Very poor food - template BA response

Old Jan 4, 2019, 1:49 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold, IHG Diamond
Posts: 354
Originally Posted by Caronahill
Having had a fairly dismissive reply already what would you do?
What are you looking for from BA?

I find when filling out BA forms, if you state what you want (x,xxx Avios, full/partial refund, formal apology from Alex Cruz dressed as a pirate) then you have a far easier time getting a simple yes, no or other / partial offer; than if you just write to indicate poor performance and leave it at that.
YacozA is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 1:54 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 778
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
I agree that the timelines seem too short in this case for food poisoning from that meal, though it may have been non food but still flight related (i.e. noro, which is pretty quick). However if BA's crew suspected there was a problem, reheating food again to somehow "deal" with a problem is against the food handling protocols that I'm familiar with, not least due to the risk of cross contamination. If there is a perceived risk - into the bin it goes! It's fine if the crew had kept it in the original packaging and decided to give the items a few more minutes directly after the first cook, but once it gets to a passenger's table I don't think it should be returned to the oven. I appreciate this causes a customer service issue of some proportion on a longish flight. Either way, however, it shouldn't be dangerous to eat so long as it was properly cooked and then secured throughout before serving.

But it still needs to be mentioned to BA in case there were wider issues, there's also Twitter / DM.
As other people have said it is very difficult to prove that food poisoning came from a particular source. The onus would be on you - you would need to be tested at that time as presumably no evidence remains? Horrible being ill I have had food poisoning from restaurants and other places some were aggressive in their denial that they were the source and some very apologetic. I would tweet and see if anybody else had similar symptoms from that flight it would then be easier to back to BA, that being said so many people just seek compensation that you would need to be careful that your responses werent just jumping on your bandwagon
CharlotteC is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 2:33 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: London
Programs: Hilton Diamond, NZ Gold, BA Gold
Posts: 134
Wow - BA are getting a roasting at the moment. All the top articles are related to issues. How much longer can this camel last??
noddie09 is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 3:20 am
  #19  
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: 63,474
Originally Posted by noddie09
Wow - BA are getting a roasting at the moment. All the top articles are related to issues. How much longer can this camel last??
It's a clich but the plural iof anecdote isn't data. I have just completed my sixth flight of 2019 and nothing has gone wrong so far. Those 6 flights wouldn't make for riveting reading no matter how hard I tried.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 3:43 am
  #20  
bzc
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 31
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
I have just completed my sixth flight of 2019
Do you actually live in BA planes and lounges? I guess that's probably still cheaper than rent in London ...
nancypants likes this.
bzc is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 4:19 am
  #21  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 531
HarryHolden68: "Yet I am always fascinated by people who allege food poisoning. Food poisoning kills people. At best, you will be in bed for several days and most likely you will face a spell under medical care being re-hydrated."

Food poisoning does not always result in a multi-day stay in bed. I have fallen victim to it a few times, and was once hospitalised, but on each occasion, it passed over within 24 hours.
fairhsa and nancypants like this.
_nate is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 4:41 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC GGL/GFl, HH Diamond, BW Diamond, Virgin Voyages Deep Blue Extra, Blue Peter Badge Holder
Posts: 3,933
Originally Posted by _nate
HarryHolden68: "Yet I am always fascinated by people who allege food poisoning. Food poisoning kills people. At best, you will be in bed for several days and most likely you will face a spell under medical care being re-hydrated."

Food poisoning does not always result in a multi-day stay in bed. I have fallen victim to it a few times, and was once hospitalised, but on each occasion, it passed over within 24 hours.
minded, that post was somewhat odd, here is what the NHS says food poisoning is https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/food-poisoning/
navylad is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 4:57 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Programs: Meh
Posts: 2,584
Originally Posted by Lioneye
I would never, under any circumstances, fly ba again.

That's just about the limit of what any one person can do.
Absolutely true!
stevie is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 5:14 am
  #24  
Fontaine d'honneur du Flyertalk
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Morbihan, France
Programs: Reine des Muccis de Pucci; Foreign Elitist (according to others)
Posts: 19,085
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
It's a clich but the plural iof anecdote isn't data. I have just completed my sixth flight of 2019 and nothing has gone wrong so far. Those 6 flights wouldn't make for riveting reading no matter how hard I tried.
That should be an adage! I could not agree more. There is a huge difference between facts and internet facts.

Given the emphasis on food temperatures, what I find difficult to understand is the apparent complacency of the crew.
PUCCI GALORE is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 5:24 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NT Australia
Programs: QF WP
Posts: 4,149
Theres a vast array of food borne gastrointestinal illnesses with incubation periods ranging from minutes to months. Theres also a vast array of levels of immunocompetence and response to infectious with any of these agents. Heres a reasonable laymans guide:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2...use-it/7535682

Like it or not, none of us can really say if OP did or did not have food poisoning, whether the BA food was responsible etc. Even if microbiology testing had happened, theres no proof that whatever bug isolated originated from the BA good (especially since it seems most if not all of it has been eaten/disposed of/reheated). If there were multiple complaints it might be indicative but it seems only a few rows were served the dodgy food before it was additionally cremated; what proportion of the people in those few rows would know that they can raise a complaint with BA? What percentage of those would bother?

BA will doubtless hide between this plausible deniability however may be convinced to make a customer service gesture which may or may not make OP feel better
nancypants is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 6:03 am
  #26  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought that BA WT meals are fully cooked and simply reheated onboard. Thus, could safely be eaten straight off the cart if need be,

That is not to say that the meal did not cause OP's illness. Simply that if this is the case, the reheating or lack thereof did not harm him.
navylad likes this.
Often1 is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 6:12 am
  #27  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NT Australia
Programs: QF WP
Posts: 4,149
Originally Posted by Often1
Perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought that BA WT meals are fully cooked and simply reheated onboard. Thus, could safely be eaten straight off the cart if need be,

That is not to say that the meal did not cause OP's illness. Simply that if this is the case, the reheating or lack thereof did not harm him.
eating it cold off the cart would probably be safer than reheating it to an inadequate temperature
nancypants is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 10:01 am
  #28  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
What should have happened when the FAs discovered the food was still cold (no doubt after several complaints by passengers), is that all the food that had already been served should have been taken back and binned. There is no way to say that 'it's safe to eat'.

But what also should have happened is that every passenger who was served cold food should have refused to eat it and asked to have it taken away and binned. You didn't do that and that means you share responsibility for the outcome (assuming it was indeed the food that was responsible for your illness). If you are responsible for the outcome, you cannot then try to put all the responsibility back onto the airline.

What did happen no doubt is that someone in the flight crew said, 'if we take them all back, we will have nothing else to serve them. There will be a riot, tell them they are OK to eat.' Someone did what some people always do, that is, what is easiest for them.

Regarding it being fully coooked and safe to eat, that's a common misconception. It all depends on what happens during the cooling and re-heating periods. People often take say a leftover cold chicken leg out of the fridge and just eat it without any ill effects. But it is not guaranteed by any means. Here is a good description of the issue.
https://www.theskepticsguide.org/ask...reheating-meat

My wife has a medical background and NEVER serves any meat, fish or poultry without using a thermometer to make sure it has reached a high enough temperature. She would never have taken a second bite of what you were served or allowed me to do so. If I look at a cold chicken leg in the fridge, she just gives me 'that look' and I know I have to heat it first.

So bottom line for me on this one is that they should have taken it all back and weathered the resulting 'storm' of protest when there was nothing else left to serve you. Equally, you should have refused to eat it and insisted it be binned. The airline should then have apologized to all passengers for a mistake that happened for whatever reason and the passengers should have 'gracefully' accepted that apology and nibbled on the cookies they handed out instead or whatever.

But that would be in a perfect world.
dulciusexasperis is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 11:15 am
  #29  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC GGL/GFl, HH Diamond, BW Diamond, Virgin Voyages Deep Blue Extra, Blue Peter Badge Holder
Posts: 3,933
Originally Posted by dulciusexasperis
What should have happened when the FAs discovered the food was still cold (no doubt after several complaints by passengers), is that all the food that had already been served should have been taken back and binned. There is no way to say that 'it's safe to eat'.

But what also should have happened is that every passenger who was served cold food should have refused to eat it and asked to have it taken away and binned. You didn't do that and that means you share responsibility for the outcome (assuming it was indeed the food that was responsible for your illness). If you are responsible for the outcome, you cannot then try to put all the responsibility back onto the airline.

What did happen no doubt is that someone in the flight crew said, 'if we take them all back, we will have nothing else to serve them. There will be a riot, tell them they are OK to eat.' Someone did what some people always do, that is, what is easiest for them.

Regarding it being fully coooked and safe to eat, that's a common misconception. It all depends on what happens during the cooling and re-heating periods. People often take say a leftover cold chicken leg out of the fridge and just eat it without any ill effects. But it is not guaranteed by any means. Here is a good description of the issue.
https://www.theskepticsguide.org/ask...reheating-meat

My wife has a medical background and NEVER serves any meat, fish or poultry without using a thermometer to make sure it has reached a high enough temperature. She would never have taken a second bite of what you were served or allowed me to do so. If I look at a cold chicken leg in the fridge, she just gives me 'that look' and I know I have to heat it first.

So bottom line for me on this one is that they should have taken it all back and weathered the resulting 'storm' of protest when there was nothing else left to serve you. Equally, you should have refused to eat it and insisted it be binned. The airline should then have apologized to all passengers for a mistake that happened for whatever reason and the passengers should have 'gracefully' accepted that apology and nibbled on the cookies they handed out instead or whatever.

But that would be in a perfect world.
there is no suggestion that the food was improperly stored, if stored correctly, chicken that has been properly cooked then cooled is safe to eat, irrespective of what you or your wife personally do.

This answer may be of use in explaining more https://www.theskepticsguide.org/ask...reheating-meat

Bacteroa from incorrectly stored food can produce toxins which remain despite the cooking process whereas incorrectly heated food, the bacteria themselves can remain.
Often1, ConfusedByBAEC and Eltham like this.

Last edited by navylad; Jan 4, 2019 at 11:31 am
navylad is offline  
Old Jan 4, 2019, 11:29 am
  #30  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Agreed.

I don't know how one can suggest that food which is fully cooked and then maintained at a safe storage temperature from the time it is cooked until service time is in any way dangerous (or more dangerous than had it been heated).
Eltham likes this.
Often1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.