Originally Posted by
corporate-wage-slave
I think this is unrealistic and one of the reasons why the Montréal Convention limits airlines' liabilities.
...
You order something from Amazon, it arrives a day after the guaranteed time. Amazon says that some elderly driver had an accident, the M6 was blocked, the Amazon vans were unable to travel. Is it realistic for Amazon to sue the elderly driver for the inconvenience of some purchase that arrives a day late?
I rarely disagree with you - your insight is incredibly useful but I think you are missing the fundamental point that people are annoyed with here. People paid BA to get them from A to B. BA have failed to do this, by outsourcing to an outside company their IT capabilities. It really is as simple as that.
Your analogy of Amazon attempting to sue an elderly driver on the M6 is frankly bizarre - and of course something that nobody has said should happen. You pay for a service, with a company, the onus is on the company to deliver. If they chose to outsource - that is fine - but it is the companies responsibility to get it resolved in a timely fashion.
No, nobody expects Amazon to then sue the delivery driver
To go further; are you suggesting someone, somewhere here is suggesting attempting to sue a check in agent? I simply do not get it. What a ridiculous thing to add to this story.
BA has failed to deliver because it chose to outsource. A customer has every right to complain about this and 'Oh but it isn't BA's fault' doesn't cut it here. Contract is with BA. Period.