Ldnn1

Yes but all you're saying here is 'we can't let anyone leave as we may have to find their bag'. That's why I asked above whether pax were given the option to deplane individually and abandon the flight. I think for a tarmac delay of 6+ hours, that surely must be an option.

Globaliser

Isn't there a risk here of unreasonably using hindsight? While many people would agree with you that it would raise eyebrows to make a single decision to keep everyone on board for six hours when they could be in the terminal instead. But we don't know the nature of the problem, the information that was available at various times, the timeline of the search for and preparation of the replacement aircraft, and so on. It may be that at any time, nobody thought that the passengers would be on board the broken aircraft for more than (say) another 90 minutes or so, with a bus transfer direct from aircraft to aircraft being the most efficient way of doing this (can you imagine giving 300 people instructions on how to use the walkways to get from T5C back to T5A?), but rolling problems meant a rolling increase in the delay. We simply don't know what the decision-making timeline was on the day.

I think I've had three long BA delays because a replacement aircraft was needed. On two occasions, this was discovered before boarding commenced, and so boarding never commenced. On the third occasion, the fault was discovered during taxi, and there was a rolling delay while successive attempts were made to resolve the problem, both before and after returning to the gate. At all times, the hope was that we could get going again within 30-45 minutes if the next repair attempt succeeded, but in the end we were on board for about four hours before the flight was finally cancelled (as we had hit the curfew that evening).FWIW, it looks like the OP may have been on BA275 on 11 November. Scheduled 1550-1830. Actual time of departure 2201 (6:11 behind schedule), actual time of arrival 0048 (6:18 behind schedule).I would be astonished if, had anyone had asked to abandon their journey, they would have been prevented from doing so. You don't need to get as far as 261/2004 to get to that position, but I think that 261/2004 provides a definitive answer anyway.

I think that in a situation like this, though, it's pretty rare to find someone who wants to abandon the trip - at least, that is my experience.

mikeyfly

I find 10,000 very stingy, they might sell for £175 but they’ll only get you around £70 off a future flight.

The €600 was paid as this is legislation, the actual comp of £70 of value for a cash paid First seat for the above problems is a disgrace. Agreed you won’t likely get much more, however I believe it should be significantly more. Three years ago I got £450 evoucher for a dodgy (potentially dangerous...) plug in First or 50,000 Avios. I found the evoucher very generous.

BA compensation is truly dire

Ldnn1

Which is exactly why the US has regulated to enforce deplaning after 3 hours. I'm no expert on how that plays out in practice and no doubt on particular occasions it can create more inconvenience than benefit, but there is a good reason for it.

lordgaino

Yes correct, I was on BA275 on 11/11.

The delay was initially two hours whilst they looked for another plane. When the new plane was located, it was decided a further four hours would be required to prep the aircraft. At that point we were told that they had to serve dinner since without doing that the crew would be unable to rest sufficiently to meet their obligations. We went along with it, since what other choice did we have. Again, the crew were superb in the difficult circumstances.

A number of PAX asked to get off the plane and were convinced otherwise by the crew, who rightly pointed out that you might as well hang around and see what happens. It was a Saturday afternoon flight to Vegas - most people had plans for when the plane arrived on the other side and alternative direct flights are minimal.

With hindsight its hard to see what more they could have done at the time, with the obvious exception of opening the bars on the planes... maybe they were concerned people would get too drunk with a six hour delay and another 11 hours in the sky.

I guess I feel that given the significant sum paid for the ticket (which to me is a lot of money and was a treat to myself), being confined to a plane for six hours and the fact that I missed a whole evening of a very short trip, that EUR600 doesn't exactly cut it.

I don't suggest for one minute that this isn't a high class problem, but if I had been traveling economy then the compensation would represent pretty much a full refund. In my case, it represents basically a small discount on the fare.

It particularly irks me, since I recently had to attempt to change a different ticket to a another date for early next year and they refused to help me out. Yet when there is a problem that is their fault, they also refuse to help you out.

