09R

Not strictly BA but hoping someone can help. Some friends are flying the following route:

MAN-FRA
FRA-BKK (5 night stopover in BKK)
BKK-SYD (7 night stopover in SYD)
SYD-SIN (5 night stopover in SIN)
SIN-FRA
FRA-MAN

All of the orange segments are on one booking ref and the blue is a separate booking ref. The MAN-FRA flight was delayed by 2 hours such that they missed their FRA-BKK flight and have to stay overnight in FRA meaning they will arrive in BKK some 24 hrs later. Are they entitled to compensation? i.e. is BKK considered a "final destination" as they are spending some time there? Or is SYD the final destination (given that it is the last point on the booking before they start "returning") and given that they have not been delayed in arriving there (unless that segment is ultimately delayed) they are not entitled?

Thanks

SeattleDavid

BA 279 (LHR-SJC) had a 788 substituted for the usual 789 today (the sub happened in the middle of last night).

The 788 chosen would appear to have had mechanical problems at IAD last night and was 90 minutes late into LHR. At this stage 279 was scheduled to be not quite three hours late departing and 2+ hours late arriving.

At boarding time they said that they were still doing engine checks and we eventually boarded 4 hours late - and arrived in SJC 4 1/2 hours late. [As a non-relevant aside, the generator problem recurred mid-flight and we went cold and dark - no ovens, no IFE, no lights, no seat movement - for the last 3-4 hours of the flight.]

Although these problems began with a 789 issue, I presume there should be no issues for passengers to get their fair compensation on this one?

armouredant

I'd definitely try for it; if the airline's defence is that BKK isn't a final destination, I'd push it to CEDR or MCOL - I think any reasonable adjudicator would side with the passengers on that.

corporate-wage-slave

Potentially yes, since the BKK time is a clear trip and had they been in transit there would have been earlier services they could / would have used. But it depends on the cause of the delay. And depends on the airline in terms of willingness to pay. I know it's not always believed, but BA is one of the better airlines in this space, some airlines only pay if an enforcement body tells them to do so.

corporate-wage-slave

Because you started from LHR, BA's biggest base by far, then I don't think the back story really matters too much. If you were delayed more than 3 hours for technical reasons then that's normally a clear case for Article 7 compensation.

09R

It's LH - apparently there was some bad weather in FRA yesterday, though that did not stop the flight from FRA - BKK departing on time (though the MAN-FRA flight was delayed by 2 hours). When does weather become extraordinary? Can it be "extraordinary" such that it delays one flight but not another?

corporate-wage-slave

Quite easily I'm afraid. Bad weather tends to reduce flow rates at the larger airports, so they have to cancel or delay some services, and the shorter flights are the ones that get it. See the Dashboard thread on Fog Disruption as background. There have been some successes in the German courts challenging the use of weather, and it remains the case that even if extraordinary circumstances do apply, airlines still need to do take all reasonable measures to get the passenger back on track. However in the absence of legal processes - with uncertain outcomes - I very much doubt Lufthansa will pay up compensation if this was the cause.

suncloud

British Airways flight from Seattle to London, second flight on same ticket from London to Edinburgh.
The plane from Seattle was delayed because it was hit by lightning on the way to Seattle and needed checking. As a result I also missed the onward flight. I was rebooked (after I contacted BA as they were completely absent in Seattle) and landed 4.05 late. I suppose an EC 261 claim will not be successful here? Just want to confirm as BA have been absolutely rubbish from handling this delay to communication afterwards.

kingcole974

suncloud

The lightning strike was also mentioned at the airport in Seattle and that technical checks would be needed. No idea if true though.

tigertanaka

I think lightning strikes are regarded as outside the airlines control so EU261 does not apply.

At MUC a few years ago, U2 told me and about 600 other stranded pax that they were cancelling 4 evening flights back to the UK as the MAN, EDI, LGW and LTN planes had all been struck by lightning on approach at MUC and had to be checked out during daylight the following morning. Obviously pure coincidence and bad luck on them as no other carrier seemed to be affected by the bad weather.

They did their best to wiggle out of their duty of care too by having one person manually writing out €5 food vouchers for each affected person which took a fair while. Overnight accomodation in a hotel 80km away was offered at about 10pm but passengers were warned that they would only get 4 hours sleep before the coach would return to the airport for the following morning's rearranged flights.

Often1

This seems a fairly clear "extraordinary circumstance" with no delay compensation due.

Although calling in may be a good proactive idea, BA would, like most carriers, handle the reroute either while you are enroute to LHR or upon your arrival.

Nothing in your post suggests anything beyond careful attention to the safety precautions required after an airplane is struck. They can be extensive and frustrating, but quite welcome when you are FL over the Arctic Ocean.

suncloud

Yeah, I'd prefer not to be hit to be honest. I'm only asking in case I missed something, not because I want All The Cash, Desperately! I thought as much. Thanks a lot.

simons1

I don't agree it is "fairly clear" at all.

In Evans v Monarch Airlines a couple of years ago the judge ruled exactly the opposite, ie lightning strikes were inherent in the operation of an airline and compensation was due. Although such rulings are not binding it appears some emphasis was placed on this case brought by Bott & Co. Full details here:

https://www.bottonline.co.uk/blog/fl...htning-strikes

My suggestion is the OP considers moving on with CEDR/MCOL, or alternatively for a fee Bott & Co themselves may be happy to assist.

corporate-wage-slave

Welcome to the BA Forum suncloud. There is a well developed thread on EC261 in the Dashboard of this forum.

There are a number of legal cases in the UK and Germany where courts have held that since aircraft are built to withstand lightning strikes, and they are relatively common, they can't be regarded as extraordinary circumstances. These cases are at junior court level so not necessarily binding on the body of jurisprudence at this point. I don't know whether CEDR, the arbitration process which is an alternative to taking the airline to court, takes the same view. But my feeling is that this is something that may over time become established as not extraordinary circumstances. In addition, and there is no dispute on this, airlines still need to use all reasonable measures to maintain the schedule. If you haven't got the appetite for a legal battle, you could put in a claim, which BA is likely to reject, perhaps take it to CEDR if you want to try that route, but then wait to see if my hunch is correct at some point in the future.