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 18, 18, 2:12 pm
  #1351  
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: 38,789
Originally Posted by rlnnpt View Post
Sorry to drag this back up, but I canít understand why BA are fighting so hard on issues with the Trent 1000 - surely these are just effectively billed back to RR en masse? Or have RR already reached their liability cap on this?
Unlike some other cases, the RR aspect is extraordinary circumstances, but what CEDR (and I have no doubts the courts) are suggesting is the bit that is under BA's control - dealing with customers and getting them from A to B at least approximately in line with what they booked - isn't being done properly. Or rather BA haven't presented the evidence to show they have taken all reasonable measures (done the planning, rebooked people adequately, run alternative services, hired in more lease aircraft etc) to mitigate the issue. It's a useful reminder that extraordinary circumstances isn't a full "get out of gaol" card on its own. The relationship between BA, Boeing and Rolls Royce need not detain the passenger, however knowing how BA operates, it wouldn't surprised me if BA took on some of the risk themselves, or perhaps reinsured it. But I suspect we will never know the specifics of this, this falls squarely under the ambit of commercial confidentiality.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Sep 18, 18, 2:20 pm
  #1352  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,253
Originally Posted by rlnnpt View Post


Sorry to drag this back up, but I canít understand why BA are fighting so hard on issues with the Trent 1000 - surely these are just effectively billed back to RR en masse? Or have RR already reached their liability cap on this? Has BA already agreed liability from RR based on estimates of what the total cost of compensation etc will be, in which case every claim BA deny is pure profit? Or even worse, under BAs responsibility to mitigate its losses, does this include fighting every claim? Surely their total overhead for the back and forth is more than the payout?
Surely the essence of 'sharp practice' would be to negotiate compensation whilst restricting payouts.

So I wouldn't be surprised to find that BA has been compensated by RR whilst trying to dodge any EC261 liabilities.

This is something the rail companies do well from, receiving big payouts from National Rail whilst paying out less than 10% to customers.
simons1 is offline  
Old Sep 18, 18, 9:51 pm
  #1353  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Programs: BA Gold, AA Lifetime Gold 1.8mm, IC Spire Ambassador, Hilton Diamond, SPG Gold et al
Posts: 4,298
Originally Posted by Globalist View Post
One of my friends was on that flight and claimed the EC 261 600 euro for the 4hr+ delay on a flight over 3,500km.

BA did not proactively point the passengers to their rights. My friend is not a frequent flyer and would not have been aware of this (until I told him).
BA did not provide any vouchers or other assistance before the flight.

To me this is clearly BA their fault.
At times I have some sympathy for airlines who see this regulation as unduly harsh but then I am reminded of behaviour like that where my reaction is to take them for every (legitimate) penny.
Blueboys999 is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 1:05 am
  #1354  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brighton, UK
Programs: BA Gold, IC Ambassador, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Fairmont Platinum
Posts: 3,154
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
I can't point to anything that says they are definitely right or definitely wrong on this. I'm assuming you were something like 185 minutes late in arriving and BA are claiming (e.g.) 10 minute was due to ATC. Now my take on this is that it broadly takes about 25 to 30 minutes to get airborne out of LHR, if LGW it's more complicated (time of day related). Let me give you an example from the flight I've just taken, LHR-EDI on BA1452. This left gate 3 at LHR at 16:26 (a minute late) and got to EDI gate 10 at 17:55, which is 5 minutes late. As is common at this time of day we were held at the queue point for 27R (the one by Holiday Inn Ariel) for quite a while and only got airborne at 17:01, so it took 35 minutes from pushback to take off. This is a little on the long side, 25 to 30 minutes is what I normally expect, but here's the point: today with strong winds and a congested Eurocontrol boxes day, they accommodated the delay pretty much within the generous time allowed under the schedule, 5 minutes late into EDI, 1 minute late out of the gate, 10 minutes late at 27R, 5 minutes at least recovered from the time padding.

So in your case, if you were airborne say 40 minutes after the eventual pushback, then BA perhaps have a case (and this is where capturing the Expertflyer data or asking here for it within 2 days is so helpful). That's a long delay and if BA are saying 10 minutes is due to ATC then they have the evidence for this. If on the other hand you were airborne at LHR 30 minutes after your delayed pushback then I would say that's not valid. As you can see, the details rather matter here.

If you feel strongly about this, you better forget CEDR and focus on MCOL, but I think you'll have to do a lot of research. And it would need MCOL/CEDR to change their view, in that some paralegal would have to construct a case rather than a Customer Relations representative.
Thank you for the advice which is very helpful as ever.

In this case this was a LIN to LHR flight where at LHR the plane operating the route was damaged beyond immediate repair and therefore an alternative plane was substituted. The damage was BAís fault.

The inbound service was 3 hours late. Turnaround at LIN was normal time (I am very familiar with this route). As usual it was a bussed departure to a remote stand. There were two rotations of the bus and no stragglers. Again normal. Front door was closed immediately last passenger boarded, steps were removed and we left the stand straightaway. After a short taxi with no delays and no queue, we took off. Stand to airbound would be 10 minutes. Again all normal LIN stuff.

Flight appeared to take normal route per moving map screen. BA do not claim differently.

The ATC delay BA is claiming is a single short circle of West London whilst in a queue to land at LHR. This took the 8 minutes claimed. Again I would say this was normal.

That is my point: a queue at LHR waiting for a landing slot is normal for an on-time departure and to be expected if you are looking for an alternative slot as your scheduled arrival time was three hours earlier. Given that all other aspects of this flight operated normally and without any further delay other than the late arrival of the outbound flight, I do not see a single circle at LHR as an exceptional circumstance that BA can hide behind.

FrancisA is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 2:29 am
  #1355  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 62
Hi there, I'm trying to work this out: We were on an Iberia ticketed flight from MAN via LHR to MAD on Friday just gone (all one PNR/ticket). The MAN-LHR was slightly delayed which meant we couldn't get the LHR-MAD (Iberia metal). The BA desk then re-booked us on the first BA flight to MAD the next morning and put us up in a hotel etc. I pretty sure this means we claim from Iberia, but not sure if this is a delay/cancellation/denied boarding...does that even make a difference etc?

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

SoiDog
SoiDog is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 2:57 am
  #1356  
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: 38,789
Originally Posted by FrancisA View Post
The ATC delay BA is claiming is a single short circle of West London whilst in a queue to land at LHR. This took the 8 minutes claimed. Again I would say this was normal.
I'm sure the LHR regulars would note that once or twice around the hold is entirely normal, 15 minutes plus would be unusual these days. Going straight in without a hold is - well - not uncommon these days, and the 20 - 30 minutes in the hold are things of the past (though low speed floating over Oxfordshire is more common). But I would say 8 minutes is normal and booked into the schedule. If you left LIN clearly over 3 hours late (?) and accepting that the departure time is generally irrelevant, nevertheless I don't think BA can rely on an 8 minute hold to avoid EC261.

I suggested MCOL would be better than CEDR, however CEDR does involve a more clear exchange of information before the adjudicator reaches their decision. It may be worth on a "normal for LHR" day studying a sample of Flightradar24 movements to establish what is reasonable here.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Sep 19, 18, 3:00 am
  #1357  
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: 38,789
Originally Posted by SoiDog View Post
Hi there, I'm trying to work this out: We were on an Iberia ticketed flight from MAN via LHR to MAD on Friday just gone (all one PNR/ticket). The MAN-LHR was slightly delayed which meant we couldn't get the LHR-MAD (Iberia metal).
That's BA who caused the misconnect. When you say slight delay, that makes Article 7 compensation potentially tricky since it's easier for BA to maintain extraordinary circumstances were to blame. Had you got to LHR on time then I presume you would have made the Iberia flight and therefore it's not Iberia that was the operating airline here.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Sep 19, 18, 3:19 am
  #1358  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 387
Very quick question, just want to make sure I've got this right - is AGP-LGW considered to be a medium band flight?
shadowline is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 3:34 am
  #1359  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 35,210
Originally Posted by shadowline View Post
Very quick question, just want to make sure I've got this right - is AGP-LGW considered to be a medium band flight?
AGP-LGW is 1,644 km, if that's what you're asking.
Globaliser is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 3:41 am
  #1360  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 387
Originally Posted by Globaliser View Post
AGP-LGW is 1,644 km, if that's what you're asking.
Thanks.

145km away from a payout under EC261 for a family member who was delayed for 2 hours and 4 minutes by U2 (with the delay handled awfully!)
shadowline is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 3:43 am
  #1361  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
That's BA who caused the misconnect. When you say slight delay, that makes Article 7 compensation potentially tricky since it's easier for BA to maintain extraordinary circumstances were to blame. Had you got to LHR on time then I presume you would have made the Iberia flight and therefore it's not Iberia that was the operating airline here.
Thanks CWS.

Looking at the flight times I think we were within MCT for T5 - the flight from MAN (IB7685) was delayed for about an hour which should've meant we had at least a 50 min connection time at T5. We had to wait in a queue at the BA transfer desk for quite a while to be told we couldn't fly until the morning. I think this might be about whether there was a problem with the IB flight to MAD (we were given no information). I've asked on the IB forum about whether the flight was cancelled or not.

If anyone has any info on here it was IB3167 on Friday 14th Sep.

Thanks again.
SoiDog is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 4:57 am
  #1362  
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: 38,789
Originally Posted by SoiDog View Post
If anyone has any info on here it was IB3167 on Friday 14th Sep.
If this happens to you again, try to ask about this within 48 hours of it happening, ideally 24 hours. It's much easier to get chapter and verse at that point. BA522 left T5 on time and arrived in MAD on time or perhaps a minute or two early.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Sep 19, 18, 6:31 am
  #1363  
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club, Marriott Bonvoy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Englandshire
Programs: SPG LT Plat, BA G, BD*LG, MG Blue+ ...
Posts: 11,534
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
Taxi fares should also come in at £50 or less too, same principle
Family party of 4 passengers
Stranded in AMS overnight on the day of the LHR Tower Fire Alarm / FLY failure
Given a hotel by BA in The Hague, which was the nearest with available rooms, at around midnight. Told by BA agent that BA would reimburse taxi expenses.
All 4 squeezed themselves into one taxi (to save cost to BA), arriving at 1am, and costing about Eur100.
Took one taxi back to AMS the next day (again, to save cost to BA), costing about Eur90

BA have paid only £100 (£50 per taxi journey), citing a £50 cap, and advised the passenger to claim the balance from their Travel Insurance.

Claimant is understandably hacked off by BA's response and being left out of pocket, particularly as they made more than reasonable effort to minimise cost to BA by taking just one taxi.
Even setting aside BA conjuring up this £50 cap after the event, the per-passenger cost was way below £50 per journey.

Suggestions on how to extract the full Eur190 taxi fares from BA are welcomed.
Oxon Flyer is offline  
Old Sep 19, 18, 6:44 am
  #1364  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Flatland
Programs: AA EP 1MM, BA Gold, UA Peon
Posts: 5,238
Personally I would be inclined to send a Letter Before Action and then use the Money Claim On-Line part of the small claims court process.

I don't know of any legal basis to support BA's £50 per day taxi limit. It is just a policy decision.

At past midnight, public transport is not a workable option to get from Schiphol to Den Haag. During the daytime it would be a viable option to get back to the airport if no other circumstances (limited mobility, etc) prevailed, but as long as BA don't claim "you should have used the train" (and they usually do not) then the question will not arise - and you should not raise it.
flatlander is online now  
Old Sep 19, 18, 6:59 am
  #1365  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oxon, UK
Programs: Mucci des canapes, Skywards Gold, BAEC Gold, IC Plat Amb, Accor Gold
Posts: 1,839
Originally Posted by Oxon Flyer View Post
Told by BA agent that BA would reimburse taxi expenses.
All 4 squeezed themselves into one taxi (to save cost to BA), arriving at 1am, and costing about Eur100.
Took one taxi back to AMS the next day (again, to save cost to BA), costing about Eur90

BA have paid only £100 (£50 per taxi journey), citing a £50 cap, and advised the passenger to claim the balance from their Travel Insurance.
This has happened to me on a couple of occasions with IRROPS when the BA rep at the time has stated that BA will pay for x or y and then on making the claim BA refusing to pay or more usually paying only an arbitary proportion.

I'm afraid now that I would write the offer down and ensure that at the least a record of the staff member's name or preferably a signature
pomkiwi is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread