corporate-wage-slave

Which confirms a suspicion I noted a few months back: OPER and ZO means they don't have the information that OPEN or OPEY gives, and they currently are being told not to investigate further (presumably this is very time intensive) hence the reply you got. In other words agents can spend a couple of minutes on each request for EC261. Yes, ask for confirmation their answer will not change and then go to CEDR or MCOL. If you are after 8 weeks from submission you don't even need to do that for CEDR, and MCOL you can also do straight off now you have had that reply.

corporate-wage-slave

It looks like you are in scope for EC261 for the technical fault, that doesn't look to me to be open to discussion. For the holiday curtailment, it's BAH if booked via them, which I guess it wasn't since they normally send a proactive communication in this scenario. Insurance if not BAH, for the loss of one night's hotel. Any and every bit of expenses involved with the overnight stay in London would be Right to Care under BA.

stefan_nl

As a datapoint (and final resolution to this issue), I received the payment today from BA.

ThatT1Feeling

Thanks as always, corporate-wage-slave .

I received another entertaining and contradictory update today - despite yesterday being told that they had no idea why the flight was cancelled, today's stance is that it is down to Covid-19 but also that it's now being looked at by a manager (who, presumably will either agree to pay up or come up with another reason which bears no relation to the previous reasons).

It's like there is a random excuse generator with 10 possible responses. Normal CS agents have a 1 in 10 likelihood of landing on "we will pay up" and maybe the management has a 1 in 2 chance of the same, following Simon Calder's intervention in May. Either way it's all done to frustrate the customer, but now I have started playing their game (despite not being able to look on the box to read the rules), I want to continue playing.

ringingup

DELETED - sent too soon

ringingup

I hope it’s not too cheeky to ask a question that can be of general interest even if my specific case is not BA related.



If you book a long haul flight, let’s say LON-BOS, and you get rebooked onto LON-JFK-BOS because there are no direct flights for your date due to schedule changes, where do you stand? Can you push hard to be rebooked onto a direct service?

Whitstabubble

Another datapoint for those interested in the on-going ticket validity argument, and a good example to illustrate the inconsistency between the approaches taken by different CEDR adjudicators.

2 cases (2 PNRs from the same family, same flights/dates and identical set of evidence) submitted within minutes of each other, assigned to different adjudicators. Requested that CEDR directs BA to allow rebooking on dates 12 months after cancelled flights (beyond BA's argued ticket validity) - no monetary compensation requested.

Case 1: 'Claim Fails' - adjudicator specifies that they are unable to direct BA to amend practices or rebook if BA insists that they cannot/will not do so. That said, they specified that I am entitled to a rebooking 12 months later if I so wish and should be entitled to financial compensation as a result of a loss from BA's failure to rebook.

Case 2: 'Claims Successful' - BA directed by adjudicator to rebook at the date of our convenience.

I'm planning on accepting the outcome of both cases, and will request that they rebook for all passengers - failing that I will issue a letter-before-action for the sum of a brand new J class tickets through MCOL, given the initial outcome of both cases.

Very happy to provide more details (including my submission and CEDR's decision) once both cases have concluded, should this be useful to anyone constructing a case against BA.

corporate-wage-slave

The only thing I can think of in the Regulation is the requirement for rebookings to be "comparable transport conditions" and the EU's interpretative guidelines suggest "reasonable efforts" should be used to avoid connections. Which implies they can be offered by airlines. There is also a general requirement that the rebooking is suitable, so someone of reduced mobility really should be given a LCY to LHR connection for example. So if you were offered a routing via BOS and it was the easiest option to arrange, then airlines can propose it, and you would need a stronger reason than disinclination to reject it. You can of course be rebooked at a later date anyway, but if it's your choice then at some point Right to Care will stop.

corporate-wage-slave

That is incorrect in both law and in terms of CEDR's scope. It is self evidently wrong since CEDR is able to take on cases where BA is deemed to be acting unfairly to customers. If the adjudicator cannot direct BA on these matters, why would this area be in scope? I would actually raise a complaint about this to CEDR's management, pointing out the different outcomes. You could then go to MCOL on the basis that you tried CEDR but they made an error here. I suspect a well constructed case would find favour. Alternatively you could jump straight to the financial compensation calculation via MCOL.

Whitstabubble

Thank you as always, corporate-wage-slave.

I would imagine that the first adjudicator (incorrectly) interprets CEDR's power as purely financial compensation based. I have already accepted the outcome of Case 2 and have specified to BA in my final note that I intend to pursue financial compensation via MCOL for Case 1 - just in case this convinces that the paralegals to cut their losses.

I hadn't appreciated that there is an escalation process within CEDR itself so I may do this anyway for the benefit of future complainants - even if I do go via MCOL directly.

Monium

Evening all,

Before I start my claim with BA I thought I’d consult the collective wisdom here as to what we’re entitled to.

Flew LHW-CTA yesterday, arrived around 3.5 hours later than scheduled.

Reason: original aircraft “went tech” so the first aircraft we were put on had been “got
out of the shed” (according to the crew…). We sat on that for a bit, before they decided they couldn’t get it working, so they were going to put us on the ‘original’ aircraft, having decided it was ok after all.

The snag was: in order to get us in the air, no catering at all was on board the aircraft that (successfully although late) got us to our destination.

We had no indication of lack of catering at any stage, either when waiting on the first aircraft, when being told we were changing aircraft or at any time until we were already in the air en route to CTA. So, for a flight that was scheduled to leave at 1455, but actually pushed back from stand and LGW almost
4 hours late, we had nothing but water and a bag of nuts.

What, if anything, is due by way of compensation for the lack of catering on the flight? I know the 3+hr delay kicks in so we’re due the relevant amount for that, but wonder if there’s anything else I should be adding to my email to BA?

Many thanks as ever.

SK AAR

There is no regulation on compensation for lack of catering, i.e. there is no claim for this. BA might be willing to reimburse expenses for food etc actually incurred.

corporate-wage-slave

Yes I would put a claim in for EC261 purely based on the delay. But Customer Relations can also offer you some Avios for the lack of catering, so you should ask for that. I don't think it matters if you put it in the same claim, since it's the same people who handle both EC261 and non EC261 issues.

jomala05

It's official - avoid Danish NEB Trafikstyrelsen like the plague. If a flight is cancelled less than 2 weeks in advance purely due to low demand due to the pandemic, they will summarily side with the airline and not even address the nuances brought up by the claimant. This is in contrast to CEDR, which has ruled in favour of such a claimant https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/33166825-post90.html

Just sent CEDR an email explaning the situation and asking if I could claim through them without it being considered reckless/frivolous (thus increasing the risk of me being charged Ł25 if losing). I mentioned the linked case where the flight was cancelled for the same reason as mine.

SK AAR

If you submitted a claim with the Danish CAA, why would you think that CEDR is competent to deal with the claim, i.e. there is UK jurisdiction?