BA offloads couple at Portuguese military base over business class row [LGW-KIN]
#167
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Well 11 pages on I'm still unsure what to make of this.
BA diverts a plane to the Azores, inconveniencing hundreds of customers on their outward and return journeys to Kingston. A 65 year old man is allegedly disruptive and has to be restrained and then deplaned.
A fellow traveller who became involved was also deplaned and amongst other things claims that the 65 year old was told by crew to defecate in his seat when he needed the toilet.
The police however say that the passengers "were not arrested and the matter was closed as far as they were concerned".
Surely a passenger who is such a danger that he needs restraining and the flight diverting warrants a stronger response than being told to be on his way?
There must be more to this than meets the eye. Either the passenger has got off extremely lightly, or BA has made a complete balls up of the whole thing.
BA diverts a plane to the Azores, inconveniencing hundreds of customers on their outward and return journeys to Kingston. A 65 year old man is allegedly disruptive and has to be restrained and then deplaned.
A fellow traveller who became involved was also deplaned and amongst other things claims that the 65 year old was told by crew to defecate in his seat when he needed the toilet.
The police however say that the passengers "were not arrested and the matter was closed as far as they were concerned".
Surely a passenger who is such a danger that he needs restraining and the flight diverting warrants a stronger response than being told to be on his way?
There must be more to this than meets the eye. Either the passenger has got off extremely lightly, or BA has made a complete balls up of the whole thing.
#168
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 37
Any BA 777 Captain is going to be hugely experienced, with various links to medical and company contacts from the air.
I highly doubt this was a knee jerk reaction and would have been very carefully considered and done very reluctantly. The crew and BA would really not want to divert an aircraft for no reason, which would undoubtedly have cost them a fortune and resulted in severe disruption. People forget that contrary to popular belief on here, it's actually in the airline's interest for the schedule to run entirely as planned and published. They do not want to delay passengers and have aircfraft and crew out of position just for a laugh.
The bad guy here is the gentleman who decided he was more important than anyone else's holiday. After protesting about how poorly he was, what was he expecting BA to do once he refused to move. After the UA furore they were hardly going to manhandle him back to his seat were they? Maybe the crew dived into Lajes thinking he would get off in a few minutes and that they would have enough available duty time left to continue to destination. If the gentleman in question wasn't co-operative getting off then perhaps this resulted in a longer delay than expected and the crew timed out meaning it was more sensible to return to base and get a fresh crew than be stuck at Lajes.
I highly doubt this was a knee jerk reaction and would have been very carefully considered and done very reluctantly. The crew and BA would really not want to divert an aircraft for no reason, which would undoubtedly have cost them a fortune and resulted in severe disruption. People forget that contrary to popular belief on here, it's actually in the airline's interest for the schedule to run entirely as planned and published. They do not want to delay passengers and have aircfraft and crew out of position just for a laugh.
The bad guy here is the gentleman who decided he was more important than anyone else's holiday. After protesting about how poorly he was, what was he expecting BA to do once he refused to move. After the UA furore they were hardly going to manhandle him back to his seat were they? Maybe the crew dived into Lajes thinking he would get off in a few minutes and that they would have enough available duty time left to continue to destination. If the gentleman in question wasn't co-operative getting off then perhaps this resulted in a longer delay than expected and the crew timed out meaning it was more sensible to return to base and get a fresh crew than be stuck at Lajes.
#169
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Munich, Algarve, Sussex or S.F Bay Area
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, A3*Gold, AA Plat, HH Gold, IHG Plat Amb, Marriott Plat
Posts: 4,163
#170
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Singapore
Programs: HHonors Diamond; A3 *Nothing ; BA Exec. Club Gold
Posts: 1,689
One of the passengers on the flight, who was quite reasonable and did not go screaming about brutality or whatever, has been told by BA that he won't get a penny in compensation.
https://twitter.com/British_Airways/...20837926666240
https://twitter.com/British_Airways/...20837926666240
Lost time would have an undefined value. A lawyer's lost time might carry a different hourly value than an admin's lost time.
If there was compensation it would be based on liability and regulation (EU261). In this case I would argue it is an event outside BA their control and no payments are due. Duty of care would still apply, rebooking, sustenance and a hotel room if the delay is overnight.
It would be interesting to see people taking damages from the party who caused this but that seems unlikely too.
Globalist
#171
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
My point here is that if the passenger was as dangerous as is made out, requiring the plane to be diverted at great expense and inconvenience, why wasn't he arrested for endangering an aircraft?
#172
Join Date: Jul 2008
Programs: I am a lowly ant
Posts: 1,751
Well, to be honest "compensate for lost time" is a lose term. I would reply the same as BA did.
