Dec 11, 2017, 3:39 am
Last edit by: corporate-wage-slave
BA current newsflash here / London Cancellation list for Tuesday here
Rebooking policy for operating flights on Monday and Tuesday here / EC261 main thread here
ba.com/helpme one stop shop on BA.com giving lots of advice and pointers to where to claim expenses.
For EC261, delay/cancellation compensation is not payable for this event but BA is still liable for the Regulation's “Right to care” provisions. Refreshments can be claimed after 2 hours of delay departing (3 hours for flights longer than LHR-Rome, 4 hours for longhaul), £200 guideline for hotels - OK to book your own and charge back. £50 guideline for taxis. Meals, drinks and communication costs are also covered. Keep / photo receipts. If on a Buy on Board aircraft, use Avios to buy items - it will be faster to refund. For missing baggage, it's OK to claim essential items, such as clothing, toiletries. Keep / photo the receipts.
Rebooking policy for operating flights on Monday and Tuesday here / EC261 main thread here
ba.com/helpme one stop shop on BA.com giving lots of advice and pointers to where to claim expenses.
For EC261, delay/cancellation compensation is not payable for this event but BA is still liable for the Regulation's “Right to care” provisions. Refreshments can be claimed after 2 hours of delay departing (3 hours for flights longer than LHR-Rome, 4 hours for longhaul), £200 guideline for hotels - OK to book your own and charge back. £50 guideline for taxis. Meals, drinks and communication costs are also covered. Keep / photo receipts. If on a Buy on Board aircraft, use Avios to buy items - it will be faster to refund. For missing baggage, it's OK to claim essential items, such as clothing, toiletries. Keep / photo the receipts.
Bad weather disruption - UK/AMS/NW Europe - 10 & 11 December 2017
Dec 14, 2017, 5:47 pm
#586
Join Date: Jul 2014
Programs: Mucci de l'Arbitrage
Posts: 927
Ignore this argument at your peril. Do not assume this is a black and white case, it isn’t. The level of de-icing capability will certainly form part of an airline’s defence in such a claim. You must look at all the circumstances of the situation you found yourself in to establish your entitlement to compensation under EC261. Whilst the onus is on the airline to prove the reason for the delay/cancellation you must be ready to rebut their defence. The airline will argue that in all the circumstances of the situation all reasonable measures had been taken.
Dec 15, 2017, 12:26 am
#587
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Switzerland
Programs: AY+ Platinum, SK Gold, BAEC Silver, airbaltic VIP, Radisson VIP
Posts: 6,531
Current TAF for Heathrow:
METAR:
-----------
EGLL 150650Z 32007KT 290V360 5000 -RA SCT014 BKN016 04/02 Q0992 TEMPO 4000 SHRASN BKN012
TAF:
-----------
TAF AMD EGLL 150623Z 1506/1612 26008KT 9999 SCT025
BECMG 1506/1509 33012KT
TEMPO 1506/1511 7000 SHRA BKN008
PROB30
TEMPO 1506/1509 4000 SHRASN
PROB40
TEMPO 1511/1518 34015G25KT 8000 -SHRA BKN012
BECMG 1606/1609 27006KT
So a 30% probability of showers rain snow.
Here we go again, I hope not!
METAR:
-----------
EGLL 150650Z 32007KT 290V360 5000 -RA SCT014 BKN016 04/02 Q0992 TEMPO 4000 SHRASN BKN012
TAF:
-----------
TAF AMD EGLL 150623Z 1506/1612 26008KT 9999 SCT025
BECMG 1506/1509 33012KT
TEMPO 1506/1511 7000 SHRA BKN008
PROB30
TEMPO 1506/1509 4000 SHRASN
PROB40
TEMPO 1511/1518 34015G25KT 8000 -SHRA BKN012
BECMG 1606/1609 27006KT
So a 30% probability of showers rain snow.
Here we go again, I hope not!
