Frequentflyer99

What is very aggravating is that the US supervisor I spoke to last night said that during the recent strike (?) they did have authority to re-book people into a higher class. However, no such authorisation has come through from London in relation to the weahter delays. If she reqeusted it, a response would likely take "Several days".

I see that all the empty premium seats (and today's all J flight to LCY was offering 4 miles seats last night !!!!!) have now disappeared. I wonder who got them ???

Even more inexplicable is how VS has been flying a full NYC schedule but BA has not.

My real problem with the suggesiton of 'enjoying' the delay is that I am with my family at a top 5* hotel in NYC. I would have no wish to take them to a significantly inferior hotel of BA's choosing to provide an immemorable end to an otherwise very memorable holiday. Therefore I have cut my losses and paid big time for VS seats. I am lucky I can do that, but my loyalty to BA has taken a REALLY serious blow.

BTW, BA has actually offered me nothing in terms of assistance, hotel, etc. so the above is really rather academic in any event !!!

sunrisegirl

I know I can't change laws, but personally I think this is another example of why Britain should not be part of Europe. These stupid European laws that say an airline is responsible for an Act of God. Ludicrous in my opinion.

If this snow continues and BA has to compensate every passenger because of what Europe dictates, then we'll be broke by next week!! It just seems stupid to me when the snow is not BA's fault. Maybe I'm being too simplistic. Does a higher authority pay BA (and every other airline) back for making it fall out of the sky!!!

Who do I see to claim for lack of trains and buses in my area - is that covered under the same European cr@p?

Shona

Does/did VS have available seats or indeed any other carrier-that might have available seats-even through an indirect routing-to deliver you/your family to your destination sooner than a flight departing Sunday?

Whether those are offered to you-and the implications of not offering these seats to you-may be governed more by what that law delivers (especially EC 261/2004 and the provisions of the Montreal Convention) than whether BA has a "commercial policy" in place.

The offer of rerouting-and the implications of any failure to offer that re-routing-may be the aspect to consider this further.

Art 5 of EC 261/2004-and the required explanation of alternative transport may be the starting point.

Compliance may provide a significant burden upon a carrier ( especially at a time of high "stress" on available carrier resources)-but what are the implications upon non compliance of what the law provides?

The underlying issue is whether that "stress" is transferred to the passenger or whether it is borne by the carrier. That stress is felt in your hands in being somewhere you would rather not be (and any cost/losses attched with that)-the carrier's stress is the cost and resource in getting you there sooner rather than later.

There is, of course. likely to be a tension between the passenger's interests and the carrier's.

Similarly why would your stay during a currency of a delay awaiting a re-routed flight offering-by extending your existing lodging- not be a reasonable reaction to your predicament?

If you had been obliged to stay until a Sunday departure-on what basis could/might BA dispute the "reasonableness" of continuation of your stay at your present location? You would simply be staying put in consequence of the delay you are experiencing. Would it be more "reasonable" for BA to say that you/your family should decamp to other lodging?

pinkcat

Mainland Europe are absolutley responsible in this case the weather fronts shifted South and THEY are enjoying OUR mild winter if we are no longer part of Europe we could sue them to have our weather back

pinkcat

To the OP
it doesnt sound like BA at all, I can understand your frustration as we have had mysterious cancellations before from PHL and were only offered WT seats out of BWI or IAD, eventually I burst into tears and was "allowed" to fly home from EWR

Centipede100

Oh but the trains are, sunrisegirl!! Read all the c**p on the following link:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...14:0041:EN:PDF

And I understand that buses and coaches will also be covered under draft legislature before the Euro parliament!!

Cityboy62

pinkcat

now thats a bit more useful than the bendiness of bananas

Jenbel

One thing the EU have done is a great advance in consumer protection which I'm actually grateful for. While it might not be fair that the airlines, who are not responsible for the weather, are left responsible for looking after their passengers, it would also not be fair for the passengers, who are also not responsible for the weather, to end up having to bear all the costs themselves. It would also provide no financial incentive for the airline to get them home as quickly as possible if they didn't have to pay for such things as hotels... Now, some might consider it a sound business decision for example to chose to upgrade some of those in Y to get them out if there were only J or F seats available or to buy a ticket for them on a charter flight rather than have to provide them with hotels and food for several days. But that is a decision for the airlines as to how best to manage the costs to them in such events.

