FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   British Airways | Executive Club (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club-446/)
-   -   The 2018 BA compensation thread: Your guide to Regulation EC261/2004 (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/1885572-2018-ba-compensation-thread-your-guide-regulation-ec261-2004-a.html)

NWIFlyer Feb 10, 18 1:10 am


Originally Posted by Janusian (Post 29400680)
I am not sure they would be entitled. I was under the impression that the compensation was all about end to end delay, i.e. the time you left your first ticketed airport to the time you got to the final one. In this case both the first and final were outside the EU, therefore EU261 would not apply?

You are confusing part of the legislation (actually a court decision on interpretation) with the scope. If the passengers were travelling on a Community (EU) carrier, all the provisions in EC261 apply.

IrritableTraveller Feb 10, 18 3:55 am


Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave (Post 29378489)
Yes, that sounds more plausible, in my head you were missing 30 minutes or so (and I deleted a sentence asking whether you had gone for a cigarette or something!) In which case the connection at that point was still just about do-able but stretchy, getting to UK Passports at 17:05 is too late for what was presumably still then expected to be a 17:30 departure (technically doors could close at 17:10). It wouldn't surprise me if the 21 minute delay to that service was due to them delaying baggage loading due to late connections! The bus between T3 and T5 takes about 12 minutes, there can be a 10 minute wait, then there is all the walking around T3 and a bit of T5, plus perhaps 10 minutes to get off the Vegas aircraft, so that makes it more plausible than your earlier post.

Do you know the reason for the delay from Vegas? That's the next part in the jigsaw.

Depending on the answer to that, it will be worth going back to BA and pointing out they may have the wrong date - it's a rather basic mistake but easily done if someone wasn't being careful.

So, BA have finally replied again and are still claiming I landed at 15:22. This isn't actually the time of the day after either, but it's only 5 minutes off which may be a recording difference. Has anyone come up against this issue before where BA are just repeatedly stating something untrue? It's the same person who keeps (rudely) replying to me which isn't helping.

I've now gone back and asked for documentary proof of this.

Does anyone know if the courts will accept flightstats info?

rapidex Feb 10, 18 4:06 am


Originally Posted by IrritableTraveller (Post 29400918)
So, BA have finally replied again and are still claiming I landed at 15:22. This isn't actually the time of the day after either, but it's only 5 minutes off which may be a recording difference. Has anyone come up against this issue before where BA are just repeatedly stating something untrue? It's the same person who keeps (rudely) replying to me which isn't helping.

I've now gone back and asked for documentary proof of this.

Does anyone know if the courts will accept flightstats info?

EU261 works on doors open time. Whilst this might not be relevant in your case as you had a connecting flight, doors open is when you could leave the aircraft not landing time.

Doors open time is recorded automatically by ACARS so BA will certainly have a record of this time.

IrritableTraveller Feb 10, 18 4:09 am

Flightstats shows landing 16:00, gate time 16:03. Husband's phone shows "we've landed" message sent at 16:07 when we were still on the plane - I'm not sure exactly when doors open was, I'm imagining a good few minutes after gate time. I don't know where this 15:22 is coming from at all

rapidex Feb 10, 18 4:14 am


Originally Posted by IrritableTraveller (Post 29400940)
Flightstats shows landing 16:00, gate time 16:03. Husband's phone shows "we've landed" message sent at 16:07 when we were still on the plane - I'm not sure exactly when doors open was, I'm imagining a good few minutes after gate time. I don't know where this 15:22 is coming from at all

Doors open time comes from the flightdeck door open warning system. This illuminates an amber warning in the flightdeck, and triggers ACARS to sent a "doors open" message to BA, presumably somewhere in Waterside. If you threaten BA with court action, their lawyers will have access to this, and will no doubt use it if they are in the right. Perhaps if you ask specifically for this, you might trigger someone to go and check.

IrritableTraveller Feb 10, 18 4:22 am

Thanks, I will ask for this specifically. I don't know how they've got this wrong - 15:22 feels, from memory, like it's probably about an hour off from when we actually were able to disembark.

sledge1 Feb 10, 18 4:55 am


Originally Posted by IrritableTraveller (Post 29400918)
So, BA have finally replied again and are still claiming I landed at 15:22. This isn't actually the time of the day after either, but it's only 5 minutes off which may be a recording difference. Has anyone come up against this issue before where BA are just repeatedly stating something untrue? It's the same person who keeps (rudely) replying to me which isn't helping.

