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

Flight From Hell [BA2036 MCO-LGW delayed then diverted to JFK]

Flight From Hell [BA2036 MCO-LGW delayed then diverted to JFK]

    Hide Wikipost
Old Nov 5, 18, 9:27 pm   -   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: lavajava
Wiki Link
Key Information (thanks @corporate-wage-slave):

Original schedule

Thursday 1 November BA2036 (Operated by G-VIIR)
MCO dep 2120
LGW arr 1025 - Friday 2 November

Delay Reason: Aircraft Defects/Technical

Actual schedule
Saturday 3 November BA2036
MCO dep 0032 (was at some point intended to depart at 19.25 on Friday)
Diverted: JFK arr 0345 Saturday 3 November
----------
JFK dep 2038 Saturday 3 November
LGW arr 0645 Sunday 4 November

Delay: 45 hours 40 minutes late for those who were not re-routed on to other services.
The rescue aircraft G-STBF left LHR at 12:52 and landed in JFK 15:27

Diversion Information (thanks @Globaliser):

The aircraft left MCO just before 0100 on 3 November as BA9601. It got to about Charleston, made a U-turn, and then another one when it was back near Savannah, before continuing northbound and diverting to JFK. ExpertFlyer.com says "aircraft forced to return" and also seems to say for this flight that the diversion to JFK was for "aircraft defects".

Compensation Information:

This delay should be in scope for 600 Euro delay compensation plus applicable/reasonable expenses. Please follow the link to the EU261 Compensation thread that contains a useful Wiki section.
Print Wikipost

Reply

Old Nov 7, 18, 1:26 am
  #151  
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 21,041
Originally Posted by botham View Post

My extended family were caught up in the BA IT failure, but didn’t keep all their receipts, not realising that they might get reimbursed. Easily done when stressed.
They should still be able to claim it back. If they do need the receipts (I am not 100% certain it would be required but it becomes a much clearer case if they had them), hotels can usually issue a duplicate invoice/receipt on request, and for other expenses a credit card/bank statement showing a transaction on a particular date at a particular location that matches the disruption should work.

Originally Posted by peck View Post




I'm sorry, but all of the above is entirely your choice and completely under your control. If it is impacting your health that badly, please just stop!
Where did I say any issues were caused by travelling? I was on a receiving end of a rather snide comment about travelling in F so I was simply explaining why I end up needing to travel in F, and also needed to comment that not everything might be how it appears to be, i.e. not that I sit here doing nothing and spend a vast fortune on travelling for my pleasure. There are things called moral obligations that I feel I must perform too. Not that it matters to anyone else one bit, but I do not particularly wish to tolerate a snide remark full of assumptions and keep quiet.

Last edited by LTN Phobia; Nov 7, 18 at 1:38 am
LTN Phobia is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 18, 1:39 am
  #152  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,258
Originally Posted by LTN Phobia View Post
Would you say the same if it is a disruption of a train for instance, necessitating an unscheduled overnight stop?
Yes, I would.

In fact 3 weeks ago my 16 year old son was stuck at Brighton station around midnight due to a suicide at Burgess Hill.

The train companies organised a fleet of taxis and he was delivered home. They certainly did not weasel out with some "tough luck, sort yourself out and claim it back" approach.

He didn't have a credit card anyway.
simons1 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 18, 1:44 am
  #153  
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 38,881
OK, allow me to put in "one of those posts".

I think we can gently disagree as to how prepared one should or should not be for life's mishaps, but it's not great to get too personal with some of the lines of argument shown above, some of which are borderline goading. We've only heard indirectly from one passenger group affected and a lot of non specific conjectures are being thrown around here, the value of which I would question. In a sense it's side argument, where this forum hopefully does a collectively good job is providing advice to travellers on what to do next, no matter where there are on the frequent flyer scale. Perhaps it's best to focus on the specifics of this event? Even though we actually haven't heard yet from someone who was on these flights.

