Originally Posted by clarkeysntfc

Yep, they can. We were originally on TPA-MIA-LHR and due to the late running AA TPA-MIA sector we'd have missed our connection, so we were rebooked TPA-LGW.

BA outright refused to pay for a transfer between the two locations.

AA gave us some vouchers towards another AA operated flight but not as direct recompense for the transfer, it was due to the delay on their service.

Originally Posted by PAL62V

So this is the part of EC261 I don't understand: she was originally offered a flight from JFK which would have got her home within the three hours delay time. BA pro-actively offered her a flight 24 hours later when she asked them to pay for the expensive cab fare to JFK. She has accepted this flight. Is she able to claim or is that thwarted because she was originally offered the JFK flight?

I should point out that she didn't turn down the JFK option, instead BA customer services person offered her the following day out of EWR when confronted with the question of cab fares!

EDIT: Just been reading this: https://www.britishairways.com/en-us...s/compensation and my take on this is that she does indeed qualify for EC261. She's on the same routing and had to be put on a day later due to no availability on the 16th.

Interestingly, this article seems to say that if you take a different routing then you can't claim compensation which is ridiculous if you NEED to be back the same day but in this case would have to pay out far larger cab amounts due to BA's own fault in not taking you on your booked route. The implication here is that it's you r choice to take a different route and therefore BA can't be held responsible for extra costs.

Originally Posted by Misco60

Getting from EWR to JFK by public transport costs less than $30.

Originally Posted by PAL62V

Just to keep this on topic so it doesn't drift too far, can someone advise whether EC261 applies in my case when the first flight offered by BA (which would have arrived an hour later than booked) was from and to different airports and to maintain the same routing they then offered a flight 24 hours later which has been accepted?

Originally Posted by LondonElite

She was offered an alternate, which would have gotten her home in time, but this was, de facto, declined, I think you are saying. No EC261 compensation would apply.

Originally Posted by PAL62V

Except that the alternative was both from and to different airports than the original booking. Which is why I read it that she is entitled to claim.

Originally Posted by SeattleDavid

Doesn't 261 compensation apply if you arrive home later, OR if you have to leave earlier?

Given the extra time Mrs PAL62V would have to allow to catch the same time flight from JFK, I suspect 261 compensation would be due for an early departure instead of a late arrival.

But I have never yet had to deal with 261, despite flying TATL 6-7 times a year for 5 years, so I could be quite wrong.

Originally Posted by PAL62V

Originally Posted by LondonElite

You may have an argument on your hands, though, as JFK, EWR, and LGA are all considered NYC. I prefer your interpretation too, incidentally!

Originally Posted by EC261

3. When, in the case where a town, city or region is served by several airports, an operating air carrier offers a passenger a flight to an airport alternative to that for which the booking was made, the operating air carrier shall bear the cost of transferring the passenger from that alternative airport either to that for which the booking was made, or to another close-by destination agreed with the passenger.

Originally Posted by LondonElite

Originally Posted by cauchy

I'm struggling to see why it's complicated there is an argument here?



Is BA saying there's a distinction between arriving vs departing at an alternative airport? Given the pro-consumer way the regulation has been interpreted in the past, I'm not convinced BA would want to test this out...