lizban

No one is disputing your logic as being sound, simply disagreeing with you conclusion.

Surely it is perfectly acceptable and logical that given any set of circumstances, different people will think that different outcomes are the 'right' one?

That to me is a basic concept but to quote you

‘Oh well’

uk1

But you felt compelled to post a judgement on the OP's behaviour with an opinion he has made clear he hadn't sought. On a practical level, how exactly would you visulaise BA handle this?

Should the CC ignore the fact that a serious (for some) paid for facility hadn't been provided and not provide hassle-free facilities and procedure for compensating passengers? Would that improve customer service for the majority?

Or are you suggesting if they do, then the CC interrogate each customer on board along the lines of "You didn't have IFE. For those customers that would have used it if we had provided it we're offering compensation but not for those that wouldn't have used it. . So I'm going to ask you ... and I expect you to be completely honest and not to fib ..... if we had provided it ... would you have used it?"

lancefan

In that situation I wouldn't complain and try to get some sort of compensation from BA, but if the crew proactively came round offering compensation to everyone in the cabin or if customer relations contacted me after the flight offering some sort of compensation, then yes I would take it.

So I wouldn't go out seeking compensation but I would take it if BA off there own bat offered it to me.

bioblot

Do people really think compensation should be based on use of the service rather than the ticket that was paid for?

"In the opinion of our fight crew you appeared to be asleep and thus unwilling/unable to avail yourself of this particular aspect of our service, so no compensation will be awarded to you on this occasion"

V10

The airline has been unable to provide a part of its advertised service offering ultimately. To my mind it shouldn't make any difference whether the passenger uses it or not - they no longer have a choice in the matter.

What the passenger does have is a choice to determine whether they have been inconvenienced or feels short-changed after something that has, after all, been paid for but not delivered. Some may care more or less than others. It looks like good proactive customer service to me if the airline acknowledges the issue and offers some form of redress. All passengers are affected, even if they may not have been inconvenienced by it.

No one, least of all the airline or any other third party, should be sitting in judgement on that for them.

In the exact situation described I wouldn't be bothered but that's for me to decide just as it is for the passenger in the next seat.

lizban

Have you read my posts?

I said I am sure that the CSD handled it well. It was the best way to handle the situation. I would have simply poliely declined at this stage. On other threads there is an example of my handing back thousands of DC points so Ican say I wouldn't take it. If I had tried to use the IFE I would ahve been at the front of the AVIOS queue.

Maybe I should put it in big letters as people don't seem to understand or want to understand that I have no issue with the OP or others taking eth points, I'm chuffed for them.

I simply wouldn't.
(AS an aside are we honestly suggesting that when posting of FT we should not provide an opinion or have option on whether to provide an opinion directed entirely by whoever started a thread?)

uk1

Yes I have.... but have you read your own posts?

Your #6 opening post gave the very clear impression that you fully understood the OP's position - he had made it very clear - but that you were attacking him for doing so.

There is a difference between offering an opinion and attacking someone else for there's isn't there?

lizban

post 6 is a question - but IF that is seen as an attack (which it's not) then I'm sure my subsequent 'chuffedness' for him/her clarifies the position.

uk1

As others have said .... ah well ....

lighting

I've never booked a hotel room in my life expecting a car park space to be 100% included in my room booking at said hotel. How odd.

lighting

I'm sorry, this is getting ridiculous.

I think he's 100% due compensation as the ticket he bought included food. It makes no difference at all if he chooses to eat all the food or none of it.

lighting

Now you are merely back tracking from your original post on this subject;

Am I understanding this correctly?

You want compensating for somthing that you didn't use, had no intention of using but didn't work?

Could you explain to me what loss you are trying to be compensated for?

The above post clearly shows a person who doesn't think the OP is entitled to claim compensation as you questioned what he was being compensated for.

oiRRio

Same here when it happened on MIA-LHR last year in old F. I took the vouchers as I didn't have an Avios account. It seemed the CSD was very well prepared for such a scenario rather than it being a once-off.

lizban

Oh dear.

If I was the OP would I accept compensation - No
Do I think it should be offered - yes as it's simply not practicable for the csd determine who tried to use IFE and who didn't
Do I think it's due - no
Do I think that OP is doing anything wrong - No of course not

This has got crazy - partially my fault accepted!

Feel free to carry on I shall leave it there.

Globaliser

So, if I understand you correctly:-

1. [*]

I think you're right. This is getting ridiculous.