Often1

First & foremost, any scheduling more than 30 days out is purely notional. Whether that flight will operate, be performed by what aircraft, and on what frequencies & schedules is something which BA itself does not know.

Second, if indeed it comes to pass that you are stuck in CW, you are entitled to EC 261/2004 reimbursement (not compensation) of 75% of the base fare, which would mean 75% of the avios + 75% of any fees (but, not taxes). Wait on that until you return from your trip and file a claim. You will receive pushback from BA, but it ought to be a fairly simple affair before CEDR.

fwfdan

I thought EC 261 was wavied, how is that working these days?

Truthmonkey

This is a change with more than 14 days notice, so does EC261 apply here? BA will, obviously be offering a partial refund but I didn't think they needed to agree to the 75% formula?

KARFA

14 days only relates to possible compensation for cancelled flights. Downgrade reimbursement applies regardless of when you are notified.

Often1

You are mistaken.

EC 261/2004 applies. The compensation for a change or delay with 14+ days notice would be zero. But, the reimbursement (I specifically noted not "compensation") is 75% of the fare. BA need not agree to anything.

Prospero

In post #1, DanAirLondon stated he/she accepted the change albeit reluctantly but this would rule out an involuntary downgrade come time of boarding.

Phlyer2

So how can you not accept the change, still fly and claim after? I have an F flight booked later this year and fully expect it to lose that cabin so wondering what the correct strategy is to ensure a retrospective claim can be made if required.

Often1

I don't believe that "accepting the change" in the sense that BA portrays it is a resolution of the EC 261/2004 claim for reimbursement.

It is not as though OP could decline the change and retain his seat in F.

BA is certainly free to make an offer in lieu of reimbursement, but that would only be effective if the reimbursement under the Regulation is known, e.g. "you are entitled to reimbursement of X, but we propose to offer you Y"

cauchy

Ultimately every downgrade is "voluntary" in the sense that the customer can just refuse to board the aircraft and to sit in the cheaper seat.

But EC261 kicks in where an operating air carrier "places" a passenger in a lower class. Even if the OP goes along with it, the OP was still "placed" in business and is, in my view, still owed the money.

AJA_

What happens if BA refunds the difference between First and CW rather than the 75%? I've seen reports of BA doing this particularly with Avios bookings.
E.g. LHR DXB is 80k Avios in First and 60k in CW peak fare. So BA automatically refunds 20k Avios instead of 75% x 80k. I've understood that BA sees doing that as a get out of paying the 75%. If you say I involuntarily accept the downgrade but will sort out the entitlement to refund after I've flown. Does that work? Or could you argue the 20k refund is compensation for the inconvenience and still claim the 75% reimbursement per EC261?

Tafflyer

BA will do this. They did it to Miss Tafflyer from a CW booking rebooked onto IB in Eco/Premium. BA refunded a pittance in Avios due to the Avios cost of the changed routing on IB being insignificantly less expensive than the CW routing. BA was firm, responded with their policy and when pushed responded again that they would not change their mind. My response was to go to CEDR which was simple and forced BA to reimburse correctly. I do not know why BA sticks to their policy of ignoring valid law, especially as it is now widely known. This was pre-Covid, so maybe they'd handle it differently today.

Im a new user

The words "by the means provided for in Article 7(3)" in your quote are interesting. It means the following:To my knowledge, you can't transfer frequent flyer points to someone using one of the stipulated payment methods.BA is required to refund 75%. If the ticket costs 80,000, then BA has to refund 60,000. If BA refunds 20,000 as a fare difference, then I'd say that you should subtract 20,000 from the 60,000 claimed and only request the difference of 40,000 when you go to CEDR. Note that you should also get back 75% of the fuel surcharge.

Often1

Exactly.

The Regulation has a number of anomalies which deal poorly with payments by other than cash or its equivalent, but it seems that are dealt with fairly nonetheless. E.g. 75% of avios paid returned in avios.

The simplest way to deal with the issue is to wait until your return and make the claim in a clear and succinct manner setting forth the avios & cash charged, your calculation of 75% due, what was reimbursed and what is due. Make a specific "demand" for that sum in a polite but firm manner, e.g., citing the Regulation, and be done with it.

Arguing with BA is wasting your time. If the response is to advise you of BA's policies, simply proceed to CEDR.

In the event that there is a change in taxes, remember that the new taxes, rather than 75% apply. Thus, if downgraded from CW to WTP on an xLHR flight, the new APD would be calculated as well.

To those who ask why BA insists on its formulation, the answer is likely simply that the vast majority of passengers accept what they are told and are happy enough with what they got.

seawolf

Several years ago, had no issue with BA providing 75% refund on the downgraded segment. Downgrade was day of departure due to IRROPS cancelling earlier flights. Keep your documents in order showing you were originally ticketed for F. But who knows between now and next year. Maybe F service will be restored.

Often1

This is exactly why I would not make a claim until after return. If by some chance, F is restored, I would simply ask to be reseated in F.