Schultzois

I think we are reading the same posts. I have already clarified that I didn't realise the OP was on daytime flight from JFK. Which meant that BA's delays would make an overnight delay (but still a two day instead of one day journey). I am perfectly happy to be corrected but OP seems to have indicated that he talked to BA, attempted to make contact online, but no same-day solutions were offered (which I realise may have required a little effort to find).

I still am glad the OP found a solution that caused only 80 minutes delay instead of more than 12 hours. I hadn't even thought of how much this saved BA since he basically took his own duty of care into hand... And although I don't know the OP's conditions, I do know that for me an overnight delay caused by the airline's failures is something that I don't take lightly.

Schultzois

deleted as I MAY have misread another message...... I'm not actually certain.

NickB

It seems to me that you are adding requirements which are not in the regulation. The passenger is not required to investigate alternatives, put these to the airline and only after the airline has refused those alternatives does the passenger become eligible to compensation.If the airline offers a rerouting, there is no obligation on the passenger to engage in a negotiation with the airline regarding the rerouting. The passenger can simply decide that he will not take the rerouting that is being offered and choose one of the alternatives available under the Reg.

The OP indicated that what they were offered was a rebooking on the next day's flight. So the offer of rebooking by BA did not satisfy the requirements in the Reg to escape the compensation duty. Moreover, even if one were to assume that BA might theoretically have been willing to consider a rerouting on an LY flight had the OP been to the transfer desk to discuss it, this would in any event not have been an option as, by that time, it would have been too late to catch it. As it was, the OP barely managed to make in time before the gate closed. Since there was no other option that would have allowed the OP to arrive within 3 hrs of the originally scheduled BA flight, there is no way that BA could have offered a rerouting that arrived within that time frame.

Often1

Under the reasonable presumption that OP wishes to make it from his connection point to his final ticketed destination, BA offered OP a fully compliant reroute. It most certainly was for OP to propose some other reroute if that is what he wished, or to require a refund or a reroute at some future point. While I do not believe that OP's case for compensation would have been better had he sought the LY reroute and been denied (for good reason it turns out as he could not make the flight with his bags), he did not even make that attempt.

OP instead did nothing and went off on his own. At that point there is nothing more for BA to do, even if it wished to do so. While he may or may not be due a refund of the segment which is not likely to be much or perhaps a single between LHR and TLV at some point in the future, it is hard to see how he is due compensation for a delay which did not occur and, although not part of EC 261/2004, for BA to deliver his bags to TLV (although I suspect that BA will do so in due course if only to rid itself of the physical items).

NickB

A delay DID occur: the JFK-LHR flight was delayed, which resulted in BA being unable to offer rerouting that would have seen the OP arrive within 3 hours of the original schedule. It is the airline's unwillingness or inability to offer rerouting that arrives within 3 hours that generates the right to compensation. There is no requirement in the Reg for the OP to take that rerouting. Nor is there anywhere in the Reg an obligation on the passenger to notify on the spot to the airline which of the two remedies other than immediate rerouting offered by Article 8(1) he opts for. Again, we seem to be inventing additional requirements that do not seem to be in the Reg.

One cannot entirely rule out that a court would read such additional requirements in the Reg but it is far from obvious that a court (or at any rate the CJEU) would do so, all the more as it seems in keeping with neither the wording nor the spirit of the Reg.

jeremyBA

smokie36

I see that now my apologies to the OP as I didn't realise he needed to be there there for religious reasons.

Schultzois

This is a preposterous thing to say. the OP did not "abandon" his trip. He chose to continue it with a commercial carrier willing to take him to his destination, even if it was more expensive and less comfortable.

I have also re-read (since another member suggested maybe I had not read the same posts) and OP makes clear in his very first post that BA, knowing fully well what time his flight had left JFK for LHR, proposed a 12+ hour delay the minute he stepped of the plane in LHR. So to suggest he did this all on his own is also disingenuous at best. BA's solution to the problem of its own making was a delay of more than 12 hours. That delay was not acceptable to the OP, who without the resources of a global airline in his employ, got himself home.

simons1

It's an interesting thread and a somewhat unusual set of circumstances, although fairly clear that some posters really don't have a scooby and are just guessing or making it up as we go along. Probably not helpful to the OP.

Clearly rerouting on another airline in order to minimise delay (which is part of the intent of EC261) was possible as the OP in effect did this. Whether it was reasonable for BA to have done this in the limited time available is a matter of debate.

If I was the OP I would re-read CWS's interventions and then get in touch with the airline setting out the facts and what he is expecting in return.

pauldb

simons1

Yes, and CWS was correct in stating that.

I stand by what I said, most people are guessing at the outcome, it is a complicated case that could be argued either way.

There is nothing in EC261 which requires the OP to be rerouted on BA, however with tight connections it may equally not be realistic to have expected BA to have rebooked on the LY flight.

Best for the OP to inform BA of their proposed resolution and then take it from there. Whilst it is not clear cut it is also conceivable that a district judge might find in OP's favour. Alternatively I believe consumer protections exist in Israel too.

snaxmuppet

Andriyko

How is one supposed to be re-booked without talking to the airline? The OP did not clarify where the 'offer' of the hotel and the next day flight was made. If they actually talked to a BA agent then it is not clear why the OP did not ask about the alternatives. From the description of events it looks like no options were presented and that it was cabin crew (or probably a ground agent who met the aircraft) who advised the OP about the missed connection. The line at the customer service desks were long and the OP decided to make their own arrangements. I am not adding a requirement that it was up to the OP to suggest a new routing, but they were supposed to talk to BA and ask what their options were. It is the airline's responsibility to rebook a passenger, but if a passenger refuses to talk to the airline then I am not sure how any assistance and solutions can be offered. The OP was rebooked onto the next BA flight as a default option, but they could have had a number of other options had they actually talked to a customer service agent which they chose not to.

simons1

You could of course argue that the flight left JFK an hour late at which point it was clear that the OP would miss their connection. So there was at least 6 hours notice of this.

A proactive airline may have met a premium traveller off their flight and transferred them. A non proactive airline would expect the traveller to stand forever in some queue or another and thus miss the chance of rerouting at the earliest opportunity (maybe that is what you mean by 'talking to them'?)

Sometimes it's about going the extra mile.

Jumbodriver