Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > British Airways | Executive Club
Reload this Page >

The 2018 BA compensation thread: Your guide to Regulation EC261/2004

The 2018 BA compensation thread: Your guide to Regulation EC261/2004

    Hide Wikipost
Old Dec 17, 18, 5:14 am   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: serfty
Wiki Link
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.
Print Wikipost

Closed Thread

Old Sep 10, 18, 10:14 am
  #1291  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold, CX Gold (OW Sapphire), Hilton Gold, SPG Gold, Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,450
So, I believe this should be a fairly open and shut case for compensation - although unsure if it is at the EC261 level of EUR400 or EUR600:
- BA199 (LHR-BOM) last Friday (07 Sep) was boarded, prepared for departure when an issue was found with the air conditioning
- The Captain requested parts from stores, however the wrong part was delivered, and when eventually the right part was found, it would fit/work
- Departure time drifted from 2125, with updates eventually leading to 2350
- At 2359 one of the pilots announced that departure would now be delayed to 1600hrs on Saturday (it departed 1650hrs)
- BA began to discharge its duty of care duties by serving the meal at this point, whilst accommodation was readied (it was duly provided)
- The delayed BA199 arrived BOM over 20hrs behind schedule
- My father requested to see if there was anything that could be done to get him there more quickly due to it being a time sensitive trip: the BA139 on Saturday morning (like all this week) is cancelled due to the 787 issues
- BA reticketed him (and protected his return) on the Saturday morning Jet Airways LHR-BOM flight, which arrived 12hrs+ on his original flight arrival time

I assume this falls under the delay regulation (EUR400) rather than cancellation (EUR600) but seek advice accordingly.

Must be said that BA did comply with all their relevant duties regarding food, accommodation (up until my father left for his alternate flight).
Jordan D is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 10:27 am
  #1292  
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: 38,445
Originally Posted by Jordan D View Post
- BA reticketed him (and protected his return) on the Saturday morning Jet Airways LHR-BOM flight, which arrived 12hrs+ on his original flight arrival time

I assume this falls under the delay regulation (EUR400) rather than cancellation (EUR600) but seek advice accordingly.

Must be said that BA did comply with all their relevant duties regarding food, accommodation (up until my father left for his alternate flight).
I don't think there is a difference between Delay and Cancellation here, it's over 4 hours, over 3500 kms (twice that in fact) so I think it's 600€ anyway. Unfortunately the EF data showing whether EC261 is likely to be OK'd vanished 24 hours ago.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Sep 10, 18, 3:03 pm
  #1293  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: LGW.
Programs: Cunard WorldClub-Gold,Silverseas Venetian society,Alitalia Mille miglia,SPG,Fairmont,IHG.
Posts: 664
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
easyJet are not well known for being forthcoming on EC261, Ryanair are better, strangely. But this is a good example of where you would need to construct the case carefully. ATC is indeed a legitimate extraordinary circumstances defence, but easyJet are also responsible for minimising this and also for the outcomes. So if easyJet could have arranged their crew rotas to avoid this, or there was more they could reasonaby have done to reduce the delay, then they may well be liable. It's not the sort of thing where a quick form filling into to MCOL or CEDR will work, you need to assemble the details and arguments carefully for MCOL. For CEDR you don't have to do this so much, but the argument - and all details - will have to be carefully formulated.
Easyjets response...

To further explain what happened on the day; the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight arrived late into Nice. Air traffic control restrictions that substantially regulated airspace caused a day of disruption to our network and those of other European airlines. Air traffic controllers over France restricted air space due to staffing issues. There were also air traffic control restrictions over London, directly affecting London Luton due to capacity of air space. Long delays built up as flights waited for ‘slots’ to operate, sometimes taking several hours. The delays continued throughout the day and knocked on to later flights. The delays pushed our crew into their maximum legal operating hours and we had no other choice but to delay your flight until the next day. We do take reasonable measures to avoid delays and cancellations to our flights by having replacement crews and spare aircraft available in our network. In the circumstances, these options were not possible as the delay to your departure was as a direct result of air traffic control restrictions.

Any ideas how to appeal?
no longer atc is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 3:10 pm
  #1294  
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: 38,445
Originally Posted by no longer atc View Post
Any ideas how to appeal?
It's certainly a fluid explanation, but curiously short on meaningful specifics. The writer has an excellent career in politics ahead of him/her. The key point ducked is "could easyJet have had a spare crew available in LGW - and spare aircraft - so as to catch up on previous delays"? A key piece of evidence here would be other services on other airlines - ATC does not discriminate (as you will know!) and if one airline is badly affected by ATC, on paper all of them would be.

Personally, if I was determined to get my Euros of flesh out of OrangeCo, I would give 16 days notice to pay the correct compensation, then get the evidence together to take it to MCOL, so long as you have enough persuasive evidence that easyJet could have avoided this with more resources, and / or mitigated it better (e.g. rebooking those affected on to earlier sevices). But it will need some homework and as much background information that you can muster, particularly on alternative flights that were running.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Sep 10, 18, 6:30 pm
  #1295  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HKG/LON
Programs: QRPC-Gold/Sapphire CXMPC-Silver
Posts: 65
CEDR awarded full compensation in my favour - A big thanks!

Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
Well so long as it's not a 787 then the Rolls Royce issue doesn't apply. And even if it was a 787 it is still arguable. Just move on to the CEDR process as suggested above.
CEDR issued decision against my case just now, which simply put is that my flight is cancelled because the aircraft (a 777) has to be elsewhere, replacing 787 that has to be taken out due to engine issues. Arbitrator agreed 787 hidden defect is exceptional circumstances, though argued given the time frame between announcement and my flight, there is no evidence of the airline doing everything they could to prevent the cancellation.

Compensation payable in full. A big thanks to CWS, who advised me going down the CEDR path, and if anyone of you would find it useful, the decision is attached.


HOLYMOLEAIR is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 8:52 pm
  #1296  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Programs: BAEC Gold, AA PlatinumPro, Hilton Diamond, SPG Gold
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by HOLYMOLEAIR View Post
CEDR issued decision against my case just now, which simply put is that my flight is cancelled because the aircraft (a 777) has to be elsewhere, replacing 787 that has to be taken out due to engine issues. Arbitrator agreed 787 hidden defect is exceptional circumstances, though argued given the time frame between announcement and my flight, there is no evidence of the airline doing everything they could to prevent the cancellation.

Compensation payable in full. A big thanks to CWS, who advised me going down the CEDR path, and if anyone of you would find it useful, the decision is attached.
Thanks! That was an interesting read. And, I believe that is now two decisions on this issue from two different adjudicators, both against BA. (However, this adjudicator did at least do BA the favor of telling them what they can try saying next time to mount a better defence. So, BA might get better at fighting these in the future.)

One thing I found curious is that you received 600 Euros. It appears your replacement flight left more than one hour earlier than the originally scheduled flight; therefore, I assume it also arrived earlier than the originally scheduled flight. I was under the impression that such circumstances would attract only 300 Euros compensation. Perhaps, someone who is more experienced than I can explain (for my benefit) why 600 Euros was payable here?
Infinite Possibilities is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 8:54 pm
  #1297  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Programs: ►QFWP/LTG►VA WP►HyattGlobalist►HiltonGold
Posts: 21,116
Originally Posted by HOLYMOLEAIR View Post
CEDR issued decision against my case just now, which simply put is that my flight is cancelled because the aircraft (a 777) has to be elsewhere, replacing 787 that has to be taken out due to engine issues. Arbitrator agreed 787 hidden defect is exceptional circumstances, though argued given the time frame between announcement and my flight, there is no evidence of the airline doing everything they could to prevent the cancellation. ...
Hmmm ... so basically they had eight months to reschedule/cancel flights "because of the RR engine issue" but did not do so in this case until less than a week before the flight.

In doing so, they failed the "all reasonable measures" part of the exemption.

If the flight had been rescheduled/cancelled 12 days earlier there would have been no compensation payable.
serfty is offline  
Old Sep 10, 18, 9:34 pm
  #1298  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HKG/LON
Programs: QRPC-Gold/Sapphire CXMPC-Silver
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by Infinite Possibilities View Post

Perhaps, someone who is more experienced than I can explain (for my benefit) why 600 Euros was payable here?
I think it's because they gave us less than 7 days notice, and we have to depart one hour earlier than scheduled, or arrive two hours later than scheduled.

My friend was travelling on the same flight, will start the CEDR process for her given this decision. Seems to me that it would be another easy win given they didn't have much evidence for a valid defense.
HOLYMOLEAIR is offline  
Old Sep 11, 18, 1:05 am
  #1299  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Programs: AY Platinum Lumo, BA, SK, AX Plat, Priority Pass, Marriott PP Ambassador & others
Posts: 499
I was booked to travel on a two-leg journey with a feeder flight into LHR, connecting onwards to a TATL flight. Both flights were operated by BA, while AY was both the marketing and ticketing carrier. The feeder flight became delayed due to a technical fault, and the delay of this flight eventually extended to the next day.

After the delay to the next day became apparent, BA rebooked me on another set of flights on SK and KL. These flights also departed the following day, but nevertheless got me to my final destination approximately seven hours earlier than the TATL BA flight on the following day would have (this North American destination only has one BA flight each day). On the basis of 17+ hours delay at arrival, I raised an EU261 claim on BA. They refused with the following explanation:

Looking at the records available we informed you about the delay and you were rebooked on (date of travel) August by Finnair for (date of travel +1) August on BA(same flight number as on day of travel). Whenever a flight is delayed or cancelled, it’s our obligation to assist you with rescheduling and rerouting you to your intended destination under comparable transport conditions. This means on the next available flight and with the same airline.

Any exceptions to this policy can only be done at the airport and, we were happy to absorb the cost of rebooking you to another airline so that we could get you to your destination sooner. If we offer you a flight with another airline, this and all other options would have been discussed with you by our staff at the airport. As I’m sure you can appreciate, by agreeing and accepting to travel in a lower cabin, we can’t offer you compensation. Please contact your travel insurance who might be able to cover the costs you had.

When calling us to rebook your flight during any disruption, it's only possible for our Reservations staff to rebook you to another British Airways flight or to one of our oneworld partners as outlined in our General Conditions of Carriage.

I'd also like to thank you for your request for EU compensation. I’m afraid we’ve had to reject your EU claim. By not taking your flight with British Airways and not continuing with your journey on British Airways, there was no delay at your final destination. For delays, we would only be liable to pay EU compensation if you arrive at your final destination. I'm very sorry to disappoint you.


In addition, BA's rebooking was to a lower class of travel than what was ticketed. I complained about that to the airport staff issuing the ticket immediately, and they completely refused to address this issue and said that I would need to complain directly to BA. I never gave my consent for the downgrade. I also contacted BA's customer service over telephone, who told me that "any upgrade would need to be paid for by myself". Downgrade compensation was denied with the explanation above. BA's response follows on by stating:

Of course, you are entitled to a refund between World Traveller Plus and economy with KLM, if applicable, since this was booked and purchased through Finnair you'd need to contact them. I'm very sorry for the added inconvenience.

I find the entire response fishy. BA is essentially claiming that by re-routing on a non-Oneworld carrier they no longer have any responsibility for the delay at arrival under EU261 "as I never arrived at my final destination". They also claim that I have "accepted" the downgrade (which I certainly did not do). Has anyone experienced anything similar?

On the positive note, BA did provide hotel accommodation and taxi transportation, as well as a small allowance for dinner.
Trav1970 is offline  
Old Sep 11, 18, 1:34 am
  #1300  
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: 38,445
Originally Posted by HOLYMOLEAIR View Post
CEDR issued decision against my case just now, which simply put is that my flight is cancelled because the aircraft (a 777) has to be elsewhere, replacing 787 that has to be taken out due to engine issues. Arbitrator agreed 787 hidden defect is exceptional circumstances, though argued given the time frame between announcement and my flight, there is no evidence of the airline doing everything they could to prevent the cancellation.
Thanks for putting that online, it will be extremely useful to FTers and lurkers. Paragraphs 9 and 10 are particularly interesting and so anyone claiming needs to emphasise the multiple points raised there, including the fact that BA didn't try hard enough to keep their passengers on time. This "didn't try hard enough" goes right back to why EC261 came about, in the context of low cost carriers' modus vivendi in that period of time.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Sep 11, 18, 2:21 am
  #1301  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denmark
Programs: TK Elite, HH G
Posts: 5,124
Sorry to hear about your problems.

The issue is here that technically speaking you were not delayed. You were rerouted and thus never took the initial flight, HEL-LHR that was delayed. Your flights with SK and KL were on time. Had the initial HEL-LHR BA flight been cancelled it would have been different but when claiming compensation for delay you need to be on the flight that arrives late. Had you chosen to keep your booking on the delayed HEL-LHR flight you would have been on a delayed flight and thus entitled to compensation because you reached your final destination with a delay exceeding 3 hours. I believe this is what BA is trying to explain to you in the letter, but admittedly the wording of the letter is not very clear.

Moreover, you were not downgraded in the sense of EC Reg. 261/04. When rebooked to other flights but in lower service class you may be entitled to refund of the fare difference but that has nothing to do with being downgraded as under EC Reg. 261/04
SK AAR is offline  
Old Sep 11, 18, 2:56 am
  #1302  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Programs: AY Platinum Lumo, BA, SK, AX Plat, Priority Pass, Marriott PP Ambassador & others
Posts: 499
Is this so even if the rebooking was done when the original flight was already 4+ hours delayed?
Trav1970 is offline  
Old Sep 11, 18, 5:59 am
  #1303  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denmark
Programs: TK Elite, HH G
Posts: 5,124
I understand your point but doubt that it makes a difference. The point is that you never traveled on the BA flight that was delayed, but by all means try reply back and emphasize that the departure of your initial BA flight was delayed and due to the delayed departure you were rebooked to SK/KLM and any rebooking to other carriers doesn't exempt BA from paying compensation as you reached your final destination with X hours delay due the rebooking necessitated by the delayed depart. of BA HEL-LHR. Good luck!

I wouldn't repeat the compensation claim for "downgrade" as this clearly not a downgrade situation (you never had a ticket for Y+ with SK/KLM - in which case you had to contact these carriers for EC Reg. 261/04 compensation).
SK AAR is offline  
Old Sep 11, 18, 6:10 am
  #1304  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 41,001
This would have been a lot easier to understand and thus to explain if the passenger had simply listed his itinerary, the carriers, and the timings, rather than having to parse through vague references.

But, once done. There is no EC 261/2004 delay compensation due here because the passenger arrived at his final ticketed destination not later than 3 (or 4) hours after his originally scheduled arrival. In fact, he arrived earlier. That is the sole determinant of the delay. Sometimes it works to the compensation benefit of the passenger and sometimes not. For all the lengthy discussion, all that matters is: #1 - At what time was the passenger originally scheduled to arrive at his final ticketed destination? #2 At what time did he arrive? If #2 - #1 exceeds 3 hours, he would have been entitled to EUR 300, if 4 hours, then EUR 600. As #2 - #1 was less than 3 hours, he is not entitled to compensation.

There is also no downgrade here. The passenger is contractually entitled to a refund of the fare difference (which might be quite significant and sometimes exceeds EC 261/2004 calculations). Thus, I would not fixate on the refund under the Regulation, but consider the contractual refund.
UKtravelbear and aidy like this.
Often1 is online now  
Old Sep 11, 18, 6:24 am
  #1305  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 35,118
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
This would have been a lot easier to understand and thus to explain if the passenger had simply listed his itinerary, the carriers, and the timings, rather than having to parse through vague references.
I agree with the observation about the opaque and confusing way in which the post was written. I've had to read it about half a dozen times before reaching a conclusion about what I think it means.
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
This would have been a lot easier to understand and thus to explain if the passenger had simply listed his itinerary, the carriers, and the timings, rather than having to parse through vague references.

But, once done. There is no EC 261/2004 delay compensation due here because the passenger arrived at his final ticketed destination not later than 3 (or 4) hours after his originally scheduled arrival. In fact, he arrived earlier.
But what I think it means is that the passenger arrived about 17 hours after his originally scheduled arrival. It would have been the full 24 hours (there only being one BA flight a day to that destination) if he had not been re-routed on SK and KL, thus shaving about 7 hours off the delay.

Does this make a difference? And I do wonder whether the person looking at the claim might have been equally confused by the way that the claim was described.
Globaliser is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread