Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > British Airways | Executive Club
Reload this Page >

'Which?' target BA for EC261 petition - please sign

'Which?' target BA for EC261 petition - please sign

Old Jul 1, 2017, 10:22 am
  #151  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
Originally Posted by simons1
Personally I would say it's the party in breach of the regulations that should put things right. That is also what the wording of EC261 indicates when it says "passengers shall receive compensation" as opposed to passengers may claim compensation.

Of course there is a link between airline's profits and the amount of compensation they avoid paying, presumably that is why BA routinely rejects claims and also tried to force customers to claim duty of care payments from insurers recently until the insurer bodies embarrassed them into changing tack.

I have no issue if people are aware of their rights and decide to forego compensation. However I do have an issue if people are not made aware. My kids for example would have no idea what to do in such circumstances. Nor would my parents in their 80s. Maybe in some posters eyes 'getting away with it' is fair game, personally I don't think so.
Now I am no lawyer but at this stage surely no regulation has been breached? A circumstance has occurred which has made an airline liable, but unless they refuse to pay out the airline is NOT in breach of the regs...

(sorry about the capitals, using a phone)
Flexible preferences is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 10:33 am
  #152  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,168
All of the confusion as to whether extraordinary circumstances applied or not could easily be rectified if the EU hadn't added the silly clause in the first place.
Removing it altogether and slashing the compensation levels would make it easier for everyone.
HIDDY is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 10:41 am
  #153  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: BOS
Programs: BA Silver, Mucci
Posts: 5,289
Originally Posted by Flexible preferences
Now I am no lawyer but at this stage surely no regulation has been breached? A circumstance has occurred which has made an airline liable, but unless they refuse to pay out the airline is NOT in breach of the regs...

(sorry about the capitals, using a phone)
The regulation is breached thousands of time a day. Airlines are supposed to inform passengers of their rights at check-in. A notice stuck to the check in desk with a basket of luggage tags on top of it does not pass muster. This springs to mind.

It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying Beware of the Leopard.

Then there are the lies told to passengers when cancellations / downgrades / delays occur. Last year I was standing at the rebooking counter at LHR for a considerable amount of time, listening to the staff lie to passengers again and again.

And that's before we even get to what happens when claims are submitted.

I am in favor of anything that gives this law more teeth. Those who claim under EC261/2004 themselves but don't support actions to expand payments to all who are eligible because they think it would increase fares, are being more than a teensy bit hypocritical.
HilFly is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 10:49 am
  #154  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
Originally Posted by HilFly
The regulation is breached thousands of time a day. Airlines are supposed to inform passengers of their rights at check-in. A notice stuck to the check in desk with a basket of luggage tags on top of it does not pass muster. This springs to mind.

It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of the Leopard”.

Then there are the lies told to passengers when cancellations / downgrades / delays occur. Last year I was standing at the rebooking counter at LHR for a considerable amount of time, listening to the staff lie to passengers again and again.

And that's before we even get to what happens when claims are submitted.

I am in favor of anything that gives this law more teeth. Those who claim under EC261/2004 themselves but don't support actions to expand payments to all who are eligible because they think it would increase fares, are being more than a teensy bit hypocritical.
simons1 will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the anecdotal evidence you mention is what he was referring to when he said about breaching the regulations. I read it that he meant 'breach' as a circumstance that would trigger liability for compensation. As I see it this law has plenty of teeth - 600 euros for an arrival over 4 hours late - that's 2400 euros for a family of four. Wow.
Flexible preferences is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 11:11 am
  #155  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond *, IHG, Couples Romance Rewards
Posts: 2,319
Originally Posted by Flexible preferences
simons1 will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the anecdotal evidence you mention is what he was referring to when he said about breaching the regulations. I read it that he meant 'breach' as a circumstance that would trigger liability for compensation. As I see it this law has plenty of teeth - 600 euros for an arrival over 4 hours late - that's 2400 euros for a family of four. Wow.
In my experience BA has paid out very quickly on EC261 claims. I've had two and both got sorted out within 10 days. One for me long haul and one for a family of six short haul. No complaints, easy process. But perhaps having status helps...
firstlight is online now  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 11:17 am
  #156  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 2,196
Originally Posted by HilFly
The regulation is breached thousands of time a day. Airlines are supposed to inform passengers of their rights at check-in. A notice stuck to the check in desk with a basket of luggage tags on top of it does not pass muster. This springs to mind.

It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying Beware of the Leopard.

Then there are the lies told to passengers when cancellations / downgrades / delays occur. Last year I was standing at the rebooking counter at LHR for a considerable amount of time, listening to the staff lie to passengers again and again.

And that's before we even get to what happens when claims are submitted.

I am in favor of anything that gives this law more teeth. Those who claim under EC261/2004 themselves but don't support actions to expand payments to all who are eligible because they think it would increase fares, are being more than a teensy bit hypocritical.
I'm 100% in favour of making the process as easy as possible and discouraging airlines from not paying out legitimate claims.

There are broader public policy concerns however with the proposal to make compensation automatic.
TabTraveller is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 11:48 am
  #157  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brighton. UK
Programs: BA Gold / VS /IHG Diamond & Ambassador
Posts: 14,141
Originally Posted by HIDDY
All of the confusion as to whether extraordinary circumstances applied or not could easily be rectified if the EU hadn't added the silly clause in the first place.
Removing it altogether and slashing the compensation levels would make it easier for everyone.
Not sure about that. It was a recgonition that some cancellations were being made purely for commercial reasons - e.g. light load - rather than technical and that passengers needed to be compensated for it. (Or the airline fined by Government who would then keep the fines like they do for other regulatory breaches.)

The main problem now with the regulation have been the court decision(s) that it also applied to delays which wasn't part of the original regulation (other than duty of care). In the duty of care section there is no mention of 'extra ordinary circumstances'

If it was just cancellations then there would have been a lot less pushback by them on what are and are not extraordinary because the number of cancellations is relativly small compared to the number of excessive delays.
UKtravelbear is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 11:55 am
  #158  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brighton. UK
Programs: BA Gold / VS /IHG Diamond & Ambassador
Posts: 14,141
Oh and 'exreaordinary circimstances' is actually in the Montreal Convention which predates EU261
UKtravelbear is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 1:19 pm
  #159  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: BOS/MAN
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 168
Originally Posted by simonrp84
Go ask BALPA or check the parliamentary records, then.^
That's not how discussions work, you made the claim therefore you provide the evidence. Making a unsubsantiated claim then saying "you go look it up" proves nothing.
ObscuredByClouds is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 2:01 pm
  #160  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Originally Posted by simonrp84
Nope. Try again.
Well you made some comment about crews being put under pressure to exercise 'commander's discretion' to save money.

Then you said you weren't suggesting it happens on BA. So who are we referring to here?
simons1 is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 2:07 pm
  #161  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 2,196
Originally Posted by simons1
Well you made some comment about crews being put under pressure to exercise 'commander's discretion' to save money.

Then you said you weren't suggesting it happens on BA. So who are we referring to here?
Swinging wildly in the dark, Norwegian or Ryanair?
TabTraveller is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 2:57 pm
  #162  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by simons1
Then you said you weren't suggesting it happens on BA. So who are we referring to here?
I wouldn't dream of suggesting it has happened on BA.
simonrp84 is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 2:57 pm
  #163  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Around somewhere
Programs: Gold, Some red card and some hotel cards.
Posts: 702
Originally Posted by windowontheAside
This.

And I'd like to see some sort of consistency regarding payout. Surely once one passenger has been paid out under EU261 for a given flight, other claims should be processed without question. Or is there some kind of logic I am missing that says one passenger may be entitled under law, while others aren't?
Probably. I was on a flight from MCO which arrived in Gatwick 5 hours late but as I had another connecting flight on the same booking I still arrived at my destination on time. So should I have gotten compensation even though I wasn't actually delayed?
SonTech is offline  
Old Jul 1, 2017, 2:59 pm
  #164  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Around somewhere
Programs: Gold, Some red card and some hotel cards.
Posts: 702
I think the whole compensation payouts need changing. It should be restricted to the cost of the ticket up to the current or new maximum.
SonTech is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2017, 7:22 am
  #165  
NFH
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London (LCY)
Programs: BA bronze, Hilton gold, Marriott gold, IHG plat, Meli gold, Radisson gold, Hyatt disc, AmexPlat
Posts: 977
Originally Posted by Tim_T
If automatic payment came in, its very likely this would go to the original payment method. I suspect a lot of business travellers would not then be happy, and also those booked via travel agents may see "admin fees" appearing that would reduce their payment.
In 164 posts, Tim_T is the only person who raises this crucial point. Similarly Which haven't thought about it either, and nor has anyone who responded in their own forums:

https://conversation.which.co.uk/tra...ceo-alex-cruz/

https://conversation.which.co.uk/tra...tion-campaign/

How would airlines know each passenger's bank account to which any compensation (usually denominated in EUR) should be paid? Not every passenger is a simple consumer with only a GBP bank account and paying for their own flight with a UK debit card. Take the following examples of why the airline cannot automatically refund to the original card used to pay for the flight:
  1. The tickets were paid for with a credit card that earns points, airmiles or cashback etc. Any refund to the same card will cause a cancellation of any earnt rewards, which could exceed the rewards earnt for purchasing the flight.
  2. Refunding to a credit card gives an undue cost saving for the airline in that it receives a rebate of interchange fees; this cost saving causes the loss of benefits described above. This creates an undue loss of revenue to the credit card industry, which it would not tolerate in the long term.
  3. The party who paid for the flight might not be the inconvenienced passenger who is entitled to compensation. It is the passenger who is inconvenienced and therefore legally entitled to compensation, not the party who paid for the flight. Take the example of a business traveller who is significantly delayed on his return home on a Friday evening. Although his employer paid for the flight, it is the passenger who is entitled to the compensation.
  4. Although the flight might be paid for in GBP, EU261 compensation is usually due in EUR. In many cases, the passenger will have a EUR-denominated bank account and will want to receive compensation in the original round EUR amount without conversion to another currency such as GBP by the airline or a card issuer.
  5. The passenger might no longer be using the credit card used to pay for the flight, particularly for flights booked many months in advance. A refund to it would cause a credit balance on that credit card rather than giving the passenger money that can be spent anywhere such as with payees that do not accept cards.

The only practical way for this to work is for each passenger's bank account number for EUR compensation to be specified at the time of booking or in the passenger's frequent flyer profile. For example, I nearly always pay for flights in GBP with my American Express British Airways credit card, but I would always want EU261 compensation to be paid in EUR to my German bank account. How else could this work?
NFH is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

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.