BA refusing compensation - advice please

Reply

Old Feb 22, 19, 2:14 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 1
BA refusing compensation - advice please

Hello

I was recently booked on a direct flight from Houston to Heathrow and BA cancelled it 6 days before it was due to depart. We were rebooked on flights stopping in Dallas which meant we arrived more than four and a half hours later than the original scheduled arrival time. When we called to rebook, BA said the flight had been cancelled for “operational reasons”. We lodged a claim for compensation under EU rule 261/2004 as we were told less than 7 days before the flight, it was greater than 3500km and the arrival time was more than 4 hours later than scheduled.

BA’s response said that the cancellation was because of the problems with the Trent engine on the 787-900 and the need to “inspect and maintain” the engines. BA said this was beyond their control and so compensation was not payable. I have tried twice and BA refused compensation both times and won’t set out what the escalation routes are.

All the other Houston to Heathrow flights in January used the 787-900 and so I still feel this cancellation was not outside of BA’s control as the Trent engine problems were notified to airlines a year ago and so compensation is due.

Any advice would be great, thank you
Jon
jonclay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 3:23 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Programs: BAEC Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 59
That doesn't sound right to me!

You could look into an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme: https://www.caa.co.uk/passengers/res...te-resolution/

Or lodge a complaint via the European Consumer Centre: https://www.ukecc.net/

You could also outsource your complaining to a startup such as AirHelp, though they take a sizeable cut of your compensation: https://www.airhelp.com/
HMPS likes this.
groenroos is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 3:39 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Watford Gap
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 430
Unofficial welcome to FT jonclay
babats is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 3:40 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,710
BA have lost countless CEDR adjudications on this very point. I cant believe they are still trying it on. I would be amazed if CEDR did not rule in your favour.
EuropeanPete and nancypants like this.
rapidex is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 3:42 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: London, UK
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 1,163
Hi Jon. BA have been trying this "exceptional circumstances" BS for a while now. Email them asking if that's their final answer, and when they say yes, raise the case with CEDR https://www.cedr.com who will in the fullness of time rule in your favour. Lots more info on this on the recent few pages of the BA compensation thread: The 2019 BA compensation thread: Your guide to Regulation EC261/2004
HMPS likes this.
armouredant is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 4:07 am
  #6  
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 37,356
I'll just add my welcome jonclay, welcome to the BA forum and to Flyertalk.

A number of FTers have been successful in this area, along the same lines as you. armouredant has indicated the main thread for this, which is the Forum's Dashboard too. Some cases are in the 2018 version of that thread and this includes CEDR's judgements. I would look at these wordings, focus purely on the "all reasonable measures" aspect rather than wasting time on the Extraordinary Circumstance area, but it is just a process that you need to go through.
armouredant likes this.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 5:03 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London and Suffolk
Programs: BA Silver, TK Elite, UA Silver, SPG Lifetime Platinum, Hertz Presidents Circle, NEXUS/GE
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by rapidex View Post
BA have lost countless CEDR adjudications on this very point. I cant believe they are still trying it on. I would be amazed if CEDR did not rule in your favour.
Why wouldn't they try it on? It doesn't cost them any more if they lose via CDR, and this way, they might get away with a few customers not bothering to claim for compensation.
strickerj and nancypants like this.
PeaSouper is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 5:17 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PVG, FRA, SEA, HEL
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 2,969
I was recently booked on a direct flight from Houston to Heathrow and BA cancelled it 6 days before it was due to depart.
The engine issue is not extraordinary - BA has to pay up.
warakorn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 5:55 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, United Kingdom
Programs: British Airways Gold
Posts: 2,050
Press on, they will give in eventually
ajeleonard is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 6:30 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by ajeleonard View Post
Press on, they will give in eventually
More to the point - they will be refused by CEDR...and one day may get the message.
PAL62V is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 6:50 am
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 39,755
Don't waste your time arguing with BA. BA continues to assert that the Trent issue is an "extraordinary circumstance" and CEDR continues to determine that it is not. Simply send a clear note to BA asserting that it is wrong and asking for it to either relent and pay out the EUR 600 per passenger or to advise you of a standstill. Specifically reference your intent to proceed with a CEDR arbitration on some specific date, e.g. 10 business days. If BA pays up, all the better. If it does not, you will simply have to push papers, but unless CEDR changes its view, you will have your decision and thus funds soon enough.

Why does BA continue to litigate this issue? Likely because most claimants do not pursue their claim when denied. It costs BA very little to go through the make work of defending the Trent claim. If most claims drop off when declined, that is a net win for BA.
MSPeconomist, HMPS and IndyHoosier like this.
Often1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 6:59 am
  #12  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 77,872
This is an example where a nice big class action lawsuit could teach them a lesson.
sarahuk, Gerbs, HMPS and 9 others like this.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 7:14 am
  #13  
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 37,356
Actually I think it is more-or-less agreed to be Extraordinary Circumstances, just that CEDR hasn't seen the evidence from BA that they took all reasonable steps. The only legal qualifier I know of to that clause is that the airlines shouldn't face "intolerable sacrifices" (the Peskova case). Now this is an extremely high bar for BA, one of the world's largest airlines, with deep pockets, and huge connectivity via oneworld / Amadeus and so on. My own suspicion is that BA has had internal advice that they could win the case on the "hidden manufacturing defect" argument, so are refusing all claims, but CEDR has reached a different position given the wording of the Regulation and the onus on BA to prove its case. I imagine BA aren't wildly keen for this to get to a senior court either, and given Jet2's experiences I don't blame them.

The CAA did a report which said that processing claims via an ADR channel such as CEDR reduced the airlines' cost of complaint handling, at least in processing time. I'd guestimate it is half the cost of going to MCOL, and I know it costs about £500 for each MCOL case. So at some point it would be cheaper to settle either before CEDR, or early in the process. There is also the risk of CEDR making rulings where BA will face additional compensation claims beyond the typical 600€ compensation for delays. So perhaps it is worth following the example of my own CEDR case in the main thread, and leaving a final paragraph with a hint as to where the CEDR adjudicator can find some more money.
armouredant likes this.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 7:19 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,710
Originally Posted by PeaSouper View Post
Why wouldn't they try it on? It doesn't cost them any more if they lose via CDR, and this way, they might get away with a few customers not bothering to claim for compensation.
Perhaps because it uses staff time on unnecessary refusals which drive up costs, is a devious and deceiptful way of doing business and is upsetting customers.
rapidex is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 19, 7:29 am
  #15  
V10
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Provincie Antwerpen, Vlaanderen, België
Programs: MUCCI Gold
Posts: 2,368
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist View Post
This is an example where a nice big class action lawsuit could teach them a lesson.
It is certainly a situation where the CAA, in its role as the National Enforcement Body, could be doing more "enforcing".
Kgmm77 and armouredant like this.
V10 is online now  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread