Originally Posted by
craigthemif
Yeah, if LIS-MAD was cancelled then IB should have no problem issuing a refund for the cancelled flights. I assume that would be more attractive than getting the Avios back for the replacement flight. And IB should consider themselves lucky to avoid duty of care and delay compensation and just pay out.
The problem with "the gate agent refused to re-book" is that there is nothing in writing. EC261 works more smoothly when people are actually re-booked by the airline and actually delayed. It's not quite so straightforward when airlines say something verbally and passengers say "that's not good enough" and make their own alternative arrangements.
So since flight was cancelled, then OP can now ask combinations of
A) refund LIS-MAD-LHR
B) free rebooking to a future LIS-MAD-LHR
C) 400 eur (using LIS-LHR 1565km, haha, just beyond the 1500km for 250eur)
AC or B
Then there may also be the option of asking for the difference in cost between BA LIS-LHR (avios + TFC) and original LIS-MAD-LHR (cash) instead, let's call this D) but there wouldn't be C).
Intuitively AC or B is higher than D.
But if D is actually higher (eg there was no avios option, only $$cash, I'm not sure it'll work anyway as
i) is LIS-LHR "
under comparable transport conditions" as LIS-MAD-LHR?
ii) Only after the flight is cancelled (or delayed by 3 hours to be considered cancelled) is the airline liable for rerouting, estimated arrival time doesn't seem to matter? There's no gun jumping?
The gate agent not offering rebooking to LIS-LHR is correct, before the cancellation and possibly even after. And can IB (or even BA) gate agents (at out stations or even at MAD) do rebookings anyway, seem a CS job?
Good that OP's quick thinking yielded AC or B in exchange for the BA avios + TFC.