flozano

Hi all,

I have a MAD-LHR-NRT flight today in Club world, BAEC Gold.

The MAD-LHR leg is delayed a little (40 minutes), but it's late enough that I will miss my onward connection. Therefore, the (very nice) check-in agent told me that she would have to look for alternatives, as I was NOT going to make it in T5.

The option she gave me to arrive NRT was horrible, with Alitalia, so I suggested that they re-route me to MAD-LHR-HND, 2nd leg with JAL, and they accepted.

Now my booking shows my original flight to NRT and also an additional flight to HND a few hours later.

Anyway, I will make it to Tokyo almost 6hr later than my original booking. Am I entitled to claim any compensation?

I tried to understand the situation from former posts and the guide in first-page, but it's a connecting flight and I'm afraid it wasn't clear to me.

Dave Noble

The 1st option which you refused ; what time would that have got you to your destination?

flozano

I have no idea... She said Alitalia and I let her know that I was not going to fly Alitalia. Can they force-feed me an Alitalia flight or escape compensation?????

corporate-wage-slave

Yes, the point of the regulations is to encourage airlines to get passengers to their destinations efficiently, but not necessarily effectively! So any old bird would do.

If Alitalia's offering was going to lead to a longer than 3 hour delay at Narita, then you are still in with a chance for compensation under EC/261. But it also depends on the precise cause of the delay too.

If you give us some times, dates and more precise information then we can also advise you more precisely. A lot, actually, will depend on what was written on your PNR.

UKtravelbear

The regulation says 'rerouting under comparable transport conditions' so J for J etc (Article 8)

It does not say who does the comparison though.

The fact you don't like a particular airline is neither here nor there. Their obligation is to get you to your destination as soon as possible.

To my mind if you refuse that then you don't qualify for any compensation. Others may disagree.

flozano

Understood, thank you all.

gcuk

Had a quick check of schedules in the absence of extra info from OP and it looks like BA5 would get into NRT at 9.10am.
By electing to travel to HND, OP will only arrive at 3pm.
Alitalia would have got there at 10.30am according to their schedules.
Personally, I think the agent fulfilled EU261 obligations by offering an alternative which got OP to NRT 1hr 20mins late.
The fact the OP chose not to take that and elected to go somewhere else and get there 6 hours late is entirely their decision and I hope BA don't pay compensation. If BA do, it opens up the option for pax to reject every solution until they find one that creates an EU261 claim and that is just wrong.

flozano

I just asked, I did not reject the flight for that reason. I rejected because:
- it was not clear that I would not make it to the NRT flight.
- i honestly DON'T want to fly alitalia.

If no compensation is due, that'll be fine by me, I just asked.

Still, it's funny that I pay more for a flight to pick the airline that I want and, if something wrong happens, they can force me to fly a different airline or walk away without any compensation. Doesn't feel right either...

corporate-wage-slave

To my way of thinking the customer protection worked well here: the Regulations would have clobbered BA if they sent you to London, missed your connection and then held you for 20 (HND) or 24 (NRT) hours in London. They would have had to pay you €600, paid €150 in hotel costs and you would have lost a day. So to avoid that outcome they came up with an alternative that appears to get you to NRT within an hour or so of your timetable. Furthermore, given your unwillingness to go with AZ they came up with further options. Before the Regulations came in, the chances are you would have sent to London and left to wait overnight possibly without a hotel and only ex-gratia compensation. You weren't forced to fly AZ or even JAL: you could have insisted on a BA service, just it would have been the next day.

Incidentally, I have been on Alitalia longhaul a few times in the last year, and it is greatly improved from its nylon and electric colour scheme days. The leg to Italy isn't great but thereafter AZ isn't so bad at all.

Scallywag72

A rather belated thank you, cws!

Dave Noble

That you do not want to fly on Alitalia is your choice - however that flight , it seems, would have got you to your destination with minimal delay

Compensation is due is the airlline cannot get you to your destination within the specified timeframes - that you refused an option that would get you there close to schedule would make you ineligible for the compensation

It was your choice to take a service that would get you there 6 hours behin schedule rather than around 1.5 - it sounds to me that the airline acted very well in finding a replacement service

Batchtj

Hello All,
Apologies if this is rather long winded!
I am hoping someone can give me some advice/help. I have been dealing with a compensation claim since Feb2014 regarding a 5 ½ hour delay when flying from Glasgow/Heathrow/LA/LV in Oct 2009. We were boarded onto our flight in Glasgow, however, there was apparently an oil leak which resulted in us taking off 156 minutes late. This meant we missed our connecting flight to LA then onto LV. I received several replies saying that as I could have made my connecting flight to LA, I did not qualify. This was despite the fact our plane departed over an hour before we even got to Heathrow! I pursued the claim, and was finally told I did not qualify as it was an extraordinary circumstances, however, in light of the Hurzar success, I continued to pursue my claim. I received a reply in February saying that I DID in fact qualify but only for 50% as my delay was less than four hours. As this was again incorrect I wrote back saying I felt this was wrong. I then received a telephone call from BA apologising for their catalogue or errors and mis- information, but I DID NOT actually qualify for anything! However, as a goodwill gesture they offered me BA Credits. I asked why I wasn’t eligible and was told the reason was that domestic flights don’t fall into the EU261 guidelines. I said I didn’t agree, as our final destination was LV. She then went on to say my flight didn’t take off due to windy conditions it didn’t apply. I said this wasn’t the reason and she confirmed it was due to an oil leak. I was obviously somewhat angry, expressing they had already offered me 50% and now I was not even entitled to that. She said she already had BA Lawyers check it out and I definitely didn’t qualify. I refused to accept their goodwill gesture as I am unlikely to travel with BA anytime in the near future and asked her to put everything into an email, detailing her conversation in plain language, no jargon so I could investigate matters further. So, imagine my surprise when I received an email, apologising again for their errors and confirming their goodwill offer. Nothing was detailed at all.
Is anyone able to offer help as to what I can do or say to them now?
Thanks in advance.

nufnuf77

1) Have you sent an official request for compensation under 261/2004 back in Feb 2014? (Not just a complaint about late/missed connection, etc...)

2) If so, send them a letter detailing you disagree with their position,and that you are requesting £x for the delay on xx.xx.xxxx under the 261/2004 within the next xx days. Otherwise you will take it to small claims court. (Also make sure you are not 6 years out, as you can only claim for up to years years back, ?I am not sure how this applies to this prolonged claim?)

Batchtj

Hi Nufnuf77,

Yes all this was done way back in Feb 2014. thanks for your reply.

nufnuf77

I hope somebody who has experience with claims taken to MCOL past 6 years of flight date will be able to comment on your chances there(I am not a lawyer).