BA deem me a no-show.. for being in hospital
Apr 17, 2019, 3:00 am
#16
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,364
I think to expand on KARFA's point, BA's definition of 'events beyond your control' includes:
'and the consequences of which you could not have avoided even if you had taken all due care'
Unlike KARFA I am no lawyer, but the way that is worded, especially 'consequences' and 'all due care', seems to allow for the passenger having already protected themselves with travel insurance.
'and the consequences of which you could not have avoided even if you had taken all due care'
Unlike KARFA I am no lawyer, but the way that is worded, especially 'consequences' and 'all due care', seems to allow for the passenger having already protected themselves with travel insurance.
The fact that something can be covered by travel insurance has zero relevance in determining whether the clause applies or not.
Apr 17, 2019, 3:10 am
#17
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,964
I do not think that this is sustainable. Unless the illness is a chronic illness, where it could be arguable that the increase in likelihood in an illness episode can make it a foreseeable event, illness is not sufficiently frequent or foreseeable to prevent application of the clause. A usual/foreseeable event is something like a delay due to traffic on the M25 at rush hour or the possibility of a train being cancelled and having to take the next one or the fact that a flight might suffer a delay in the case of booking on separate tickets (unless the delay is unusually big), etc...
Do you think 3c4) is applicable to the OP's situation and/or generally if a passenger becomes sufficiently ill downroute that they can't travel on the originally booked flights? and if so is your opinion BA were obliged to change the return flights at no cost?
Last edited by KARFA; Apr 17, 2019 at 3:17 am
Apr 17, 2019, 3:16 am
#18
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5,380
This is also an unsustainable interpretation of the clause. The clause is not there to cover events that cannot be covered by travel insurance (otherwise it would be pointless since pretty much any travel incident can be covered by travel insurance).
The fact that something can be covered by travel insurance has zero relevance in determining whether the clause applies or not.
The fact that something can be covered by travel insurance has zero relevance in determining whether the clause applies or not.
Apr 17, 2019, 3:40 am
#19
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,364
I am reluctant to ask this as I am not sure most people reading want to see the thread descend in to further a legal discussion. However, I will have a go and hopefully we can keep this light and with short words
Do you think 3c4) is applicable to the OP's situation and/or generally if a passenger becomes sufficiently ill downroute that they can't travel on the originally booked flights? and if so is your opinion BA were obliged to change the return flights at no cost?
Do you think 3c4) is applicable to the OP's situation and/or generally if a passenger becomes sufficiently ill downroute that they can't travel on the originally booked flights? and if so is your opinion BA were obliged to change the return flights at no cost?
Apr 17, 2019, 4:29 am
#20
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,281
I am reluctant to ask this as I am not sure most people reading want to see the thread descend in to further a legal discussion. However, I will have a go and hopefully we can keep this light and with short words
Do you think 3c4) is applicable to the OP's situation and/or generally if a passenger becomes sufficiently ill downroute that they can't travel on the originally booked flights? and if so is your opinion BA were obliged to change the return flights at no cost?
Do you think 3c4) is applicable to the OP's situation and/or generally if a passenger becomes sufficiently ill downroute that they can't travel on the originally booked flights? and if so is your opinion BA were obliged to change the return flights at no cost?
Apr 17, 2019, 4:40 am
#21
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,839
I suspect had the OP been in a position to call in advance (clearly they weren’t for obvious reasons) BA would’ve been more amenable. They did so when I was unexpectedly hospitalised on the day of a flight a few years back.
I suspect the systems challenges in retrieving and reactivating an auto cancelled booking are what’s at play here rather than a general attempt to force risk transfer to insurers.
I do though take issue with the prevailing view on here that insurers should automatically be the first port of call in many circumstances rather than the airline. There are lots of societal and economic arguments against this. Though I can see why shareholders in airlines would push this approach.
I suspect the systems challenges in retrieving and reactivating an auto cancelled booking are what’s at play here rather than a general attempt to force risk transfer to insurers.
I do though take issue with the prevailing view on here that insurers should automatically be the first port of call in many circumstances rather than the airline. There are lots of societal and economic arguments against this. Though I can see why shareholders in airlines would push this approach.
Apr 17, 2019, 5:13 am
#22
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 4,029
BA absolutely have provision to do this. When my father had a stroke a few years ago, I was a nominated contact on his Exec Club account and had to arrange moving a holiday he had booked as he was unfit to fly.
All very similar to the OP, proof from his doctors was provided and BA did the necessary.
The only difference I can see is that this was a few weeks in advance, as opposed to the day of the flight. I suspect the OP had checked in, so wonder if this has anything to do with it
All very similar to the OP, proof from his doctors was provided and BA did the necessary.
The only difference I can see is that this was a few weeks in advance, as opposed to the day of the flight. I suspect the OP had checked in, so wonder if this has anything to do with it
Apr 17, 2019, 5:14 am
#23
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JAX
Programs: Ex-BA/AA/CP/LY staff, BA Executive Club Blue, IHG Diamond, Marriott Silver, Chick-fil-A Red
Posts: 3,587
BA used to have (and I’m sure still do), a mid-travel hospitalisation policy. I’m not sure why the OP wouldn’t be covered by that.
Apr 17, 2019, 5:22 am
#24
Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club, easyJet and Ryanair
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK/Las Vegas
Programs: BA Gold (GGL/CCR)
Posts: 15,926
I suspect there was an error made by the agent or perhaps a misunderstanding between the parties involved in the original telephone conversation.
Apr 17, 2019, 5:26 am
#25
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: MAN
Programs: None anymore
Posts: 220
I am reluctant to ask this as I am not sure most people reading want to see the thread descend in to further a legal discussion. However, I will have a go and hopefully we can keep this light and with short words
Do you think 3c4) is applicable to the OP's situation and/or generally if a passenger becomes sufficiently ill downroute that they can't travel on the originally booked flights? and if so is your opinion BA were obliged to change the return flights at no cost?
Do you think 3c4) is applicable to the OP's situation and/or generally if a passenger becomes sufficiently ill downroute that they can't travel on the originally booked flights? and if so is your opinion BA were obliged to change the return flights at no cost?
3b3) If, after beginning your journey:
- you become ill
- your illness prevents you from travelling on your next flight within the validity period of your ticket; and
- you want us to extend the validity period so that you can continue your journey;
- state the facts relating to your illness and
- confirm the date you will be fit to travel again ('the recovery date').
- the recovery date, as long as there is a seat available on the relevant flight in the class of service for which youhave paid the fare or
- if not, the first date after the recovery date when a seat will be available.
Apr 17, 2019, 6:02 am
#26
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,964
Well spotted. That certainly seems a lot more relevant to the OP's situation than trying to rely on 3c4). To my mind if the OP were to look at going back to BA on this doing so on the basis of this clause rather than 3c4).
Apr 17, 2019, 6:13 am
#27
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Programs: Lemonia. Best Greek ever.
Posts: 2,274
There are (at least) 2 issues here.
Travel insurance is not a widely drawn form of insurance for everything. Some travel insurance covers only a very basic minimum. - If it is not listed as being covered, it isn't covered.
Secondly, BA Customer Service is hugely variable. That's why most BAEC folk on FT are very used to HUACA. Hang up and call again. Also, only call the UK number in the afternoon, UK time. You then stand a chance of speaking to someone who knows what they are doing. And if you do not like the answer, first HUACA, secondly ask for it to be escalated.
Travel insurance is not a widely drawn form of insurance for everything. Some travel insurance covers only a very basic minimum. - If it is not listed as being covered, it isn't covered.
Secondly, BA Customer Service is hugely variable. That's why most BAEC folk on FT are very used to HUACA. Hang up and call again. Also, only call the UK number in the afternoon, UK time. You then stand a chance of speaking to someone who knows what they are doing. And if you do not like the answer, first HUACA, secondly ask for it to be escalated.
Apr 17, 2019, 6:18 am
#28
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, TK Elite, HHonors Lifetime Diamond
Posts: 7,691
I think two things needed to happen here. First, the OP should have advised AA that they would not be travelling. If the OP was checked in for the flight then only AA could have offloaded them to avoid being a no-show. BA did not mark the OP as a no show - AA did. After that BA should have been involved to deal with the remaining coupons on the ticket. That AA marked the OP as a no-show complicated things.
Apr 17, 2019, 6:24 am
#29
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,597
(a) passenger becomes ill and
(b) illness prevents travelling and
(c) passenger wants the validity period of ticket extended
The passenger doesn't, from what I can infer, want the ticket validity period extended, but want sto be able to make a change to the booking due to illness ; these are not the same thing
Apr 17, 2019, 6:43 am
#30
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GGL+GfL, ALL Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,528
Lets hope for the op the main difference is rather about the medical nature of the issue.