA could have avoided that by providing an F seat from DCA but didn’t.