bafan

I had an overnight delay in AMS a few years ago, and I saw the huge queue for the beleaguered BA rep. Fearing that they’d run out of reasonable hotel options by the time I was seen, I booked myself in to one of the airport hotels (Marriott or Hilton). I claimed the cost of the room and dinner at the hotel, and BA paid without question. I don’t think my actions were unreasonable, and obviously BA didn’t either.

But, as I said, it was a few years ago, so maybe BA’s attitude may have hardened, though I think I’d still do the same again now.

binman

Deleted duplicate

binman

are you joking! T5 was a scene of carnage! 100 plus flights cancelled! They have neither the staff nor facilities to provide any service whatsoever. Good Lord they could get planes offloaded they had so few staff. There is no ticketing, no ticket servicing and very few staff who even know what LHR stands for let alone how to arrange a hotel, food and transport for thousands of passengers. In such circumstances making you own arrangements is exactly what BA want but the tie your hands on how to do it.

orbitmic

was your cost above £200 for the room though? No one is suggesting the op would have an issue being refunded for making their own booking within the ba limit - in fact, recently, they publicised those themselves, and that sure is the option I would have also chosen myself rather than queue for hours!!

The process only becomes relevant because the op spent above the BA’s stated limit and the question is whether ba would have a case sticking to their own, arbitrary limit.

The regulation clearly puts the onus on the airline to provide duty of care including a hotel room in cases like that of the op. It is for the airline to do so but they can’t bail out of their duty because of cost. My sense is that if the airline is unable to provide the room they are obliged to (or choose not to), a passenger can book what works for them and the airline would find it difficult to pursue the argument it is too expensive unless (maybe) the passenger goes for something really outrageous (and even then I’m not sure). However, if the passenger chooses not to ask the airline, and said airline accepts a limit which, frankly, is not shockingly low as a matter of course, and especially if other reasonable options were available, then I think the airline is in a much stronger position to play hard ball if it chooses to (it might not but ut may well, that will depend on the case, the customer, and probably who chances to handle the complaint). That would have been as true some years ago as it is now and reports of people being quoted the £200 limits are not in any way new.

scottishpoet

agreed

did this happen in this case?

xenole

I've seen this a couple of times at MAN for a single flight after 8-9pm. 189 people possibly on that flight, and a single agent trained for the ticket desk, so they're the only person able to rebook and sort hotels. Other check-in staff can only assist by sorting out queues, seeing if locals can go home rather than wait for a hotel and then a taxi etc.
Takes quite a while to sort things out, and then it's first come first served most of the time.

My last cancellation at SEA with AA took a good 40 mins+ of queueing and that was with a dozen agents rebooking people. No hotel though, although a 4hr gap before my rebooked flight.

scottishpoet

the op admits they confirmed the £200 guidline (they haven't said who with), then rather than connect to the heathrow free wifi and do some searches of the popular chain hotels they phoned "a few" and settled for the sofitel

quick searches would have identified a number of hotels within the guidlines that were available had some online searching been done

the OPs question was can they get refunded

the advice is maybe, and it will be strongest if they can show what efforts they went to find a hotel for less than, a not unreasonable, £200

How busy LHR was or what sort of carnage there really has nothing to do with it, I completely understand the OP taking the decision to search themselves

Lets not suggest that BA abandoned the OP, I do not believe that is what happened, it could well be that whoever handed out the £10 vouchers that the OP mentioned was the person who suggested booking your own hotel within the £200 limit rather than wait in the Q for a hotel to be found

davidcamp6

The key is, not to take the p. Guidelines are not tramlines and as such as a matter of law can be departed from with good reason. In this instance, there were cheaper and reasonably convenient options available. ~The Sofitel is very convenient, but it is not outside the realms of Wednesbury reasonableness for other hotels to have been booked instead. had I been in the pax position and having made myself aware of the guidelines, I would have looked at options within 10% maximum of the guideline and asked for n invoice that differentiates food and soft drinks from alcohol.

subject2load

Many UK-based FT-ers will recall the fly-on-the-wall reality programme Airline produced by ITV for several years, featuring EasyJet and the joys of LTN. Easy was clearly willing to be be fully exposed, warts and all, with an attitude of ‘this is our business model, and it has brought us huge growth & success’. Airport disruptions and general chaos were a ‘popular’ feature, often involving groups of aggrieved pax in standoffs and arguments with ground staff about the lack of support, whilst being offered little practical help or information other than the contact details for Customer Relations (office hours only of course !).

Over recent weeks I think a film crew positioned at LHR T5 departures might well have found very similar material to film.

In times past, BA regulars would often point to more trusted & effective IRROPS handling (should it become necessary) as a key incentive for choosing to book BA over the well-known LCC’s for s/h trips. But I wonder just how convincing that rationale is in the current climate …… especially with no means of contacting BA’s CR team by phone, and formal claims taking several weeks / months to be looked at ….??

These days I compare more closely than ever the price points between s/h carriers, in the awareness that quality standards can be just as good - or just as bad - on any of the European carriers, whether LCC or ‘full service’ ; judging by other posts I’m far from alone.

Tafflyer

Duty of care in my opinion means organising the passenger with a decent hotel, transport there and back as well as food and beverage for as long as is needed to continue the journey. As far as I know this is also what’s written into EC261/2004 or whatever modification thereof is now valid in the U.K.

if BA do not provide staff or facilities to deliver that duty of care and choose to save costs by not providing the resources, then any arbitrary limitations to these costs is unreasonable. If BA want all passengers to get hotels under £200 then they can provide staff and assistance in doing so.

BA has Form on this, also pre-pandemic, so I would also be looking to further my own comfort and convenience rather than protect BA’s pockets.

scottishpoet

so a suite at the ritz would be acceptable? I think for BA to have an "arbitrary guidline" for a perfectly justifiable reason. I do not think £200 is unreasonable and if hotels are not available at the price some screen shots of searches can be used to show it and justify your additional spend.

I have seen nothing from the OP to say BA could not have provided a hotel within a reasonable amount of time. i accept I was not on the ground in LHR to know.

All i know is the OP confirmed the £200 guidline and then booked something well above it when a few searches suggested other options within the guidlines were available.

BA may pay the full amount but i expect the onus will probabaly be on the OP to show they could not reasonably find a hotel under £200

Tafflyer

My point is that BA set an arbitrary limit that many passengers will not know about because when the meltdowns happen BA staff are simply not accessible for help. This form of IRROPs handling by BA is nothing new and I know it well from pre-pandemic times.

I think the point is reasonableness and certainly £280 for the Sofitel is more than £123 at the Hilton T4. But then if the passenger and his family is flying in F, had been queuing for hours to get through the fantastic LHR arrival experience provided by Border Control and Baggage Claim, which he would not have needed had his connecting flight been on time, then I consider the convenience and proximity of the Sofitel perfectly reasonable.

ajamieson

Yes, I think £125-ish per person for a gold in CE hotac is very resonable. I do not believe they will quibble in the current wider circumstances, and if they do, you should rinse them.
Too late I expect, but if they are still in the fully sealed duty free bags with the receipt inside/attached then security should allow this through if you explain that you were forced to go landside. Even more so with a LHR purchase.

abligh

Legal pedantry:

"Wednesbury unreasonable" is the wrong test. That is the test for a judicial review. A reasoning or decision is Wednesbury unreasonable (or irrational) if it is so unreasonable that no reasonable person acting reasonably could have made it.

The test here is really to do with the obligation to mitigate loss. From memory this is just to take reasonable steps (I forget the case law - perhaps British Westinghouse or Wroth v Tyler). And even then it's not a particular high bar, and lower if the wronged party needs to make decisions in the heat of the moment (e.g. to book a hotel room before they all go).

Flying Doctor

What is reasonable will always be a variable feast.
No matter what you say a suite at the Ritz I think would be very difficult to justify.If you genuinely flew F all the time and that was what you usually booked and could demonstrate that then I guess you have an argument about consistency though I suspect that would not hold much weight......
The Sofitel when its connected to T5 for a standard room I think is much harder to say that is unreasonable. It is fine to say that we need to get our phones and computers out and run things via Expedia but there is the argument that this is using more of my time which does not come for free. Personally on the couple of occasions I have got stuck at T5 and have elected not to return home (late at night with a very early departure) I generally just go to the Hilton at T5. I find it nice and have a card with them and also like the restaurant better as I have said elsewhere. If it was a bit more or less expensive than somewhere else unless BA is going to sort the booking, get me there in a reasonable timeframe (and that does not mean 4 hours at the airport) I think I am entitled to take matters into my own hands and sort myself out and reasonably expect things to be covered. I have to say I don't check if hotel x or y is cheaper. This is a standard airport hotel - I don't see why staying there is unreasonable......
It is a bit like the meals - glass of wine with them to be covered? Yes I would expect that. A bottle of Petrus? Unlikely. Again about a bit of common sense and being reasonable.
FD.