Specifically the Article 7 compensation tends to be an "after event" customer remedy whereas food, drink and hotels are what is needed upfront. But most of all communication, and as far as I can see BA gave up to 4 separate letters (Orlando, Orlando hotel, New York, Gatwick) to the customers concerned as their unfortunate experience dragged on. Plus the probably unhappy experiences with staff in MCO and JFK.

Incidentally my reading on the situation is that BA were not under an EC261 obligation to provided hotel accommodation in New York - just telephone calls, food and drink. They were obliged to provide accomodation in Orlando, and to offer re-routing options.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 18, 1:51 am
  #154  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,258
Originally Posted by LTN Phobia View Post
What's so special about flying that removes personal responsibility towards preparedness though? There are so many aspects of travel and obviously travelling is not limited to flying, but even if you limited it to flying, not all carriers and not all situations are covered by EU261?
I think you would probably know that many travellers are the once in a year holidaymaker types and being dumped in an unexpected situation is not the thing they prepare for. Particularly when you are tired from already having had a 24 hour delay including (self acknowledged) poor communication from BA.

Not all travellers carry the full CWS "just in case BA cock up" toolkit of directories, Skype and hotel apps, 3 days clothing in the rucksack, photos of all your belongings type stuff.

EC261 provides for a duty of care and it was a reasonable expectation that BA would look after its customers.

I honestly think the line of defence is totally absurd.
gate4lounge and dajdavies like this.
simons1 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 18, 1:57 am
  #155  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,258
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
Incidentally my reading on the situation is that BA were not under an EC261 obligation to provided hotel accommodation in New York - just telephone calls, food and drink. They were obliged to provide accomodation in Orlando, and to offer re-routing options.
Well one of the reasons EC261 was introduced was because airlines were incapable of doing the right thing and treating people fairly. I suppose the legislators did not appreciate that this level of granularity was needed.
simons1 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 18, 2:04 am
  #156  
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 21,041
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
Incidentally my reading on the situation is that BA were not under an EC261 obligation to provided hotel accommodation in New York - just telephone calls, food and drink.
I agree with your post in general, however, I'd beg to differ on this point. I'd say that BA were under an EC261 obligation to provide hotel accommodation in New York because that's where they ended up for the night because of the diversion (i.e. resulting in a situation "- where a stay of one or more nights becomes necessary" in Article 9.), although I guess technically not till the morning (saying that, I guess the question could be, what time do they stop counting it as "night" in this context?).

I agree that Orlando would definitely have been needed with the overnight stop. Did BA actually provide hotel rooms there to essentially everyone, but had difficulties in New York because of the marathon?

Last edited by LTN Phobia; Nov 7, 18 at 2:13 am
LTN Phobia is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 18, 2:28 am
  #157  
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 38,881
Originally Posted by LTN Phobia View Post
I guess the question could be, what time do they stop counting it as "night" in this context?).
The passengers emerged were off the aircraft in JFK at 05:20, and a bit later for those with baggage. For those not rebooked to LHR, they needed to be back at the gate at 17:40. I know that in the past at least, courts haven't regarded that as being a night time stop (Smith-Packham v easyJet, Liverpool 2014). It also wouldn't be straightforward to get accommodation - in terms of walking into the room - at say 07:00 hrs in somewhere like NYC. Arguably a stronger level of protection would be needed for those with special needs and reduced mobility, though not those with accompanied children, at least in terms of the Regulation's wording. But as simons1 pointed out, the Regulation probably didn't imagine a 10 hour flight turning into 54 hours.

Accommodation was provided for all in Orlando, though that came with problems of its own.
gate4lounge and wrp96 like this.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 18, 10:33 am
  #158  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dorchester, Dorset UK
Programs: BA Blue, BMI, ANA, HH Blue, SPG Gold
Posts: 1,745
Originally Posted by DYKWIA View Post
They shouldn't really need to keep receipts, as BA should be providing "Duty of Care". This includes hotel accommodation, transport to the hotel and meals at the hotel.
They wouldn’t pay for meals or taxi fares without receipts. Nor would they pay for transport / care rental fuel from Miami to Orlando. The cancelled flights were from LGW to MCO and replacements LHR to MIA.
botham is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 18, 10:55 am
  #159  
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 13,495
Originally Posted by botham View Post
They wouldn’t pay for meals or taxi fares without receipts. Nor would they pay for transport / care rental fuel from Miami to Orlando. The cancelled flights were from LGW to MCO and replacements LHR to MIA.
BA should be arranging the transportation for you. But... of course, it's sometimes easier to bite the bullet and sort it yourself and claim back.
DYKWIA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 18, 11:08 am
  #160  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: JER
Programs: BA Gold/OWE, several MUCCI, and assorted Pensions!
Posts: 28,096
Originally Posted by DYKWIA View Post
BA should be arranging the transportation for you. But... of course, it's sometimes easier to bite the bullet and sort it yourself and claim back.
For those of us who are fortunate enough to have a spare/second credit card with £10k plus available, yes. But as others have said up-Thread, not everyone has that luxury, I could imagine many of the affected pax have spent close to their limits already.
wrp96 likes this.
T8191 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 18, 11:12 am
  #161  
Ambassador: Emirates Airlines
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 13,495
Originally Posted by T8191 View Post
For those of us who are fortunate enough to have a spare/second credit card with £10k plus available, yes. But as others have said up-Thread, not everyone has that luxury, I could imagine many of the affected pax have spent close to their limits already.
Yep - a family holiday to Orlando doesn't come cheap.
T8191, wrp96 and redeyedonkey like this.
DYKWIA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 18, 11:25 am
  #162  
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 21,041
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave View Post
The passengers emerged were off the aircraft in JFK at 05:20, and a bit later for those with baggage. For those not rebooked to LHR, they needed to be back at the gate at 17:40. I know that in the past at least, courts haven't regarded that as being a night time stop (Smith-Packham v easyJet, Liverpool 2014).
I see! Thank you for the info. That's a bit 'ouch' in this particular circumstance, especially if someone was rebooked on an afternoon flight in Y/PE. That's where a goodwill hotel booking would have been nice for people.

I do see that it's rather difficult to get a hotel room (particularly day rooms) at 7 am, and additional difficulties with hotel availability situation on the day in NY as well though.
LTN Phobia is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 18, 5:25 am
  #163  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: a £30 taxi to LHR
Programs: BA Gold, SPG Lifetime Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 636
It seems a number of pax involved in this are trying to fight their case for double EU261, claiming that there were actually two separate delays (due to different flight numbers). I believe it was quoted above that the second time this plane left MCO it was BA9601. Apparently BA have changed the flight number back to BA2036...

What do you think their chances are? Any other examples out there of double EU261 being paid in a similar circumstance?
lavajava is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 18, 5:32 am
  #164  
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 38,881
Originally Posted by lavajava View Post
What do you think their chances are? Any other examples out there of double EU261 being paid in a similar circumstance?
I did wonder if this would come up! I bet BA will regard it as a single trip which just had 2 delays on it - and it was apparently caused by the same problem. And people would typically have one reservation for that trip. If EC261 had intended to add extra penalties for extended delays it would have said so, given it does curtail penalties for short delays. Generally I would say that BA would probably have good grounds for holding to one EC261, and I bet CEDR would agree. However in MCOL, if someone was able to persuade the court that this really was two trips, two delays, then I can see in some circumstances it may be successful on a balance of probabilities basis.
lavajava likes this.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 18, 1:01 pm
  #165  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 881
Originally Posted by lavajava View Post
It seems a number of pax involved in this are trying to fight their case for double EU261, claiming that there were actually two separate delays (due to different flight numbers). I believe it was quoted above that the second time this plane left MCO it was BA9601. Apparently BA have changed the flight number back to BA2036...

What do you think their chances are? Any other examples out there of double EU261 being paid in a similar circumstance?
The change in flight number would have been more to do with ATC and not having 2 flights in the air at the same time with the same flight number.
lavajava likes this.
SpeedbirdLHR is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread