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)

Pollyti Jan 21, 18 11:50 am


Originally Posted by sonomawine (Post 29320753)
We were on the same flight and I just realized we might be eligible for compensation. Have you heard back from BA on your claim? They offered to book us on the same flight the next day, which we agreed to as they informed us the delay would be 4 hours. Not sure if that will have any impact on our claim? They did supply us vouchers to the Sofitel and for food.

hi.
It was my daughter and her partner who were taking this flight. My daughter applied for compensation and they wrote back and said operational issues, you're not entitled, so she wrote back for a second time and said that wasn't good enough they had to provide evidence of what this operational issue was, they replied and said it was due to circumstances outside of their control due to the 787 engine inspections, sorry but you're not entitled.

She sent a third email saying that's all well and good, but as yet you haven't provided proof and you just saying it is not proof. She hasn't heard back from that third email yet.

However, in the meanwhile, we realised that actually she was originally booked on a 777 aeroplane not a 787, but according to the comment posted above, BA are now claiming that the 777 was changed for a 787 and it was this 787 that got cancelled due to the inspection. So I'm assuming if my daughter points out to them that the original booking was on a 777 she will get this same answer. But if they do, we will be asking them to prove it.

Im not sure if it will work, but she has nothing to lose by trying to see if they'll pay compensation. Though it looks like they're not going to do so if they can suggest circumstances beyond their control.

Though in these circumstances perhaps it's time the EU made the manufacturer pay compensation instead. If the EU regs are there because they think people should be compensated for delays, then if delays are man made in their origin, regardless of where they originated from, I don't see why passengers should lose out, when airlines pay for normal mechamicsl delays.

DYKWIA Jan 21, 18 11:55 am


Originally Posted by Pollyti (Post 29320885)


hi.
It was my daughter and her partner who were taking this flight. My daughter applied for compensation and they wrote back and said operational issues, you're not entitled, so she wrote back for a second time and said that wasn't good enough they had to provide evidence of what this operational issue was, they replied and said it was due to circumstances outside of their control due to the 787 engine inspections, sorry but you're not entitled.

She sent a third email saying that's all well and good, but as yet you haven't provided proof and you just saying it is not proof. She hasn't heard back from that third email yet.

However, in the meanwhile, we realised that actually she was originally booked on a 777 aeroplane not a 787, but according to the comment posted above, BA are now claiming that the 777 was changed for a 787 and it was this 787 that got cancelled due to the inspection. So I'm assuming if my daughter points out to them that the original booking was on a 777 she will get this same answer. But if they do, we will be asking them to prove it.

Im not sure if it will work, but she has nothing to lose by trying to see if they'll pay compensation. Though it looks like they're not going to do so if they can suggest circumstances beyond their control.

Though in these circumstances perhaps it's time the EU made the manufacturer pay compensation instead. If the EU regs are there because they think people should be compensated for delays, then if delays are man made in their origin, regardless of where they originated from, I don't see why passengers should lose out, when airlines pay for normal mechamicsl delays.

Just do a CEDR or MCOL, and you can almost guarantee that BA will pay out. They basically make stuff up to try and put you off, and a good majority of people won't take it any further.

Pollyti Jan 21, 18 12:07 pm


Originally Posted by DYKWIA (Post 29320901)
Just do a CEDR or MCOL, and you can almost guarantee that BA will pay out. They basically make stuff up to try and put you off, and a good majority of people won't take it any further.

hi
thank you for your reply. Can you explain what a CEDR or MCOL is?

Thanks.

DYKWIA Jan 21, 18 12:13 pm


Originally Posted by Pollyti (Post 29320937)
<div style="text-align:left;"><br /><br />hi<br />thank you for your reply. Can you explain what a CEDR or MCOL is?<br /><br />Thanks.</div>

Hi. Sorry for the jargon! Have a look at the first post in this thread, it has details of how you pursue a claim if BA aren't playing ball. Normally, BA will settle once you start proceedings.

sonomawine Jan 21, 18 12:25 pm


Originally Posted by Pollyti (Post 29320885)


hi.
It was my daughter and her partner who were taking this flight. My daughter applied for compensation and they wrote back and said operational issues, you're not entitled, so she wrote back for a second time and said that wasn't good enough they had to provide evidence of what this operational issue was, they replied and said it was due to circumstances outside of their control due to the 787 engine inspections, sorry but you're not entitled.



