Could not a pax failing to appear and an off load be manipulated by passengers? Say a large school party were going skiing to the USA - yep I went to the British museum, my nephew went to Aspen - the kids hear about this €600 wheeze, one goes missing for a couple of hours and all the party miss their connecting flight. The party of 24 kids plus teachers now all get €600 each, nice tickle that.
|
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
(Post 26057428)
You seem to be entirely on the right lines here. I think you can also research Ash v. Thomas Cook Airlines, the bird strike case; and Davies v. British Airways the crew sickness case; to illustrate why the bar on extraordinary is fairly high. Both are county court judgements so not precedent forming, but the various materials should give you additional pointers.
|
Originally Posted by vbroucek
(Post 25957595)
That's the way to do it! BTW, you're flying out on my BD - you will be lucky!!!
Consolation is an extended in BA T3 First lounge visit enjoying a magnificent Merlot :D |
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
(Post 26057428)
You seem to be entirely on the right lines here. I think you can also research Ash v. Thomas Cook Airlines, the bird strike case; and Davies v. British Airways the crew sickness case; to illustrate why the bar on extraordinary is fairly high. Both are county court judgements so not precedent forming, but the various materials should give you additional pointers.
Have to say I'm having a bit of fun getting my detailed arguments together, spending too much time on it when it's only £200 at stake, but find it fascinating. Waiting for the directions questionnaire etc. to arrive next. http://www.kennedyslaw.com/article/s...lnessaviation/ |
Follow-up Q that the knowledge of the board may help me with! Is the offloading of unaccompanied baggage an airline policy, or a national regulation / requirement?
I had a look at the European security regs and they say that unaccompanied baggage can be transported if it has been through appropriate security measures. But I can't find anything relating to what that actually means in the UK context - seems (kind of understandably) that they don't like publicising all the rules around these things... Although I have come across interesting docs on the Heathrow baggage screening system and Manchester Airport has some nice PowerPoint slides of their process. If I draw a blank here I'll try again in the security forum |
Originally Posted by lorcancoyle
(Post 26088280)
Follow-up Q that the knowledge of the board may help me with! Is the offloading of unaccompanied baggage an airline policy, or a national regulation / requirement?
I had a look at the European security regs and they say that unaccompanied baggage can be transported if it has been through appropriate security measures. But I can't find anything relating to what that actually means in the UK context - seems (kind of understandably) that they don't like publicising all the rules around these things... Although I have come across interesting docs on the Heathrow baggage screening system and Manchester Airport has some nice PowerPoint slides of their process. If I draw a blank here I'll try again in the security forum |
Originally Posted by rapidex
(Post 26088593)
Delayed 24 hours in a secure area or re screened or opened and visually inspected by an approved person.
|
Originally Posted by aama
(Post 26055059)
My case against BA with flight-delayed.co.uk just hit the 6-week limit for BA to answer the claim and they failed to do so.
They're probably now going to use the national enforcement body. Any knowledge of how long does that usually take in the UK? |
Originally Posted by aama
(Post 26100541)
Just got info from flight-delayed.co.uk that BA came through and is willing to pay the full 600€! So no need for CAA thank god!
|
Originally Posted by lorcancoyle
(Post 26100883)
Do you think it was worth the €150 fee? Thought from your earlier post it was a slam-dunk. It would be very handy if "the authorities" (CAA, Eurocontrol etc.) made airlines publish the flight delay codes they report for any flight that's delayed.
The whole compensation system needs an EU controlled "compensation center" that would oversee every flight delayed over 3hrs or cancelled. It's now too easy for airlines to decline the payment with excuses. Many people just leave it there and don't pursue the compensation. Edit: Oh and of course now that it didn't even reach CAA or Court, the 150€ felt a bit hefty. But it is what it is. |
If someone could help me or clarify some writing (regards EU261 Art. 5 (1) iii)).
The early-bird MUC-LHR (onward to JFK) got canceled and was rebooked onto a noon LH flight into JFK. There was at no point any information being handed out verbally/written and upon asking for information regarding air passenger rights this request was basically denied. In accordance with that nothing from the obligatory things was done, neither providing care as in meal/drink vouchers, nor communication. Also the option of refund vs. reroute was not given, also no alternatives were being offered (except for EWR instead of JFK...). That is part one. Second part is, the LH flight ultimately opened its boarding doors at T1@JFK at something like 2:05 hrs after the initial STA of BA113. However, the flight stats claim that gate arrival is 1:55 hrs later. So first -- does that (regardless of their failure to provide any information/care) mean that there's technically no means to claim comp? Second -- does the failure of BA's ground staff to both provide information and care have any consequences? Primarily in terms of outcome for the pax? Regarding the wording of the EU261, Art. 5 (1) iii). I think this would be the dealbreaker. However, there was no advance notice AT ALL, we even waited several minutes in the check-in queue until they finally announced that there'll be a change to the flight status. And clearly the exceptions laid out in i) through iii) are concerned with advanced notice of the flights cancellation. To bring in another datapoint. Even if my claim would end up being without any substance, I've overhead conversations between the agents and other pax who were e.g. flying to Lagos or some other more exotic destinations who were delayed at least until the late afternoon, but mostly the next day... |
Originally Posted by cvision
(Post 26101845)
If someone could help me or clarify some writing (regards EU261 Art. 5 (1) iii)).
The early-bird MUC-LHR (onward to JFK) got canceled and was rebooked onto a noon LH flight into JFK. There was at no point any information being handed out verbally/written and upon asking for information regarding air passenger rights this request was basically denied. In accordance with that nothing from the obligatory things was done, neither providing care as in meal/drink vouchers, nor communication. Also the option of refund vs. reroute was not given, also no alternatives were being offered (except for EWR instead of JFK...). That is part one. Second part is, the LH flight ultimately opened its boarding doors at T1@JFK at something like 2:05 hrs after the initial STA of BA113. However, the flight stats claim that gate arrival is 1:55 hrs later. So first -- does that (regardless of their failure to provide any information/care) mean that there's technically no means to claim comp? Second -- does the failure of BA's ground staff to both provide information and care have any consequences? Primarily in terms of outcome for the pax? Regarding the wording of the EU261, Art. 5 (1) iii). I think this would be the dealbreaker. However, there was no advance notice AT ALL, we even waited several minutes in the check-in queue until they finally announced that there'll be a change to the flight status. And clearly the exceptions laid out in i) through iii) are concerned with advanced notice of the flights cancellation. To bring in another datapoint. Even if my claim would end up being without any substance, I've overhead conversations between the agents and other pax who were e.g. flying to Lagos or some other more exotic destinations who were delayed at least until the late afternoon, but mostly the next day... On the arrival time, the relevant point in time is the opening of the doors. The fact that flightstats reports an arrival time 1H55 later than your original schedule is not in itself conclusive. You should therefore be entitled to compensation if the delay was over two hours. if you have made a note of the precise time at which they opened the door, it would help. |
Originally Posted by cvision
(Post 26101845)
If someone could help me or clarify some writing (regards EU261 Art. 5 (1) iii)).
More to the point, there is no sanction in this area and I'm not aware of the CJEU ruling on the issue - in a sense that's a circular argument since any case that gets to the CJEU is bound to be best on awareness of the Regulation. Unsurprisingly airlines have interpreted the rules as "be in a position to provide", though that isn't what the regulations state. If you specifically asked for information, and they specifically refused then you could complain to the CAA or your MEP, but you'd be wasting your time, frankly. BA can say "it's all on our website", which it is. The one thing I can't make out is the reason for the cancellation - was it weather or ATC based? If so you're going nowhere anyway. The two hour rule could apply, one thing the CJEU has certainly ruled on is that the time relates to "doors open" ready for passengers to depart. So if you took an accurate time of that, you may be in with a shout, but with a further complication. If the rerouting was scheduled to get you inside 2 hours, but you were a bit late on that then there is an argument - which airlines use - to say "that's good enough, we did our best, LH screwed up, see LH". There's another argument that says the Regulation says "arrival time", not "scheduled arrival time". So it would be good to know what the scheduled arrival time was here. I have to say on the face of it the rerouting was within the spirit and intent of the Regulations, by the looks of it, there's a debate on whether it's within the letter of the Regulation. But a few more details needed here in terms of the times. For the Right to Care, the rules suggest food and drink in "reasonable" proportion to the delay (but no opt out if exceptional circumstances). So if the delay was a say 3 or 4 hours, I think they might get away with it. At 8 hours they certainly would not. |
First cheers to the extensive responses.
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
(Post 26102149)
Ok, the Regulations indeed say that airlines must provide information on EC261. Unfortunately they don't say precisely how that should be provided
Here comes one fishy point into play. I think I arrived at MUC at around 6.15ish. To add as a note here, I could've handled the whole rebooking situation probably better if I wasn't lacking sleep for the last 36 hrs. Upon proactively checking the BA app it showed BA749 delayed with an ~0845 ETA (~0900 STA). While queuing in the prio lane I observed some people being directed to the ticketing counter while others were checked-in as usual. When it was my turn I was (initially) told that there was a 1 hour delay and that I should head over too, which in itself was very interesting regarding a 1 hour delay only and the fact that there are multiple flights out of LHR to JFK. Anywho, before queueing up I called the Japanese BA line (0640AM CET) to see if they could reticket faster, which is they couldn't do due to airport control. When I got off the phone at around 0645 the - I assume ground manager - told everyone to queue up for rebooking as the flight was canceled. She explained to fellow pax next to me that there was a MECHANICAL issue since the day before that they've been working on since then. So no weather or ATC delay (also the BA crew has an overnight in MUC afaik, so no deadend). When it was my turn to be rebooked I politely demanded information regarding my air passenger rights according to European Union regulation. I was then told that she cannot and will not give me that and that I would have to call Customer Service, which is a really good advice with all west-European offices being closed. If you specifically asked for information, and they specifically refused then you could complain to the CAA or your MEP, but you'd be wasting your time, frankly. BA can say "it's all on our website", which it is. If the rerouting was scheduled to get you inside 2 hours, but you were a bit late on that then there is an argument - which airlines use - to say "that's good enough, we did our best, LH screwed up, see LH". There's another argument that says the Regulation says "arrival time", not "scheduled arrival time". So it would be good to know what the scheduled arrival time was here. I have to say on the face of it the rerouting was within the spirit and intent of the Regulations, by the looks of it, there's a debate on whether it's within the letter of the Regulation. But a few more details needed here in terms of the times. For the Right to Care, the rules suggest food and drink in "reasonable" proportion to the delay (but no opt out if exceptional circumstances). So if the delay was a say 3 or 4 hours, I think they might get away with it. At 8 hours they certainly would not. What makes me mad is not necessarily that I might miss out on some compensation, but the way who BA treated it on the ground. First telling everybody that the flight's been canceled and then reverting this back to an "indefinite delay", which then becomes a real cancellation less than two hours later smells very fishy to me. I have the feeling that this was an attempt to say "well it is just delayed for some time, not canceled, so we're not due any compensation or care". I overhead them say that the manager said that they should not say it'd be canceled but rather delayed without any estimate of how long. |
Well there is definitely a sign at the MUC check in desk, blue section at the bottom of the A4 sign, it's flat on the desk, and there's a sign on the MUC departure gate too, on the front side. Not giving the full letter on request is in breach of the regulation, however you look at it, but it won't get you far.
Irrops at airports are often poorly handled and it's difficult to come away from the experience with a positive impression. I doubt you could have done much more, and in the circumstances to get to NY within 2 hours or thereabouts was better than some other options. You could try the EC261 route (BA may have set the MUC flight for payment anyway since I'm sure there would be many passengers who were delayed over the time limits), but on the facts it may need some arguing, and a statement from you about when the doors opened (and any other evidence you have). I don't have high hopes, there again I guess you have little to lose. The alternative is to treat it purely as customer service remediation, and though you doubtless found it all annoying, it doesn't strike me as truly appalling experience. So I'm not overly confident that will get you more than a few Avios. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:17 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.