Oh well, c'est la vie.

corporate-wage-slave

I don't know the precise policy, but on BA if you can physically leave the aircraft (so connected to the airbridge etc) then you won't be barred from leaving. In extremis captains will authorise an airbridge to be reattached if someone is insistent. That said they are not going to advertise that service and they may certainly dissuade you, but you won't be stopped. If you make a nuisance of yourself in so doing it may not place you in a good position for being rebooked, but if there were good reasons why overnighting is best (health issues) then it would be accommodated. It's not to be done lightly, without going into the details there are quite significant implications if someone offloads, which can easily lead to flight cancellations.

corporate-wage-slave

That bit is (in my opinion) addressed by the CRA, but you have to do like with like here: so if you had wanted off the service and rebooked to the next day, BA would not be in a position to fall back on their one-sided conditions of carriage any more. But to cross-position [drinks with a meal] to the [fare rules and conditions] isn't realistic in a large airline in my opinion.

Globaliser

Isn't the US rule simply after three hours (or four hours for an international flight) you have the right to disembark if/when the aircraft can be safely positioned to allow you to do so? AIUI, it is not a rule to "enforce deplaning" in the sense that the airline must tip all passengers off. And AIUI the time only begins to run when passengers can no longer freely disembark, which would seem broadly to correspond to pushback, and opting to disembark would not entitle you to rebooking except in accordance with your fare rules.

If the OP's flight was still at the gate, it would seem that even the US rule would not have been violated if (as c-w-s says) nobody would have been prevented from disembarking if they did not want to travel.

I can think of situations in which I have been when it would have been an enormous inconvenience to have required everyone to disembark after three hours. The most recent one would have resulted in a 24-hour delay to my journey. As in the OP's situation, the compromise that was reached meant that the crew were still able to operate a flight for which they would otherwise have gone out of hours.

Often1

No, the EC 261/2004 compensation is what the EC has determined the delay ought to yield to the passenger. BA is not under any obligation to pay out customer service gestures above what the law requires.

The Regulation may well be a shambles and have become what it was never intended to become, but that is on the EC and the ECJ, not on the carriers subjected to nanny rules.

Perhaps BA ought to pay more to those crammed into WT than those relaxing in F? What is fair and right has been selected for BA and its customers.

Ldnn1

As I understand, an important part of the US rule is that the airline is required to notify passengers every 30 minutes that they are free to deplane. This is reflected in the published policies of all the major carriers, e.g. AA's below:

The definition of tarmac delay also covers the period prior to doors closing if the passengers have not been advised they are free to deplane.

In my view this is very important. Passengers should be told of the right to deplane and can then make a choice as to whether to wait it out or give up and make other arrangements. Most will naturally wait it out, even if it drags on for hours and hours. However from the OP's description it seems that passengers on his flight were not generally given, or were not aware they had, the choice to leave (although a few who pro-actively asked were ultimately convinced to stay).

Globaliser

If that is the only difference between what the US rule requires and what happened on the OP's flight, that is in context only a detail.

It would have been different if the situation had been that at which the US tarmac delay rule was aimed, which was flights which had pushed back and were stranded for hours on the airfield somewhere between the terminal and takeoff.

MADPhil

I believe that the US rule is just that pax must be given the opportunity to get off after three hours. If departure seems imminent then they are often persuaded not to exercise that option so it would seem that BA would have been compliant in this case. What we don't know is how soon BA knew how long the delay would be, though at some point they knew it was long enough to serve dinner.

EuropeanPete

You win some you lose with with EU261. Unfortunately for people in First the 600EUR doesn't seem all that generous, but it's not too bad for someone on a cheapo ticket down the back. Obviously BA could do more, but with some discretionary miles in your direction I think you've done as well as could be expected.

Misco60

The inconvenience of a delayed departure is the same no matter how much the ticket cost and which cabin the passenger is sitting in, and I see no reason why the level of compensation should relate to the fare paid.

EuropeanPete

I think one could argue it both ways, but what's most relevant is what the regulation actually is, as BA will understandably be operating within the context of that environment.