Dec 15, 2017, 1:34 am
#588
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Plymouth, UK
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 1,159
I am just claiming what I believe is rightfully mine to claim. At the end of the day, they will only pay out if they believe I am entitled to it under the rules. I see no problem making a claim. It isn't as if I am trying to get money I am not entitled to. If I am genuinely not entitled to it then I wouldn't want it! However, the danger here is that people are so used to bad service that they don't consider it unusual enough to make a claim and so the airlines get away with not performing as the law requires them to. If people genuinely believe they have a claim for compensation then I would like to see everyone claim. That way the airlines might take the law more seriously and make the investment necessary to give a better service.
Dec 15, 2017, 2:34 am
#589
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, TK Elite, HHonors Lifetime Diamond
Posts: 7,691
I am just claiming what I believe is rightfully mine to claim. At the end of the day, they will only pay out if they believe I am entitled to it under the rules. I see no problem making a claim. It isn't as if I am trying to get money I am not entitled to. If I am genuinely not entitled to it then I wouldn't want it! However, the danger here is that people are so used to bad service that they don't consider it unusual enough to make a claim and so the airlines get away with not performing as the law requires them to. If people genuinely believe they have a claim for compensation then I would like to see everyone claim. That way the airlines might take the law more seriously and make the investment necessary to give a better service.
Dec 15, 2017, 2:41 am
#590
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
But why do you think it is rightfully yours to claim? You are referring to some law that requires airlines to perform in a certain way, but I am not aware of any such law. Could you please elaborate on that? The EU Reg excuses airlines from the requirement to pay out compensation when extraordinary circumstances exist (and, weather is one of them). The question here is whether what BA did to avoid delays and cancellations was reasonable. Short of stopping the rain in the morning to allow de-icing and ordering other airlines not to fly so that BA's flights could get priority in the queue, I am not sure what 'reasonable' measures the airline could have taken. It was not a simple issue of there being fewer de-icing machines than needed. And, even what is reasonable in terms of the number of de-icing machines is also a question. It is simply unreasonable to keep a lot of de-icing machines and employ staff permanently to operate them (you can't just hire someone an hour before bad weather and train them) for Heathrow. You seem to be saying that the airline did not do enough and it does not matter whether 'enough' was possible and/or reasonable. The law (if you are referring to the EU Reg) does not require airlines to do everything no matter the costs to operate in bad weather; the measures must be reasonable, and you seem to be missing that word in all of your claims.
However it's snaxmuppet's right to make the claim if he feels he has a case, and if so the court will decide what is and isn't reasonable.
It will be interesting to see the outcome.
Dec 15, 2017, 3:01 am
#591
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, TK Elite, HHonors Lifetime Diamond
Posts: 7,691
Well it's your right to have that view, and I admire your spirit in defending BA whatever the eventuality.
However it's snaxmuppet's right to make the claim if he feels he has a case, and if so the court will decide what is and isn't reasonable.
It will be interesting to see the outcome.
However it's snaxmuppet's right to make the claim if he feels he has a case, and if so the court will decide what is and isn't reasonable.
It will be interesting to see the outcome.
And, I am not trying to dissuade snaxmuppet from making a claim. I am interested in what the basis for the claim is. Some posters speculate that it was a matter of not having enough de-icing machines, which is simply not true. There was a period of time when de-icing was not possible at all. There is also the issue of space constraints etc. So, it is interesting to hear what snaxmuppet knows about what BA did and what BA could have (reasonably or unreasonably) done (in addition to buying more de-icing machines which probably would not have helped anyway).
Dec 15, 2017, 3:12 am
#592
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 18,618
The (non-confirmed) story that's been mentioned is that only 1 of 6 de-icing rigs was available.
Dec 15, 2017, 3:50 am
#593
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
I am not defending anyone. I am looking at the situation from a different point of view. I don't understand why it is a bad thing to look at all the facts before making judgements.
And, I am not trying to dissuade snaxmuppet from making a claim. I am interested in what the basis for the claim is. Some posters speculate that it was a matter of not having enough de-icing machines, which is simply not true.
And, I am not trying to dissuade snaxmuppet from making a claim. I am interested in what the basis for the claim is. Some posters speculate that it was a matter of not having enough de-icing machines, which is simply not true.
The only fact I can recall you mentioning was the one about all airlines having flights cancelled which I think we agreed was not correct.
Dec 15, 2017, 3:55 am
#594
Join Date: Jul 2014
Programs: Mucci de l'Arbitrage
Posts: 927
Smaxmuppet present their facts in a logic manner and no one bar BA can present the other side of the story. No point getting worked up, not making judgments: we are not real judges, just armchair ones.
Dec 15, 2017, 4:12 am
#595
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, TK Elite, HHonors Lifetime Diamond
Posts: 7,691
Dec 15, 2017, 4:30 am
#596
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Plymouth, UK
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 1,159
But why do you think it is rightfully yours to claim? You are referring to some law that requires airlines to perform in a certain way, but I am not aware of any such law. Could you please elaborate on that? The EU Reg excuses airlines from the requirement to pay out compensation when extraordinary circumstances exist (and, weather is one of them). The question here is whether what BA did to avoid delays and cancellations was reasonable. Short of stopping the rain in the morning to allow de-icing and ordering other airlines not to fly so that BA's flights could get priority in the queue, I am not sure what 'reasonable' measures the airline could have taken. It was not a simple issue of there being fewer de-icing machines than needed. And, even what is reasonable in terms of the number of de-icing machines is also a question. It is simply unreasonable to keep a lot of de-icing machines and employ staff permanently to operate them (you can't just hire someone an hour before bad weather and train them) for Heathrow. You seem to be saying that the airline did not do enough and it does not matter whether 'enough' was possible and/or reasonable. The law (if you are referring to the EU Reg) does not require airlines to do everything no matter the costs to operate in bad weather; the measures must be reasonable, and you seem to be missing that word in all of your claims.
I make the claim on the basis of EC261 and my understanding of it. If EC261 suggests I have the right to compensation and BA or a judge agrees then who are you to say I shouldn't have it? You seem to want to defend BA at all costs. Good for you. But I don't agree with your assessment of the weather situation or of how reasonable the response of BA was. I will make the claim and see if it is paid. If I can put together a reasoned argument as to why I feel I am entitled to compensation under EC261 and it gets rejected then we will know won't we
As to me missing the word "reasonable"... I believe it is totally unreasonable to operate an airline without having adequate de-icing provision in a location where de-icing is required in normal operations. Sure, if it was in say, Florida, then it might be reasonable to not have any de-icing provision at all on the basis that they don't get de-icing conditions every year. But at LHR, where de-icing is likely to be required in winter and where they know they have a capacity issue where delays in de-icing are likely to create significant knock on effects then no, I don't think it reasonable to have what appears to be such a limited de-icing capacity. If you disagree then I respect that but there is little point in just disagreeing here all the time. You have made your point and that is your perogative. But also, it doesn't mean that I, or anyone else, has to agree.
Dec 15, 2017, 4:48 am
#597
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 721
Current TAF for Heathrow:
METAR:
-----------
EGLL 150650Z 32007KT 290V360 5000 -RA SCT014 BKN016 04/02 Q0992 TEMPO 4000 SHRASN BKN012
TAF:
-----------
TAF AMD EGLL 150623Z 1506/1612 26008KT 9999 SCT025
BECMG 1506/1509 33012KT
TEMPO 1506/1511 7000 SHRA BKN008
PROB30
TEMPO 1506/1509 4000 SHRASN
PROB40
TEMPO 1511/1518 34015G25KT 8000 -SHRA BKN012
BECMG 1606/1609 27006KT
So a 30% probability of showers rain snow.
Here we go again, I hope not!