Looks like two different flights. I was on BA287 LHR-SFO on 31-December. It was a 777 downgraded from an A380. I am still wondering if them switching me to a flight the next day will void a claim?

corporate-wage-slave Jan 21, 18 12:30 pm

Personally I wouldn't advise CEDR. MCOL may be a better idea, and I would probably go down this road if it was me. However my view is that this is not 101% certain, BA do have an arguable case, perhaps drawing on some recent senior court cases. However EC261 fundamentally is for passenger protection and I would hope that a judge would favour that side of the argument in any dispute between the two positions. For that reason I'd not advise CEDR unless we get news of someone being successful down that particular route - and I don't think we've had that yet.

serfty Jan 21, 18 6:44 pm

From post #1 :

7) Downgrades
If BA downgrades your flight of travel you are entitled to a refund on your ticket. This is 30% for Category 1 flights (see section 5), 50% of Category 2, 75% of Category 3. Now it is not entirely clear in the Regulations as to whether that is the whole ticket, including unaffected sections of that ticket. Therefore the range of options varies from 75% of the whole ticket (out and back) as purchased, down to 30% of the implied cost of the sector affected (which could be a relatively small amount of money if that sector is a small add-on to a long haul journey). However the CAA has advised us that their interpretation is that the whole ticket is used to calculate downgrades, not just the affected leg; equally we know of situations where BA only compensated the effected leg. Also note that you may be entitled to further consumer protection: for example if the Regulation's compensation was less than the amount paid the upgrade (such as an airport upgrade) then there may be scope for a challenge under contract law.
Should this not be revised as a result of the Mennens v. Emirates ruling.

With Mennens, basically, where passengers are downgraded on a particular flight, the ‘price of the ticket’ refers to the price of that particular flight, but if not indicated on the ticket, the price of that particular flight is calculated by the pro-rata cost based on distance of that flight and the total distance of all flights on the ticket. Taxes, levies and charges are not included in the refund calculation, unless the tax/levy/charge is dependent on the travel class.

"Mennens" is briefly mentioned with the 2018 update within thread's prologue, but without further detail.

e.g. https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/brit...l#post28946419

auldlassie Jan 23, 18 4:42 am

Hi folks, wondering if anyone well versed in this can assist me.
Auldladdie and I flew BA LHR-ATL in First on 17th Dec 2017. ATL airport had a power outage during our flight. The pilot diverted to Washington, with the hope of continuing later to ATL. Note, at the point he chose to divert, ATL was still technically open, although many planes were backed up on the tarmac. Once we landed at IAD, pilot said, we were to disembark and would not be continuing to ATL, as the crew would be over their hours if they were to attempt to fly to ATL. Collected luggage and went to the BA desk where we waited in complete chaos for well over 3 hours. Promised a re-routing, as BA chief of staff there announced to the queue that he realised that as ATL was a hub, many of us would need to be re-routed if we were missing connections. None of that happened. Eventually he said that was "proving difficult" and if we waited until next morning, they might be able to arrange something. We realised, as they did too, that flights were being re-booked all over the eastern seaboard and we felt they would all be booked out if we waited. We were eventually offered a hotel, a meal and an 11 hour bus journey from Washington to ATL next morning. We felt this was completely unacceptable as an alternative to a flight, let alone a First flight. 2 economy seats were available on an AA flight next day to MIA (where we finally needed to be) but BA point blank refused to re-route us, so we had to pony up the money and re-book it. When we arrived at the airport the next morning every single BA desk was closed. No BA staff in the airport at all (as their normal schedule would not require it I presume) so how their promise of help next day would have panned out I cannot imagine. We took our AA flight to MIA and continued with our trip.

BA say they offered us a hotel and a meal (which they did) and "transport" to get to ATL the following day so we have no successful claim to anything at all. Are they correct? Would you find an 11 hour bus journey the following day (missing our onward travel connections) an acceptable alternative when you had booked a flight in First?

corporate-wage-slave Jan 23, 18 5:49 am


Originally Posted by auldlassie (Post 29328041)
BA say they offered us a hotel and a meal (which they did) and "transport" to get to ATL the following day so we have no successful claim to anything at all. Are they correct? Would you find an 11 hour bus journey the following day (missing our onward travel connections) an acceptable alternative when you had booked a flight in First?

If your ticket ended in ATL then they are probably correct, though it's an unfortunate way to end the trip. My guess is that there was very little alternative open to them, the ATL meltdown was pretty comprehensive, but if you were able to get a flight with another airline instead of the bus then I think you would be able to seek redress for that fare under the implied CAA guidelines for this area. If your ticket ended in MIA then they are incorrect, they are required to reroute you. There is a 300 mile rule which allows rebooking to another location within that radius, MIA is unfortunately 600 miles from ATL.

SK AAR Jan 23, 18 7:09 am

Assuming that your ticket with BA was to ATL rather than MIA, BA doesn't owe you anything. BA offered you hotel and alternative transportation albeit by bus. You could have waited in IAD until seats on a flight became available and BA would most likely have rebooked you straight away, but when would such seats become available? BA has no obligation to take you to MIA or pay for for travels to MIA.

Needless to state that the meltdown at ATL is to be considered extraordinary circumstances exempting BA from paying comp. under EU reg. 261/04.

nufnuf77 Jan 23, 18 10:06 am


Originally Posted by SK AAR (Post 29328384)
Assuming that your ticket with BA was to ATL rather than MIA, BA doesn't owe you anything. BA offered you hotel and alternative transportation albeit by bus. You could have waited in IAD until seats on a flight became available and BA would most likely have rebooked you straight away, but when would such seats become available? BA has no obligation to take you to MIA or pay for for travels to MIA.

Needless to state that the meltdown at ATL is to be considered extraordinary circumstances exempting BA from paying comp. under EU reg. 261/04.

I am not sure bus transport for 11h is appropriate for a first class customer - I would have refused that and bought a ticket in F to ATL via whatever point and then claimed even vie MCOL.
Complication here is that you needed to get to MIA...

auldlassie Jan 23, 18 11:55 am

Thanks all for replies. Just to clear up a few points that those replies raised, BA never offered us ANY other flights to anywhere, not ATL, not MIA, nor anywhere in between. They said there were NO flights they could offer, point blank, not even their codeshare partners. I take it they do not fly IAD to anywhere, but their codeshare partner AA does and it did have flights available, albeit only a few seats in economy. 2 of those we paid for later ourselves(at the BA desk and payment was taken for those by BA at that desk) as all airlines flights were selling out. They had offered re-booking earlier in the wait, then retracted that offer, so we had to make our own arrangements. I was therefore never a question of waiting in IAD for BA flights to "become available".

stifle Jan 24, 18 12:22 am


Originally Posted by ng1265 (Post 29299112)
Quick one:
Flight on Saturday LGW-RAK was diverted to CMN (pilot pushed the throttle litterally a couple of hundred meters high due to fog making the landing impossible)
Got diverted to CMN where the plane sat until it got cleared to land in RAK, where we apparently landed around 2.5 hours late.
Obviously this not eligible for EU261, but I had the following questions springing in mind:

1. While we sat on the ground, the crew opened the bar and allowed whatever was left from the service to be bought by the passengers. Wouldn't the duty of care kick in?In such cases, would the pax get a refund from BA?
2. As there were a few flights in the same spot,and we departed within 30 minutes of each other, would a change of plane be OK? e.g. could a pax on a LH flight arriving to CMN 5 planes behind us have gone on board and left with us to minimise the delay?
3. if after an hour we had decided to leave the aircraft and made our own way there, would said costs be refundable by BA?
Bonus question: in the case of diversion, do we get the avios and TPs for the extra legs? :-)

1. Duty of care arises at a 3 hour delay for a 1500-3500 segment; you were not delayed that long.
2. I’m not sure what you mean by “would a change of plane be OK”, nor from the context whether LH is long haul or Lufthansa.
3. Most unlikely.

ng1265 Jan 24, 18 7:54 am


Originally Posted by stifle (Post 29332077)

1. Duty of care arises at a 3 hour delay for a 1500-3500 segment; you were not delayed that long.
2. I’m not sure what you mean by “would a change of plane be OK”, nor from the context whether LH is long haul or Lufthansa.
3. Most unlikely.

Thanks for the info!
For context, there were a few planes parked with us, amongst which I had friends on a Transavia plane and one on a Lufty (hence LH) aircraft, at some point we wondered whether we could have done the route together since load on BA was light, which would have saved us half an hour waiting for them at the airport :-)

Globaliser Jan 24, 18 8:06 am


Originally Posted by ng1265 (Post 29299112)
2. As there were a few flights in the same spot,and we departed within 30 minutes of each other, would a change of plane be OK? e.g. could a pax on a LH flight arriving to CMN 5 planes behind us have gone on board and left with us to minimise the delay?


Originally Posted by ng1265 (Post 29333273)
For context, there were a few planes parked with us, amongst which I had friends on a Transavia plane and one on a Lufty (hence LH) aircraft, at some point we wondered whether we could have done the route together since load on BA was light, which would have saved us half an hour waiting for them at the airport :-)

I imagine that this would not have been easy. You can't just move a load (whether it's self-loading or inanimate) from one aircraft to another. AIUI, you'd have to account for the weight and balance of the additional load (and I don't know whether the pilots would necessarily have all the information and tools to do so on the spot). And you'd also have to do security and legal stuff before accepting more passengers. For example, those on the Lufthansa aircraft had contracted to be carried by Lufthansa - so how do you sort out the legalities, and with whom, for them to be carried by British Airways instead, and on what terms and conditions; and what would be the legal arrangements for British Airways to be reimbursed by Lufthansa for doing so, and at what price? It's not like getting half a dozen people off the number 6 bus and asking them to board the number 6 bus that's right behind.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:31 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.