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
Jan 8, 2018, 11:19 pm
#46
Moderator, Emirates
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Where My Heart Is
Programs: BAEC Silver, FB Platinum, KQ Asante Gold, Shebamiles Blue, Emirates Blue
Posts: 3,386
An update for anyone interested in a scenario I posted about in the 2017 thread https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/29210596-post1823.html where I was IDBd albeit temporarily because of a biometrics issue.
I wrote to HAL to find out what happened and have had a couple of emails from them keeping me up to date with the progress of their investigation and final findings.
After investigating the issue, their findings are that there was an error with my BP (Mobile BP on my iPhone) and although the security barrier at fast track picked this up, it still let me gain access which obviously should not have happened and eventually the issue was finally picked up at the boarding gate. So in summary this was down to a technology failure. My problem that day has now highlighted a potential issue with their systems which they should now be able to resolve and hopefully prevent such things happening again.
S
I wrote to HAL to find out what happened and have had a couple of emails from them keeping me up to date with the progress of their investigation and final findings.
After investigating the issue, their findings are that there was an error with my BP (Mobile BP on my iPhone) and although the security barrier at fast track picked this up, it still let me gain access which obviously should not have happened and eventually the issue was finally picked up at the boarding gate. So in summary this was down to a technology failure. My problem that day has now highlighted a potential issue with their systems which they should now be able to resolve and hopefully prevent such things happening again.
S
Jan 11, 2018, 10:10 pm
#47
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 732
I had a one-way flight from BUD-LHR-EDI in CE (avios redemption). The BUD-LHR flight was delayed and this was going to cause a misconnect. Upon arrival at BUD, BA had rebooked me on Lufthansa via FRA. All was good and I was scheduled to arrive at a similar time.
Got on the plane, only to be told it was cancelled due to weather in FRA.
I understand that I cannot make a claim against Lufthansa as it was due to weather in FRA. Does BA hold any responsibility as the ticketing airline?
Got on the plane, only to be told it was cancelled due to weather in FRA.
I understand that I cannot make a claim against Lufthansa as it was due to weather in FRA. Does BA hold any responsibility as the ticketing airline?
Jan 12, 2018, 1:49 am
#48
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,596
I had a one-way flight from BUD-LHR-EDI in CE (avios redemption). The BUD-LHR flight was delayed and this was going to cause a misconnect. Upon arrival at BUD, BA had rebooked me on Lufthansa via FRA. All was good and I was scheduled to arrive at a similar time.
Got on the plane, only to be told it was cancelled due to weather in FRA.
I understand that I cannot make a claim against Lufthansa as it was due to weather in FRA. Does BA hold any responsibility as the ticketing airline?
Got on the plane, only to be told it was cancelled due to weather in FRA.
I understand that I cannot make a claim against Lufthansa as it was due to weather in FRA. Does BA hold any responsibility as the ticketing airline?
Jan 13, 2018, 6:14 pm
#49
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Gold, HH Gold
Posts: 29
Back in November, I was traveling to Stockholm on an EWR-LHR-ARN itinerary. Flights were booked on AA stock with AA flight numbers, but were operated by BA so I believe this falls under BA for EC261 purposes. I was scheduled to fly back through LHR on flight 0185 on 21 November. On 19 November I got a voicemail from AA saying that my LHR-EWR flight had been cancelled. Was never contacted by BA. AA had rebooked me on Finnair flights through Helsinki which got me back to JFK (not EWR) about 2 hours after I was originally supposed to arrive. Since my final destination was in New Jersey and this was the week of Thanksgiving, it took another 2 hours to get home.
Contacted BA about EC261 compensation because A) they never contacted me about the cancellation and B) I didn't get back to my original destination.
BA said the flight was cancelled due to "operational circumstances" outside their control. I asked what those were and they said it was due to the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 issue impacting the 787s. I was scheduled to fly on a 777 and the last information on flightaware still shows a 777. They claim that the equipment was switched to a 787 and then cancelled due to the engine issue. Is there any way to verify that?
Thanks for the help.
Contacted BA about EC261 compensation because A) they never contacted me about the cancellation and B) I didn't get back to my original destination.
BA said the flight was cancelled due to "operational circumstances" outside their control. I asked what those were and they said it was due to the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 issue impacting the 787s. I was scheduled to fly on a 777 and the last information on flightaware still shows a 777. They claim that the equipment was switched to a 787 and then cancelled due to the engine issue. Is there any way to verify that?
Thanks for the help.