METAR:
-----------
EGLL 150650Z 32007KT 290V360 5000 -RA SCT014 BKN016 04/02 Q0992 TEMPO 4000 SHRASN BKN012
TAF:
-----------
TAF AMD EGLL 150623Z 1506/1612 26008KT 9999 SCT025
BECMG 1506/1509 33012KT
TEMPO 1506/1511 7000 SHRA BKN008
PROB30
TEMPO 1506/1509 4000 SHRASN
PROB40
TEMPO 1511/1518 34015G25KT 8000 -SHRA BKN012
BECMG 1606/1609 27006KT
So a 30% probability of showers rain snow.
Here we go again, I hope not!
Dec 15, 2017, 4:49 am
#598
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, TK Elite, HHonors Lifetime Diamond
Posts: 7,691
You are entitled to your point of view and I respect that but I don't have to agree.
I make the claim on the basis of EC261 and my understanding of it. If EC261 suggests I have the right to compensation and BA or a judge agrees then who are you to say I shouldn't have it? You seem to want to defend BA at all costs. Good for you. But I don't agree with your assessment of the weather situation or of how reasonable the response of BA was. I will make the claim and see if it is paid. If I can put together a reasoned argument as to why I feel I am entitled to compensation under EC261 and it gets rejected then we will know won't we
As to me missing the word "reasonable"... I believe it is totally unreasonable to operate an airline without having adequate de-icing provision in a location where de-icing is required in normal operations. Sure, if it was in say, Florida, then it might be reasonable to not have any de-icing provision at all on the basis that they don't get de-icing conditions every year. But at LHR, where de-icing is likely to be required in winter and where they know they have a capacity issue where delays in de-icing are likely to create significant knock on effects then no, I don't think it reasonable to have what appears to be such a limited de-icing capacity. If you disagree then I respect that but there is little point in just disagreeing here all the time. You have made your point and that is your perogative. But also, it doesn't mean that I, or anyone else, has to agree.
I make the claim on the basis of EC261 and my understanding of it. If EC261 suggests I have the right to compensation and BA or a judge agrees then who are you to say I shouldn't have it? You seem to want to defend BA at all costs. Good for you. But I don't agree with your assessment of the weather situation or of how reasonable the response of BA was. I will make the claim and see if it is paid. If I can put together a reasoned argument as to why I feel I am entitled to compensation under EC261 and it gets rejected then we will know won't we
As to me missing the word "reasonable"... I believe it is totally unreasonable to operate an airline without having adequate de-icing provision in a location where de-icing is required in normal operations. Sure, if it was in say, Florida, then it might be reasonable to not have any de-icing provision at all on the basis that they don't get de-icing conditions every year. But at LHR, where de-icing is likely to be required in winter and where they know they have a capacity issue where delays in de-icing are likely to create significant knock on effects then no, I don't think it reasonable to have what appears to be such a limited de-icing capacity. If you disagree then I respect that but there is little point in just disagreeing here all the time. You have made your point and that is your perogative. But also, it doesn't mean that I, or anyone else, has to agree.
Dec 15, 2017, 5:03 am
#599
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: LON
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 96
Question about claims - complicated one
Hey guys, I will keep this as short as possible but this is about my nightmare on Sunday and how I should claim:
Original flights
BA953 MUC-LHR 15.55-17.00 (10.12)
BA105 LHR-DXB 20.40-07.45 +1 (10.12)
Further impacted flights
BA951 MUC-LHR 12.50-14.00
So, first things first the MUC-LHR and the LHR-DXB flights were in different booking.
At 10.17am on 10.12.17 our flight to LHR got cancelled, but all other BA MUC-LHR flights were still operating. Did not get through to BA on the hotline after being on hold for over 60 mins and decided to just cab it to the airport as we saw that there were seats available for the 12.50 flight BA951. When we got to MUC the check in staff said they are not BA employees and cannot do anything interms of rebooking us etc. They advised a number we should call but that just said "due to high number of calls we cannot take you call right now and ask you to call back later", so we bought the last two tickets available for the BA951 flight so we would make it to Heathrow in time for the DXB flight - these seats however were in Club while our original journey was in Eco.
This flight BA951 was then delayed and we departed around 5.5 hours later at 18.30. 30 mins before landing we were informed that we were diverted to Leeds as could not land in Heathrow anymore.
In Leeds we were kept on the plane for 3 hours as Leeds airport did not have busses to get us from the plane to the terminal.
Then we were informed BA wont be able to fly us to LHR the next day and we were to take taxis from Leeds to Heathrow and BA would reimburse later.
Luckily my BA105 Dubai flight also got cancelled. Luckily because they were different bookings and I was worried BA would not care that it was them that delayed me, so I was rebooked on the same flight the next day.
What I am wondering now is, how do I claim for this best? Of course I would like the money back for the flight I had to buy additionally to get from MUC-LHR, especially as the flight that BA had eventually rebooked me on for the next day was ultimately also cancelled.
How do you advise I best claim for all these issues and what do you think the chances are that BA will reimburse me for my costs of the MUC-LHR flight - I know they will reimburse the Taxi etc, so the main question is around how to get the ticket fee back from them.
Also, are there any other things I can claim for due to the amount of flights I had to take being cancelled and arriving at Heathrow more than 24 hours late?
Thanks for your advise
Original flights
BA953 MUC-LHR 15.55-17.00 (10.12)
BA105 LHR-DXB 20.40-07.45 +1 (10.12)
Further impacted flights
BA951 MUC-LHR 12.50-14.00
So, first things first the MUC-LHR and the LHR-DXB flights were in different booking.
At 10.17am on 10.12.17 our flight to LHR got cancelled, but all other BA MUC-LHR flights were still operating. Did not get through to BA on the hotline after being on hold for over 60 mins and decided to just cab it to the airport as we saw that there were seats available for the 12.50 flight BA951. When we got to MUC the check in staff said they are not BA employees and cannot do anything interms of rebooking us etc. They advised a number we should call but that just said "due to high number of calls we cannot take you call right now and ask you to call back later", so we bought the last two tickets available for the BA951 flight so we would make it to Heathrow in time for the DXB flight - these seats however were in Club while our original journey was in Eco.
This flight BA951 was then delayed and we departed around 5.5 hours later at 18.30. 30 mins before landing we were informed that we were diverted to Leeds as could not land in Heathrow anymore.
In Leeds we were kept on the plane for 3 hours as Leeds airport did not have busses to get us from the plane to the terminal.
Then we were informed BA wont be able to fly us to LHR the next day and we were to take taxis from Leeds to Heathrow and BA would reimburse later.
Luckily my BA105 Dubai flight also got cancelled. Luckily because they were different bookings and I was worried BA would not care that it was them that delayed me, so I was rebooked on the same flight the next day.
What I am wondering now is, how do I claim for this best? Of course I would like the money back for the flight I had to buy additionally to get from MUC-LHR, especially as the flight that BA had eventually rebooked me on for the next day was ultimately also cancelled.
How do you advise I best claim for all these issues and what do you think the chances are that BA will reimburse me for my costs of the MUC-LHR flight - I know they will reimburse the Taxi etc, so the main question is around how to get the ticket fee back from them.
Also, are there any other things I can claim for due to the amount of flights I had to take being cancelled and arriving at Heathrow more than 24 hours late?
Thanks for your advise
Dec 15, 2017, 5:21 am
#600
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 63,821
How do you advise I best claim for all these issues and what do you think the chances are that BA will reimburse me for my costs of the MUC-LHR flight - I know they will reimburse the Taxi etc, so the main question is around how to get the ticket fee back from them.
Also, are there any other things I can claim for due to the amount of flights I had to take being cancelled and arriving at Heathrow more than 24 hours late?
Also, are there any other things I can claim for due to the amount of flights I had to take being cancelled and arriving at Heathrow more than 24 hours late?