I've now gone back and asked for documentary proof of this.

Does anyone know if the courts will accept flightstats info?

I have 3 times asked for documentary proof on a cancelled flight not qualifying for compensation all to no avail and no response to this one either and begs the question if its a deliberate BA tactic or they have only (Mod: employee name redacted per privacy rule) working in British Airways Customer Relations.

This following massage got a new auto response case No 17444433 on 15 Jan 2018 but no reply todate
Follow up string sent today 15/01/2018 for case reference is:17192333 Please do not let S**** More British Airways Customer Relations respond as she in two attempts has failed to answer or substantiate simple questions put t her.I am sending a this as a fresh case to get auto verification that you have received it as follow up e mails to you using case reference 17192333 get no acknowledgement or response. Shame on you. Accordingly if you do not respond within 10 working days to those 3 simple questions put to you on 3/12/2017 as below with independent supportive documentation I will commence legal proceedings against you along with abortive time costs.

Refueled Feb 10, 18 6:09 am

Hi All, new to the site. I just had a very interesting response from BA on my claim that I wanted to share with you.

I was due to fly from ATH to LHR T5 on Sunday 28 January with BA633 at 18:35. On my way to the airport I get a text and an email that the flight is “delayed” to 10:00 the next day (text came at 14:21). When I arrived to the airport and after waiting at a long queue at BA desk I mentioned that I have to travel on the same day as I had a meeting Monday morning. They suggested I book an alternative and claim back to BA.I did so and flew with Alitalia back to LHR T4 that evening via FCO (AZ721 and AZ210).

I then followed the link to claim compensation via BA. I asked them to refund my Alitalia tickets and for compensation for my delayed flight. They denied both. Here is what they said:

——-
“Thanks for your email dated 30 January, I'm sorry for the delay in responding to you. It's disappointing to read about your experience when you travelled from Athens to London Heathrow airport with us on 28 January. It must have been very frustrating, especially as you had a business meeting to attend, and I'd like to say sorry from everyone here.

Although I completely understand your reasons for asking, I regret that we're unable to reimburse the cost of your alternative flights with Alitalia. The reason for this is because this represents a 'consequential loss', which the airline's liability doesn't extend to cover. I realise this isn't the response you were hoping for, and I'm sorry to disappoint you.

However, you might be covered for this cost through your travel insurance, if you had any. Please let me know if there's any supporting documentation I can provide to help back up an insurance claim.

I'm afraid that we're also unable to offer any compensation for your delayed arrival into London Heathrow airport. We’ve declined your claim because our records show you didn’t travel on our delayed flight, BA0633 on 28 January. Since your replacement flight with Alitalia arrived at London Heathrow airport within three hours of your original scheduled arrival time, no compensation is payable under EU Regulation 261/2004. “
———-

So I am not getting compensation because I paid with my own money to get back to London and I’m not getting reimbursed for the tickets because they are “consequential loss”. I am obviously going to dispute both claims but wanted to also check if anyone else had any similar experience.

IrritableTraveller Feb 10, 18 7:28 am

They are refusing to provide the ACARS information; I keep getting responses from the same person just stating the time. My last email was to go back and ask for documentation to prove the ACARS doors open message and asking for the complaints address. She's responded saying "I’ve reviewed all of the information you’ve given us, however, our response will not change and we’re unable to respond to any further requests for compensation." then following it with details for the CEDR

Bunch of muppets!

Letter before action it is.

corporate-wage-slave Feb 10, 18 10:09 am

Welcome to Flyertalk Refueled, welcome to the BA forum. It's good to see you here and I hope we will see you in other parts of the forum and indeed Flyertalk, welcome on board.


Originally Posted by Refueled (Post 29401123)
I'm afraid that we're also unable to offer any compensation for your delayed arrival into London Heathrow airport. We’ve declined your claim because our records show you didn’t travel on our delayed flight, BA0633 on 28 January. Since your replacement flight with Alitalia arrived at London Heathrow airport within three hours of your original scheduled arrival time, no compensation is payable under EU Regulation 261/2004. “

Right, this goes back to earliest days of EC261 when "cancellations" turned into "delayed service". If it was a cancellation there is no question that EC261 is payable from the layout of Article 5, assuming short notice. If it's a delay then yes you do need to be delayed to get the cancellation amount. However I would argue this looks and sounds like a cancellation to me, so if you are careful in your construction of a case via MCOL (and perhaps CEDR) I think you would have a good chance of success. And yes it seems illogical to rely on the Alitalia service to play the centre against the middle.

The second issue is whether or not you can claim back alternative travel arrangements, and this - in contrast to the earlier paragraph - is emerging jurisdiction. The CAA's guidance indicates that BA can expect you to travel the same day on a later service, but implies that if they refuse to do this (so in this case rebooked for the next day) then you can claim for the cost. However curiously missing from BA's response was an offer for an involuntary refund of the sector not travelled, this area isn't controversial. Now you don't profit from this process, so BA should refund the flight not taken and in my view pay the delta on the AZ flight. It's not clear the status of this from your post.

So I would claim on the basis it was a Cancelled service. That you are entitled to Article 7 compensation, and also Article 8 for rebooking costs. If you don't have figure for the refund aspect, I would use your best guess as to what it should be, it's a black art and BA will tell you what the refund is in due course. So in other words, make a formal demand for payment based on the above, read up on Post 1 and the CAA guidance (covered in this thread and last year's thread) and give them 16 days notice. Assuming no reply, construct - carefully - an MCOL submission on this basis. I think this one may be perhaps OK for CEDR, my hesitation is that unless there is a very clear legal precedent on rebooking same day is that they tend to be quite conservative in their rulings. On the other hand CEDR on paper at least is also able to take on board the customer service aspects, so in this case their failure to reroute you on a valid alternative service.

corporate-wage-slave Feb 10, 18 10:17 am


Originally Posted by sledge1 (Post 29400995)
I am sending a this as a fresh case to get auto verification that you have received it as follow up e mails to you using case reference 17192333 get no acknowledgement or response. Shame on you. Accordingly if you do not respond within 10 working days to those 3 simple questions put to you on 3/12/2017 as below with independent supportive documentation I will commence legal proceedings against you along with abortive time costs.

Well as mentioned above, I would keep dispassionate about this and take the whole issue in entirely clinical terms. If you end up doing MCOL then you just stick to the facts, present them as you know best via the Statement of Truth process and it will then be up to BA to present their evidence and up to the court to rule on what is correct. It is the airline's responsibility to provide proof of the 60 hour email aspect, and I would suggest that is near impossible to do in this digital. However I would urge you to stick to the facts, keep it short and straightforward, don't use emotion and keep it as simple as possible. Use the advice in post 1 on how to proceed, make a formal demand for what you think you are owed, give 16 days and then move to MCOL. CEDR may be OK but it's quite difficult for me to make out exactly what happened in your case so I can't be certain about that. The one thing that never, ever works is hassling BA with multiple case references, you are wasting your time.

corporate-wage-slave Feb 10, 18 10:21 am


Originally Posted by IrritableTraveller (Post 29401304)
They are refusing to provide the ACARS information;

Two can play hardball, and in this case MCOL would be better since they will have to present their timings to you well before any hearing. You have had the "we won't do anything" email, so while it would probably be a good idea to give 16 days notice of action, in reality you don't now need to do this and can go straight to MCOL given the last reply. In the process you give your timings are precisely as you have them. Take a screenshot now of the text messages and times, and just give the evidence as provided. Again no point using too much emotion, the facts alone should carry your case since there was more that BA could have done to have avoided the delay.

IrritableTraveller Feb 10, 18 10:24 am

I've already written up a very calm, factual letter before action so I'll send it off just on the off chance it finds someone more helpful than my current automaton! I'm in Scotland so the small claims procedure is different but same theory!

corporate-wage-slave Feb 10, 18 10:27 am


Originally Posted by Dpetryszyn (Post 29396628)

please let me know what type of compensation they are entitled to and the proper avenues to direct their complaints.

much appreciated in advance

Assuming your parents were on a single ticket to LAX, then I think you have a good case for EC261, from what you have provided, it seems to be in scope. Just follow the process in post 1, it may not be controversial if it was technical. They need to make the claim themselves, though if they share a married name one parent can claim for both. Effectively one of the advantages of using a European airline in this circumstance is that it gives you protections that you don't get from other airlines such as Emirates.

Refueled Feb 10, 18 3:42 pm

Thank you very much corporate-wage-slave for your reply, I really appreciate your time and advice. I will follow up and let the forum know of the results.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:20 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.