Hello. Can I please get help with BA886 LHR-OTP. Over 5hrs late at destination and pax had to change plane before take off.
Originally Posted by
corporate-wage-slave
It was scheduled to depart at 09:25, boarded around 13:30, pushed back at 14:29 and with take off at 14:47. So massively late. I would have hoped the captain explained the weather issues earlier in the day, I'm guessing there was some technical issues too.
Thanks. What do you think are the chances of a success for a claim? Pax were deplaned and sent to a different gate, waited for about an hour and then BA sent buses to take them to another gate. Captain said it was a technical issue, but my family member in the plane does not speak English unfortunately, so I don’t have a clearer picture. What is BA’s official reason for the delay?
BA886 is very much in scope for UK/EU261
Originally due to be operated by G-EUUC which commenced the 6th March in fair Prague operating the BA853 back to LHR. That service had a CTOT of 0753 due to the regulation applied at the London end and got Airborn at 0756. Originally scheduled to arrive at 0820, it parked up at 0957. So far not too disastrous. Then, sadly and in true ‘British Original’ style, the airframe sustained damage at Door 1L (you can guess what caused it).
This damage required further investigation and as such G-EUUC is now not due to operate until the 8th at the earliest to head to GIB. Thus a substitute aircraft of G-EUUE came to rescue the scene.
G-EUUE started the 6th of March in Europe’s drawing room, Venice. Originally scheduled to depart at 0655, it too had a CTOT and this time an unsavoury 1009, now
that is a slot!! Airborn at 1012 it parked up at T5 bang on 1204.
So BA886 as you are already more than aware should have departed at 0925. It has had the following added as delay codes. RA 0234 (2:34 of reactionary delay due to late inbound aircraft) and DG 0028 (28 minutes of damage due to ground ops), all of which are disingenuous. The aircraft swap from G-EUUC to G-EUUE occurred at 1144. Standard working time for a 320 is IIRC 50 minutes at base so at 1234 you should have departed if this was a straight RA delay and G-EUUC hadn’t been damaged and swapped out. So realistically you were looking at 3:09 of reactionary delay which would rightly have been put down to weather and the subsequent CTOT allocated to G-EUUC operating BA853 prior to BA886. The damage is in BA’s control and not extraordinary and thus BA are fully in control of the subsequent 2 hours of delay.
The root cause for being over 5 hours late is the aircraft swap, however BA will try and pin it on the weather delay and ignore the damage and subsequent aircraft swap. Should it have been a straight 3 hour 9 minute delay (the actual flight actually made up 3 minutes Enroute) then BA would rightly be off the hook. Now they are very much on it but it will require CEDR. When you get to that stage do message back. They may of course decide to be honest, so let’s see. It is however indeed in scope for a claim.