Jan 13, 2018, 8:02 pm
#50
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,595
Back in November, I was traveling to Stockholm on an EWR-LHR-ARN itinerary. Flights were booked on AA stock with AA flight numbers, but were operated by BA so I believe this falls under BA for EC261 purposes. I was scheduled to fly back through LHR on flight 0185 on 21 November. On 19 November I got a voicemail from AA saying that my LHR-EWR flight had been cancelled. Was never contacted by BA. AA had rebooked me on Finnair flights through Helsinki which got me back to JFK (not EWR) about 2 hours after I was originally supposed to arrive. Since my final destination was in New Jersey and this was the week of Thanksgiving, it took another 2 hours to get home.
Contacted BA about EC261 compensation because A) they never contacted me about the cancellation and B) I didn't get back to my original destination.
BA said the flight was cancelled due to "operational circumstances" outside their control. I asked what those were and they said it was due to the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 issue impacting the 787s. I was scheduled to fly on a 777 and the last information on flightaware still shows a 777. They claim that the equipment was switched to a 787 and then cancelled due to the engine issue. Is there any way to verify that?
Thanks for the help.
Contacted BA about EC261 compensation because A) they never contacted me about the cancellation and B) I didn't get back to my original destination.
BA said the flight was cancelled due to "operational circumstances" outside their control. I asked what those were and they said it was due to the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 issue impacting the 787s. I was scheduled to fly on a 777 and the last information on flightaware still shows a 777. They claim that the equipment was switched to a 787 and then cancelled due to the engine issue. Is there any way to verify that?
Thanks for the help.
If you check out the basource website you can retrieve historical flight data (which shows no BA185 operating on 21NOV incidentally).
In terms of factoring in additional transport time to EWR I don't think that would play out and be eligible because you had the opportunity to decline the AY rebook to JFK when contacted by AA on 19NOV and ask for a EWR arrival instead. In other words you accepted the change in arrival airport at that time which takes away any further responsibility of the airline (quite an important factor at multi airport cities such as London and New York when accepting reroutes).
Jan 13, 2018, 8:08 pm
#51
Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club, easyJet and Ryanair
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK/Las Vegas
Programs: BA Gold (GGL/CCR)
Posts: 15,926
Jan 13, 2018, 11:39 pm
#52
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Gold, HH Gold
Posts: 29
AA would have been responsible for contacting you regarding the cancellation/rebooking as they would have been responsible for your personal data because they were your original booking method.
If you check out the basource website you can retrieve historical flight data (which shows no BA185 operating on 21NOV incidentally).
In terms of factoring in additional transport time to EWR I don't think that would play out and be eligible because you had the opportunity to decline the AY rebook to JFK when contacted by AA on 19NOV and ask for a EWR arrival instead. In other words you accepted the change in arrival airport at that time which takes away any further responsibility of the airline (quite an important factor at multi airport cities such as London and New York when accepting reroutes).
21/11/17 British Airways Flight Cancellations. | The BA Source
As I've gone through this process, I've learned that I could have declined the AY flight. Didn't know that at the time. I also think it's important to note that EC261 states that the, "‘final destination’ means the destination on the ticket presented at the check-in counter." The flight they/AA provided me didn't get me back to my final destination, per that definition.
Also, BA never brought the final destination up. They only claim the reason I'm not entitled to compensation being that the 787 was pulled out of service due to turbine issues. As I mentioned, I'm pretty sure my flight was scheduled to be a 777. If you check the schedule for that flight, the 787 only operated that flight on Thursdays so this wouldn't have been a 787 day anyway.
Jan 14, 2018, 8:03 am
#53
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,595
Thanks for the information. I checked basource and sure enough, they list my flight as cancelled on the 21st.
21/11/17 British Airways Flight Cancellations. The BA Source
As I've gone through this process, I've learned that I could have declined the AY flight. Didn't know that at the time. I also think it's important to note that EC261 states that the, "‘final destination’ means the destination on the ticket presented at the check-in counter." The flight they/AA provided me didn't get me back to my final destination, per that definition.
Also, BA never brought the final destination up. They only claim the reason I'm not entitled to compensation being that the 787 was pulled out of service due to turbine issues. As I mentioned, I'm pretty sure my flight was scheduled to be a 777. If you check the schedule for that flight, the 787 only operated that flight on Thursdays so this wouldn't have been a 787 day anyway.
21/11/17 British Airways Flight Cancellations. The BA Source
As I've gone through this process, I've learned that I could have declined the AY flight. Didn't know that at the time. I also think it's important to note that EC261 states that the, "‘final destination’ means the destination on the ticket presented at the check-in counter." The flight they/AA provided me didn't get me back to my final destination, per that definition.
Also, BA never brought the final destination up. They only claim the reason I'm not entitled to compensation being that the 787 was pulled out of service due to turbine issues. As I mentioned, I'm pretty sure my flight was scheduled to be a 777. If you check the schedule for that flight, the 787 only operated that flight on Thursdays so this wouldn't have been a 787 day anyway.
Where re-routing is to another airport serving the same destination, the airline must pay for onward transport to the original airport or to a close-by destination agreed with the passenger. These choices, and the entitlement to refreshments, etc., apply to all cancellations, regardless of whether the circumstances are extraordinary or not.This would be the only thing you can claim for. The time taken doesn't form part of the overall delay because you accepted the JFK option proposed to you.
According to the rule:the airline notifies the passengers less than one week prior to departure, and re-routes passengers so that they can:
depart no more than one hour earlier than scheduled, and
arrive no more than two hours later than scheduledWith this in mind double check your actual arrival time at JFK as you may already be eligible (remember the time is calculated at doors opening at JFK, not the time the aircraft landed which at such a busy airport could may well push you over the 2hrs boundary and be eligible for the compensation.
The rule also says in this situation:The cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided by any reasonable measure.
This is ultimately for the airline and not you to prove. Whether or not the 787 issue is considered extraordinary is yet to be proven in court however. I can see why BA may consider this extraordinary. It would be upto BA to prove their equipment change from 777 to 787 and subsequent cancellation was the reason and not as you (and I) suspect this is a convenient cover story to hide an operational decision to cancel your 777 operated service to a destination which is served multiple times daily to free up your intended aircraft for another 787 affected service without easy rebook options.
The onus is very much on the carrier to prove this should the case ever reach court and something BA are probably guessing you won't go as far to get them to prove.
According to the rule:the airline notifies the passengers less than one week prior to departure, and re-routes passengers so that they can:
depart no more than one hour earlier than scheduled, and
arrive no more than two hours later than scheduledWith this in mind double check your actual arrival time at JFK as you may already be eligible (remember the time is calculated at doors opening at JFK, not the time the aircraft landed which at such a busy airport could may well push you over the 2hrs boundary and be eligible for the compensation.
The rule also says in this situation:The cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided by any reasonable measure.
This is ultimately for the airline and not you to prove. Whether or not the 787 issue is considered extraordinary is yet to be proven in court however. I can see why BA may consider this extraordinary. It would be upto BA to prove their equipment change from 777 to 787 and subsequent cancellation was the reason and not as you (and I) suspect this is a convenient cover story to hide an operational decision to cancel your 777 operated service to a destination which is served multiple times daily to free up your intended aircraft for another 787 affected service without easy rebook options.
The onus is very much on the carrier to prove this should the case ever reach court and something BA are probably guessing you won't go as far to get them to prove.
Jan 14, 2018, 11:10 am
#54
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 592
Regarding knock-on delays:
Is there any outside source that I can point to showing that knock-on delays are not extraordinary circumstances?
I am expecting pushback on a flight delayed 4:38 (on arrival). The aircraft was 4-6 hours late on every flight for 4 days. The original flight (4 days earlier) was delayed due to weather/ATC, but the subsequent flights on that aircraft were only delayed due to knock-on effects.
'
Thanks,
JS
Is there any outside source that I can point to showing that knock-on delays are not extraordinary circumstances?
I am expecting pushback on a flight delayed 4:38 (on arrival). The aircraft was 4-6 hours late on every flight for 4 days. The original flight (4 days earlier) was delayed due to weather/ATC, but the subsequent flights on that aircraft were only delayed due to knock-on effects.
'
Thanks,
JS
Jan 14, 2018, 11:37 am
#55
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: 63,803
There are quite a few, but the first that comes to mind is Frederique Jager v easyJet, back in 2013, which relates to a LGW-NCE flight, where a delay was due to poor weather on a previous sector rather than on the precise flight concerned. easyJet lost that case - it's non binding but persuasive. But it's a big subject which I (as a non lawyer) could wax lyrical for a long time without being relevant to your case. Essentially it is well known by the airlines that knock-on is not on its own extraordinary circumstances. I suspect this isn't BA since I can't think of a route where this could happen, apart from BA1.
Jan 15, 2018, 10:14 am
#56
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA GGL
Posts: 1,578
I am expecting pushback on a flight delayed 4:38 (on arrival). The aircraft was 4-6 hours late on every flight for 4 days. The original flight (4 days earlier) was delayed due to weather/ATC, but the subsequent flights on that aircraft were only delayed due to knock-on effects.
Jan 15, 2018, 10:22 am
#57
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Programs: AA Gold, HH Gold
Posts: 29
Where re-routing is to another airport serving the same destination, the airline must pay for onward transport to the original airport or to a close-by destination agreed with the passenger. These choices, and the entitlement to refreshments, etc., apply to all cancellations, regardless of whether the circumstances are extraordinary or not.This would be the only thing you can claim for. The time taken doesn't form part of the overall delay because you accepted the JFK option proposed to you.
According to the rule:the airline notifies the passengers less than one week prior to departure, and re-routes passengers so that they can:
depart no more than one hour earlier than scheduled, and
arrive no more than two hours later than scheduledWith this in mind double check your actual arrival time at JFK as you may already be eligible (remember the time is calculated at doors opening at JFK, not the time the aircraft landed which at such a busy airport could may well push you over the 2hrs boundary and be eligible for the compensation.
The rule also says in this situation:The cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided by any reasonable measure.
This is ultimately for the airline and not you to prove. Whether or not the 787 issue is considered extraordinary is yet to be proven in court however. I can see why BA may consider this extraordinary. It would be upto BA to prove their equipment change from 777 to 787 and subsequent cancellation was the reason and not as you (and I) suspect this is a convenient cover story to hide an operational decision to cancel your 777 operated service to a destination which is served multiple times daily to free up your intended aircraft for another 787 affected service without easy rebook options.
The onus is very much on the carrier to prove this should the case ever reach court and something BA are probably guessing you won't go as far to get them to prove.
According to the rule:the airline notifies the passengers less than one week prior to departure, and re-routes passengers so that they can:
depart no more than one hour earlier than scheduled, and
arrive no more than two hours later than scheduledWith this in mind double check your actual arrival time at JFK as you may already be eligible (remember the time is calculated at doors opening at JFK, not the time the aircraft landed which at such a busy airport could may well push you over the 2hrs boundary and be eligible for the compensation.
The rule also says in this situation:The cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided by any reasonable measure.
This is ultimately for the airline and not you to prove. Whether or not the 787 issue is considered extraordinary is yet to be proven in court however. I can see why BA may consider this extraordinary. It would be upto BA to prove their equipment change from 777 to 787 and subsequent cancellation was the reason and not as you (and I) suspect this is a convenient cover story to hide an operational decision to cancel your 777 operated service to a destination which is served multiple times daily to free up your intended aircraft for another 787 affected service without easy rebook options.
The onus is very much on the carrier to prove this should the case ever reach court and something BA are probably guessing you won't go as far to get them to prove.
You confirmed exactly what I was thinking. They're probably trying using the engine issue as an easy cover.
Jan 15, 2018, 3:18 pm
#58
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 12
Can I just check my understanding of the regs please.
Flying Rotterdam to City today. Original flight delayed then cancelled due to technical fault (this was announced over the tannoy). I was rebooked onto the next flight but landed just over 2 hours late.
My reading of the regs are that I am entitled to compensation of €250 as I arrived over 2 hours late and my original flight was cancelled. It seems a bit odd that if the original flight had taken off and I had arrived at the same time I would not have been due any compensation (as delayed flights have to be 3 hours late) but it does seem to be the regs.
Am I missing anything here?
Flying Rotterdam to City today. Original flight delayed then cancelled due to technical fault (this was announced over the tannoy). I was rebooked onto the next flight but landed just over 2 hours late.
My reading of the regs are that I am entitled to compensation of €250 as I arrived over 2 hours late and my original flight was cancelled. It seems a bit odd that if the original flight had taken off and I had arrived at the same time I would not have been due any compensation (as delayed flights have to be 3 hours late) but it does seem to be the regs.
Am I missing anything here?
Jan 15, 2018, 5:08 pm
#59
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 4
777 changed to 787 (allegedly)
Back in November, I was traveling to Stockholm on an EWR-LHR-ARN itinerary. Flights were booked on AA stock with AA flight numbers, but were operated by BA so I believe this falls under BA for EC261 purposes. I was scheduled to fly back through LHR on flight 0185 on 21 November. On 19 November I got a voicemail from AA saying that my LHR-EWR flight had been cancelled. Was never contacted by BA. AA had rebooked me on Finnair flights through Helsinki which got me back to JFK (not EWR) about 2 hours after I was originally supposed to arrive. Since my final destination was in New Jersey and this was the week of Thanksgiving, it took another 2 hours to get home.
Contacted BA about EC261 compensation because A) they never contacted me about the cancellation and B) I didn't get back to my original destination.
BA said the flight was cancelled due to "operational circumstances" outside their control. I asked what those were and they said it was due to the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 issue impacting the 787s. I was scheduled to fly on a 777 and the last information on flightaware still shows a 777. They claim that the equipment was switched to a 787 and then cancelled due to the engine issue. Is there any way to verify that?
Thanks for the help.
Contacted BA about EC261 compensation because A) they never contacted me about the cancellation and B) I didn't get back to my original destination.
BA said the flight was cancelled due to "operational circumstances" outside their control. I asked what those were and they said it was due to the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 issue impacting the 787s. I was scheduled to fly on a 777 and the last information on flightaware still shows a 777. They claim that the equipment was switched to a 787 and then cancelled due to the engine issue. Is there any way to verify that?
Thanks for the help.
Jan 15, 2018, 5:32 pm
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Programs: ►QFWP/LTG►VA WP►HyattExpl.►HiltonGold►ALL Silver
Posts: 21,993