MSPeconomist

I'sd ask for more, perhaps in pounds rather than dollars since this is a British airline (would you use a voucher?), but only for the passenger who occupied the defective seat and not for the companion.

LBA_flyer

And then apologise for flying in their defective seat under the direction of their (defective?)staff despite obvious safety concerns and wasting hours of your life attempting to sort out their massive error.

subject2load

Well, CWS you are the recipient of many, many bouquets from many members (including myself) here on FT - and justifiably so.

But methinks you might deserve some special sort of nomination for that particular understatement.

And not even a word of direct criticism of BA from you, I see, within your response there.

father_ted

That's pretty shocking. It's a pity you didn't take a photograph, because this would be in the national press by now in that case.

I'd encourage you to pursue them legally for a full refund of the affected sector. You paid for a seat, and you didn't get one! I would hope that any judge would be very sympathetic to you.

corporate-wage-slave

Um, my response was "sue 'em", which I think speaks for itself. But you can also look at post 13 if you want to see what I think about this. Moreover I've tried to be helpful in providing a link to a possibly useful case in the same state, and to which I also contributed. It's true that I haven't provided a rant, but the OP has plenty of that already, from those FTers who are better at it than me.

ben1991

A truly astounding and bizarre response from BA.

To put their offer into perspective, I got 5,000 avios early last year for replying unfavourably to the text they sometimes send after you've been in one of the Galleries lounge, asking for feedback...

T8191

Defective seats [plural], and thus operating illegally.

I do personally believe the issue is MUCH bigger than AirNurse+1's discomfort.

LBA_flyer

I agree T8191 .

fiona

You have just been treated with contempt.
So a seat really is not a given on this outfit.It brings to mind skyhigh airlines- the spoof airline commercials. What was their more- to fly more and to care less?? Sounds familiar.
They expect that by dragging things on and then giving you 5000 airmiles you will fed up and so give up. So you can put your miles towards another flight where they don't guarantee you a seat, or look into the legal route.
They dont deserve to get away with this.

Ber2dca

The more important bit is whether the letter from BA acknowledged it happened or not. Because the offer makes you think that they operate on the premise it never happened and this is just a token gesture to close a CR case.

I suppose if one sued them, one would be able to force them to produce the maintenance records of the concerned aircraft.

navylad

Agreed, particular given lack of evidence otherwise which would be essential to have a case, even a witness statement from someone not known to you would be useful, but alas I'm assuming this possibility is no longer possible.

I fear without proof this happened, you should settle for the 10K Avios, which I hope you will find useful in someway given this was your first BA experience (I'd have though you would have been better crediting to AA rather than BAEC)

V10

Well.

Nothing less than a full refund and compensation is due here, IMHO, with the regulatory authorities being involved.

In the event of an accident or even turbulence the passenger in that unserviceable seat could have been at significant risk. The amount due back to the OP should reflect the dangerous position that they were put in.

To be honest, if maintenance records can forget about this issue then BA deserve to be spanked for that, too.

peck

Ignore this nonsense. Why should you be scrabbling around taking photos of your cushionless seat, or requesting 'witness statements' when you get on a plane!? Seriously, please don't give up and escalate your complaint. The situation (and BA's response) is wholly unacceptable

The_Bouncer

Absolutely breathtaking!

Yes, it is definitely time to start being less nice now. I commend you for your patience and civility up to this point. But there eventually comes a time when you need to stop simply being walked all over.

The offer of 5,000 Avios is dismissive, insulting and downright arrogant. BA's response in this matter proves that they are not taking you seriously. I'm sorry to have to put it in such stark terms, but that is fact.

You now need to decide whether you are willing to be fobbed off and leave it at that, or whether you are going to fight this. If you are going to fight, you are going to have to fight hard to win this one.

Dealing directly with BA on this matter is not working and is obviously not going to work. You basically have two options open for continuing to pursue this. The courts or the press. Only you can decide which of those, if either, you are more comfortable dealing with.

Frankly, if it were me, I would have been on the phone to the Daily Mail within a week.

This is the key to it. If they have admitted liability in writing, then you have them exactly where you want them.

navylad

It's not nonsense, its looking factually. One individual alleged an incident happened, they have no evidence of this other than their word. Meanwhile, an airline provides evidence of a maintenance log that doesn't show an issue, statements from multiple cabin crew who deny the incident.

If it did happen and the OP had evidence of this, then they should pursue it; armchair lawyers saying someone else is talking nonsense because they are looking objectively at the evidence highlights the serious challenges from taking advice from an internet forum (and that's ignoring the unfriendly posting).

By all means the OP can choose to pursue it, the odds, on the basis of the evidence presented here, are certainly stacked against them and it is very easy for people to type a few sentences to tell an individual to use their time and considerable money to take it to court, its not their time nor money.

WRT compensation for potential risk, generally, this doesn't happen. If this event did happen, then compensation for the discomfort would be payable. It trms of risk, this would be down to regulatory fines not compensation IMHO.