Lost time would have an undefined value. A lawyer's lost time might carry a different hourly value than an admin's lost time.
If there was compensation it would be based on liability and regulation (EU261). In this case I would argue it is an event outside BA their control
Lost time would have an undefined value. A lawyer's lost time might carry a different hourly value than an admin's lost time.
If there was compensation it would be based on liability and regulation (EU261). In this case I would argue it is an event outside BA their control
My guess is the passenger is not aware of EU261, hence the rather vague request for 'lost time'. And certainly BA's Twitter staff are not going to spill the beans!
#173
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 37
Maybe you didn't read the press coverage then as I thought that was exactly did happen? According to the DM reports "he says he was 'ambushed' by six members of staff who tied him up by his hands and feet before allegedly dragging him back to his seat in economy"
My point here is that if the passenger was as dangerous as is made out, requiring the plane to be diverted at great expense and inconvenience, why wasn't he arrested for endangering an aircraft?
My point here is that if the passenger was as dangerous as is made out, requiring the plane to be diverted at great expense and inconvenience, why wasn't he arrested for endangering an aircraft?
The only people who know exactly what happened are the crew and airline and they came to the decision they did based on that.
#174
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
BA's Twitter team generally make it up as they go along so I doubt they would know the EC261 position.
I'd be surprised if there was any compensation here, unless it can be proved BA were negligent. Then again United refunded everyone on the Dr Dao flight after the humiliation they suffered.
I'd be surprised if there was any compensation here, unless it can be proved BA were negligent. Then again United refunded everyone on the Dr Dao flight after the humiliation they suffered.
#175
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: LHR / IAD
Programs: BA/AA/UA
Posts: 2,955
Speaking of Dr Dao, who led a master class and just settled (already!) for an "undisclosed sum"... I think we're going to be seeing more and more of this. For many people, the potential downside to such stunts is, in relative terms, fairly trivial.
#176
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,405
If passenger will change their game, then so will the airline and go after each and every passenger that delays an aircraft or forces them to divert because that passenger was drunk and/or unruly.
#177
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 740
They write what their readers want to read. My grandmother reads the DM and she will have found this chap guilty purely based on his appearance.
#178
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: BAEC Bronze
Posts: 388
They were discussing this on the radio. Apparently once you've been restrained, you stay like that until the plane has landed. The crew are concerned what you are going to do, given they've had to restrain you in the first place. When it's got to that stage, you are potentially (or seen to be) a danger to either yourself, or others. Who knows what havoc might ensue when the restraints are removed 35k feet in the air...
#179
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,065
They were discussing this on the radio. Apparently once you've been restrained, you stay like that until the plane has landed. The crew are concerned what you are going to do, given they've had to restrain you in the first place. When it's got to that stage, you are potentially (or seen to be) a danger to either yourself, or others. Who knows what havoc might ensue when the restraints are removed 35k feet in the air...
None of us here has heard all the evidence, or indeed ANY evidence, reports in the paper - any paper do not constitute sworn statements and are there to sell papers not to present facts or even be even handed, much depends on the political standpoint of the editorial team. There is no way we can judge what happened or whether it is correct, especially as few here have the background r understanding of the relevant laws and how they apply to this situation, yet many feel they can criticise one side or the other, or decide there was some conspiracy theory or claim to know what factors weighed upon the commanders decision.
#180
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 63,804
If there was compensation it would be based on liability and regulation (EU261). In this case I would argue it is an event outside BA their control and no payments are due. Duty of care would still apply, rebooking, sustenance and a hotel room if the delay is overnight.
From the "extraordinary circumstances" compensation aspect, given the little information I have read here (plus some Galley FM), I've no doubt BA will decline all requests, and they will have a strong argument on their side, after all the captain made an extraordinary decision for safety of his crew, passengers and aircraft. There is, however, another argument that can be made for compensation (which immaterially I don't agree with), namely the Article 5 clause which says this protection for BA kicks in if this condition is fulfilled: "which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken." In other words, a passenger could make the arguable case that BA's own actions lead to the diversion, and that given the passenger was fully tied down, he was unlikely to cause a problem if the aircraft continued to Jamaica. So the passenger would have to convince the court that continuing to Jamaica was reasonable - rational in legal terms. In the event of a "fine line" argument, the Regulation has a consumer protection bias. I would not like to call this, I suspect the passenger might win at appellate level, or even at Small Claims given the right lines of argument. I am not a lawyer.
So in short, I can very much understand that the captain genuinely felt the best thing to secure his aircraft was to offload the disruptive passenger - that's not a legal process, it's a safety judgement. The police will not necessarily see that safety judgement as important, merely whether a crime was committed and whether it is worthwhile prosecuting the alleged perpetrator(s). Two different things, they won't always coincide.