Andriyko

I actually had no problem accepting that BA is not responsible for the weather. What really really surprised me was that we were not allowed to be booked into F on any flight departing today simply because were are holding J tickets. The agent told me very expressly that he had no authorization to do that. Now, I understand that disrupted F passengers need to be re-accomodated as well, but why not give the remaining seats to other passengers? Does it really cost BA that much more than giving me a refund? I pointed out to the agent that these F seats would be gone as I could not believe that BA would fly with empty seats when there are pax stranded in NYC. I guess I was right - all F seats are gone on today's flights.
What surpised me the most though is how outdated BA's systems are. After I received an SMS that our flight was cancled MMB still showed our flight as operating and us as confirmed for that flight. I was hoping that the re-booking process was more automated. I actually had to call and wait for 50 minutes to talk to somebody to be re-accomodated. Seeing how all today's flights are zeroed out I fear that had I not called BA would leave me to deal with this situation myself. There was never going to be any re-booking on their part. A very very very poor showing. This makes me question whether I should trust BA with our future travels - should any disruptions happen BA will not do anything to help stranded passengers. I love BA, and am loyal to the airline - I was hoping that BA would show some love back...
P.S. I am too wondering why VS and AA did not cancel a single service out of NYC airports.

HIDDY

Look out for a new "inclement weather tax" being added to the cost of a ticket. @:-)

Andriyko

I strongly disagree with you. I think that it is just unfair to airlines. I think during weather disruptions airlines should do everything within their power - upgrade, reroute, waive fees, etc... But to hold them responsible for something beyond their control is not right. If you can't get somewhere because the roads are covered in snow and ice who do you blame in that case?
Anyways, for some reason BA customer service agents in the USA believe that during weather disruptions BA is not responsible for anything. And I had no intention to question that as I myself believe that it is not BA's fault that they had to cancel some services.

Disco Volante

BA doesn't have to compensate passengers where the cancellation is caused by extreme weather conditions:
and:
However it does have to provide care, for example the hotel accommodation and meals.

There is a good reason for this. It provides an incentive for airlines not to cancel flights, unless it is absolutely necessary to do so, and to minimise the inconvenience caused to passengers when they do. All airlines, BA included, have been guilty of cancelling flights for what are sometimes described as "commercial reasons" in the past.

Jenbel

Myself, for not being able to drive in those conditions. OTOH, I've never got stuck in snow yet, so I've not yet encountered that which you describe.

Weather happens, airports respond to it, as do airlines and passengers do as they are told. In a period of flight disruption, passengers are the ones who suffer the most, have the least control over the situation, and you'd make them entirely responsible for everything which happens to them?

So there's a snow storm on Tuesday, which means the airlines flight is cancelled that day. Unfortunately, their flights are booked solid for the next month. The passenger should be responsible for the costs of sitting around for a month waiting to get home when the airline cannot fulfill the contract it has made with the passenger to get them home? The airline should have no responsibilty to ensure that it fulfills its contract in a timely fashion?

If the airline does not want to accept the responsibility of transporting people, then perhaps it should not make the contract to transport them in the first place, and put itself out of business?

Centipede100

And some airlines are continuing to do precisely that, hiding behind the excuse of 'weather' to cancel flights. Indeed one of the LCCs cancelled >70 flights out of LGW today even though it is reported that other airlines are flying a mostly normal service from that same airport!

Cityboy62

PAUL PALMER

As I left JFK yesterday morning the 16.30 (inbound I think) had already been cancelled.

To answer your question re VS/AA. Last night the AA flight from JFK got into LHR - we did not. I reckon that this was something to do with parlking at T5. Both the others are T3 - my supposition only - but we were told that there were aircraft parked on taxiways. I have no verfication of this as I am in Lisbon where BA178 was diverted.