May 22, 2018, 3:28 am
Last edit by: serfty
Link to Text of the regulations in PDF format
How about a Wiki to post EU comp given/denied as well as results for any CEDR or other process. Especially concerning the 787 issue as there are going to be many claims given all the cancellations.
Mine was April 22 BA280 LAX-LHR cancellation 4 days before flight and rebooked on later flight and arrived 4.5 hrs later than origianlly scheduled. BA's response was to deny for "operational" requirements though the 787 "tentatively assigned" G-ZBJG was used instead for a LHR-YUL flight that same day. CEDR filed and awaiting their initial review. Sept 3rd UPDATE: CEDR decision in Article 7 comp awarded in the amount of 600 euro as even though extraordinary circumstances are present in an engine defect as this, BA didn't show that they took reasonable steps to avoid the cancellation as they have known since Oct 2017 of this issue.
How about a Wiki to post EU comp given/denied as well as results for any CEDR or other process. Especially concerning the 787 issue as there are going to be many claims given all the cancellations.
Mine was April 22 BA280 LAX-LHR cancellation 4 days before flight and rebooked on later flight and arrived 4.5 hrs later than origianlly scheduled. BA's response was to deny for "operational" requirements though the 787 "tentatively assigned" G-ZBJG was used instead for a LHR-YUL flight that same day. CEDR filed and awaiting their initial review. Sept 3rd UPDATE: CEDR decision in Article 7 comp awarded in the amount of 600 euro as even though extraordinary circumstances are present in an engine defect as this, BA didn't show that they took reasonable steps to avoid the cancellation as they have known since Oct 2017 of this issue.
The 2018 BA compensation thread: Your guide to Regulation EC261/2004
May 30, 2018, 1:20 am
#646
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 2
It depends on the date and other specifics, but during the recent French and Italian ATC strikes the boxes covering Austria did go deep red and there were delays throughout Mitteleuropa as a result.
But this may be a situation where you may be in with a case, depending on whether your flight was cancelled due to restrictions on that specific flight OR due to the knock on effect of other flights holding up crew and aircraft. For the latter, BA don't have a good defence. A key piece of evidence is finding whether other airline, notably OS, were able to operate flights at that time. Now it's not for you to prove this, it's up to BA to give the specifics and prove their argument. So by all means try and find out more information from BA, but don't let it fester too long. If you feel BA are incorrect then consider either CEDR or MCOL, particularly the latter if it looks like a grey area.
But this may be a situation where you may be in with a case, depending on whether your flight was cancelled due to restrictions on that specific flight OR due to the knock on effect of other flights holding up crew and aircraft. For the latter, BA don't have a good defence. A key piece of evidence is finding whether other airline, notably OS, were able to operate flights at that time. Now it's not for you to prove this, it's up to BA to give the specifics and prove their argument. So by all means try and find out more information from BA, but don't let it fester too long. If you feel BA are incorrect then consider either CEDR or MCOL, particularly the latter if it looks like a grey area.
May 30, 2018, 5:11 am
#647
Join Date: Dec 2013
Programs: QRPC Platinum, KFEG
Posts: 999
Currently in a clear cut EU261 case and the airline is still claiming "airport restrictions" from Heathrow even though this was contradicted by both the explanation at the gate and by the captain. Any next steps I can take?
May 30, 2018, 5:18 am
#648
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: 63,791
MCOL usually. It's then up to the airline to prove its case, and that would then be set against a Statement of Truth from presumably your side. The MCOL process generally works on the basis that everyone is telling the truth, and in the event of apparent conflict, the underlying principle of EC261 has a clear and stated bias towards the passenger.
May 30, 2018, 5:24 am
#649
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: 63,791
Thank you for your reply! My flight was on 8th of May and no other BA flights from London to Vienna on that day were affected. I contacted BA twice with the same reply "not our fault it was industrial action". Should I ask them to explain why only 1 flight got cancel or should I go straight to MCOL?
May 30, 2018, 5:53 am
#650
Community Director
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Norwich, UK
Programs: A3*G, BA Gold, BD Gold (in memoriam), IHG Diamond Ambassador
Posts: 8,476
I had delay of 3 hours 40 minutes on direct BA flight LHR-TLV (BA167/03MAY18) due to mechanical issue with hydraulics, requiring change of plane (after rolling delay). Landed at 3:20am instead of 11:35pm. I Claimed EU261 compensation online, BA are trying to get out of it by saying that Israeli law should apply instead - which only offers compensation for 8 hour delay..
From their reply;
"
Under Israeli law, the pertinent piece of legislation that would ordinarily apply to passenger complaints is the Israeli Aviation Services Law (Compensation and Assistance for Flight Cancellation or Change of Conditions), 2012 (“the ASL”).
The ASL prescribes monetary compensation only in cases of flight delays exceeding eight hours. Although I regret the way your journey with us was affected and I completely understand how inconvenient it must have been, I'm afraid we can't offer you any compensation.
"
I intend to flight this one, up to CEDR/MCOL if required. Any thoughts?
From their reply;
"
Under Israeli law, the pertinent piece of legislation that would ordinarily apply to passenger complaints is the Israeli Aviation Services Law (Compensation and Assistance for Flight Cancellation or Change of Conditions), 2012 (“the ASL”).
The ASL prescribes monetary compensation only in cases of flight delays exceeding eight hours. Although I regret the way your journey with us was affected and I completely understand how inconvenient it must have been, I'm afraid we can't offer you any compensation.
"
I intend to flight this one, up to CEDR/MCOL if required. Any thoughts?
I suppose there might still be a query on a community carrier departing from Israel, but even that must be fast receding now.
I personally find it astonishing that BA would even attempt to block this in the first place, as it's inconceivable any European court would find its own law should be disregarded simply because the destination country has a less stringent one. It does go to show the value of this thread and the advice in it on how to win - how many people would simply give up without it?
May 30, 2018, 6:54 am
#651
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 4
Thank you for your reply! My flight was on 8th of May and no other BA flights from London to Vienna on that day were affected. I contacted BA twice with the same reply "not our fault it was industrial action". Should I ask them to explain why only 1 flight got cancel or should I go straight to MCOL?
Last edited by inew; May 30, 2018 at 1:32 pm
May 30, 2018, 7:08 am
#652
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vancouver
Programs: AB BA Waterloo Mama Mia
Posts: 1,147
I had posted in this thread and the "de-icing thread" my experience on February 28 2018 at LHR 4 hour wait on a BA flight while we waited in queue to be serviced during the cold weather and snow experienced by London before and after that date. I originally was denied by email. I requested and received the deadlock letter and filed a CEDR application. I did not want to jinx the process by reporting the filing earlier and today received an offer of settlement through CEDR for the full amount I am entitled to for the 4 hour delay/over 3500 km route. Was not expecting this but filed because I felt that a customer is entitled to a more substantive answer than "sorry, weather related". I did not receive the substantive answer and I suspect BA does not want to take the chance of a precedent in case I pursued it further in the courts if denied at the CEDR stage. BA may have taken my CEDR application seriously as I wrote what I would consider a "legal brief" that required a substantive answer and perhaps reflected that I was determined to obtain those answers. No precedent set unfortunately and that will have to wait for another day. All very interesting and thanks to all on the board for their input.
May 30, 2018, 1:38 pm
#653
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 22
I was booked on BA0947 on Monday at 0720, which was cancelled at around 2100 on Sunday night. I was rebooked onto the 1245 flight which was fine.
My request for EU261 compensation has just been rejected by British airways due to weather.
Altthough the weather was bad on Sunday, it was fine on Monday morning, with no other delays at Munich and the captain on the 1245 seems to imply the plane was just in the wrong place the night before.
I feel BA are hiding behind the weather and just combined the two flights as they were both half full. Could they not have flown the plane out at 5am to still make the 0720 in which case it feels like an operational cancellation not a weather one.
Is there anyway to add evidence to this hunch? Would anyone advise I should take his further or should I just leave it?
My request for EU261 compensation has just been rejected by British airways due to weather.
Altthough the weather was bad on Sunday, it was fine on Monday morning, with no other delays at Munich and the captain on the 1245 seems to imply the plane was just in the wrong place the night before.
I feel BA are hiding behind the weather and just combined the two flights as they were both half full. Could they not have flown the plane out at 5am to still make the 0720 in which case it feels like an operational cancellation not a weather one.
Is there anyway to add evidence to this hunch? Would anyone advise I should take his further or should I just leave it?
May 30, 2018, 1:48 pm
#654
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: 63,791
BA947 is the early morning MUC to LHR service, which usually night stops from the last LHR-MUC service the evening before as BA958, hence the text message at that time. It's rare for BA to cancel these flights not least because the lose a crew that stayed over in MUC to run that early service, and they then go on to make other flights. As you mention the flight the night before was cancelled due to bad weather, fairly legitimately I suspect, given the pressure not to cancel nightstop services. MUC isn't a BA base, and they realistically can't run service out of LHR before 05:00, the building / security etc only opens at 05:00 hrs. You also have overlooked the time difference between UK and Germany, so in fact the service would have to leave at about 03:45 hrs from LHR, and for all sorts of reasons that isn't realistic. So while I could suggest you pursue this in the courts, I really can't see this case succeeding, as I recall there were a lot of cancellations on Sunday evening.
May 30, 2018, 4:01 pm
#655
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Programs: BA GGL (for now) and Lifetime Gold, Marriott fan thanks to Bonvoy Moments
Posts: 5,115
Thank you- in this case it seems I need to approach BA not IB. Let us see what they say. BA could not get baggage handling staff to offload bag as they were all busy elsewhere, they turned up 30 minutes after scheduled departure time and took a good 15 minutes to offload the offending bag.
May 30, 2018, 9:41 pm
#656
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: NYC
Programs: AA 2MM, Bonvoy LTT, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,636
Not a claim but a recent DOT dismissal sheds insight on how BA handled a downgrade claim.
May 30, 2018, 10:27 pm
#657
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,586
Not a claim but a recent DOT dismissal sheds insight on how BA handled a downgrade claim.
The complaint may have been dismissed, however in the document the complainant detailed a calculation for the downgrades for those with paid business class tickets and those with upgrade certificates applied
Based on the downgrade on 42% of the journey paid, the complaiant details 42% of each of the downgraded tickets and BA does not dispute the Complainant’s calculation
It's defence was that it had already paid more than the calculated amount.
It seems good for (a) showing that BA does not dispute that a simple mileage ratio of the journey be used and (b) that mileage upgrades are accepted as being equally entitled to compensation
May 31, 2018, 1:37 am
#658
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Singapore
Programs: HHonors Diamond; A3 *Nothing ; BA Exec. Club Gold
Posts: 1,689
A Friend of mine has an interesting one.
Today’s BA433 from AMS to LHR was cancelled, no reason given. The only alternative BA could offer was a 10am departure which is 7+ hours earlier. Ticket is a CX saver reward flight.
I have read in the Q&A that departing more than 2 hours early attracts an EC261 compensation but as most compensation is covering delayed arrival it isn’t clear to me how much the compensation is in this case.
I assume it also depends on the reason the BA433 was cancelled.
Any ideas?
Globalist
Today’s BA433 from AMS to LHR was cancelled, no reason given. The only alternative BA could offer was a 10am departure which is 7+ hours earlier. Ticket is a CX saver reward flight.
I have read in the Q&A that departing more than 2 hours early attracts an EC261 compensation but as most compensation is covering delayed arrival it isn’t clear to me how much the compensation is in this case.
I assume it also depends on the reason the BA433 was cancelled.
Any ideas?
Globalist
Last edited by Globalist; May 31, 2018 at 1:58 am
May 31, 2018, 2:27 am
#659
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: 63,791
However what I find beyond strange is why BA didn't simply say "AA is the operating carrier, over to them" (and they would then have got next to nothing back, $200 is my calculation). Reading between the lines it appears to be due to the complainant (who was somewhat unrealistic on a range of points) getting a rebooking into World Traveller even though BA had said "we're overbooked, AA don't send us any more passengers". It's rare for me to be sympathetic to BA on their EC261 handling but this is quite a stretch by the complainant.
May 31, 2018, 2:29 am
#660
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: LH SEN; BA Gold
Posts: 8,405
Might be useful
Full press release: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/...cp180077en.pdf
The judgement hasn't been released yet.
Looks like a significant extension of previous case law. In Folkerts (C-11/11) and the UK case involving Emirates last year, the first flights departing in the EU were delayed. This doesn't seem to be the case here and the delay seems to have occurred outside the EU.
Judgment in Case C-537/17 - Claudia Wegener v Royal Air Maroc SA
A change of aircraft during the stopover does not alter the fact that two or more flights booked as a single unit must be considered a single connecting flight
Claudia Wegener booked a flight with Royal Air Maroc from Berlin (Germany) to Agadir (Morocco), with a stopover and change of aircraft in Casablanca (Morocco). When she presented herself for boarding in Casablanca of the aircraft destined for Agadir, Royal Air Maroc did not allow her to board, informing her that her seat had been reassigned to another passenger. Ms Wegener eventually boarded another Royal Air Maroc aircraft and arrived in Agadir four hours after the scheduled time of arrival.
[...]
In today’s judgment, the Court rules that the regulation applies to passenger transport effected under a single booking and comprising, between its departure from an airport situated in a Member State (Berlin) and its arrival at an airport situated in a third country (Agadir), a scheduled stopover outside the EU (Casablanca) with a change of aircraft.
According to the Court, it is apparent from the regulation and case-law3 that when, as in the present case, two (or more) flights are booked as a single unit, those flights constitute a whole for the purposes of the right to compensation for passengers. Those flights must therefore be considered as one and the same ‘connecting flight’.
A change of aircraft during the stopover does not alter the fact that two or more flights booked as a single unit must be considered a single connecting flight
Claudia Wegener booked a flight with Royal Air Maroc from Berlin (Germany) to Agadir (Morocco), with a stopover and change of aircraft in Casablanca (Morocco). When she presented herself for boarding in Casablanca of the aircraft destined for Agadir, Royal Air Maroc did not allow her to board, informing her that her seat had been reassigned to another passenger. Ms Wegener eventually boarded another Royal Air Maroc aircraft and arrived in Agadir four hours after the scheduled time of arrival.
[...]
In today’s judgment, the Court rules that the regulation applies to passenger transport effected under a single booking and comprising, between its departure from an airport situated in a Member State (Berlin) and its arrival at an airport situated in a third country (Agadir), a scheduled stopover outside the EU (Casablanca) with a change of aircraft.
According to the Court, it is apparent from the regulation and case-law3 that when, as in the present case, two (or more) flights are booked as a single unit, those flights constitute a whole for the purposes of the right to compensation for passengers. Those flights must therefore be considered as one and the same ‘connecting flight’.
The judgement hasn't been released yet.
Looks like a significant extension of previous case law. In Folkerts (C-11/11) and the UK case involving Emirates last year, the first flights departing in the EU were delayed. This doesn't seem to be the case here and the delay seems to have occurred outside the EU.