salut0

A few weeks ago BA sent me a survey and I included as one of my extra recommendations in the free-form text box the following:

BA should automatically pay UK/EC261 compensation to passengers who are delayed without them having to request it or complain.

Of course in theory the compensation is legally required but they don’t ever pay it unless you actually ask, and when you ask you often have to fight and even take them to arbitration or court.

My suggestion in the survey was that they should pay it automatically to elite members as an elite benefit. But it occurs to me that perhaps they should actually pay it automatically to anyone who is a member of EC (even Blue).

What do others think? And has anyone crunched the numbers about how much this might cost them, given that such a small percentage of flyers actually know they should claim their compensation and/or bother to do so?

I suspect that the extra business and bookings they’d get would outweigh the cost of the compensation, and that doesn’t take into account the goodwill generated as well.

orbitmic

I know it sounds good on paper but I can almost bet that would be used to sometimes pay the «wrong » amount (out of many times I could have asked Ba for compensation I’ve only done it 4 times and on two of those when they accepted the claim they did so for the wrong amount (given those were connecting fares), one time they refused (cedr confirmed my understanding after Ba wasted months) and only one time did they get it right from the start.

besides many claims would include receipts for hotel or meals and those can’t be guessed by Ba…

mikeyfly

Good grief - not in a month of Sundays and then some. As the current company setting seems to be - deny 99% even when legitimate - there's no way they'd move to this !!!

Also, I can’t see it being positive marketing spin promoting “we’ll pay what you’re due rather than lie any more”

HarryHolden68

Purists may say they would take the opportunity to review the whole business in areas such as scheduling and staffing by, for example, padding out turnaround times to reduce delays and cancellations. They would be a better airlines by being a more reliable airline.
The bean counters will say this would cost a fortune, reduce profit and therefore dividend payments to shareholders who provide the investment to grow the business.

There is no chance of this happening unless legislated and I cannot see a Conservative government placing punitive measures like this on a business.

Besides, they are in such denial about what is and is not eligible anyway they would not have a clue how to implement this. I have someone from the Premium Escalations team stating that downgrade reimbursements are only due for passengers downgraded at the airport on the day of the flight. They have put this in writing... twice. Whether this is a company instruction, a training issue or personal initiative, it is either incompetence or brazen dishonesty on their part.

corporate-wage-slave

BA will argue, with some justification, that it's too difficult to do this accurately since you have to take into account each passenger's details. So a flight is 5 hours late - you may think a clear case that EC261 should be paid. But if the passenger has another flight, maybe on another airline, perhaps not on a BA 125 ticket, then EC261 may not be payable. If there were passenger rebooked from another service EC261 may not be payable either because it arose from the earlier service which already paid EC261, or due to some of the timing niceties relating to the original service. The sheer complexity of bookings, some held on 1980s server systems, would mean this would be a mammoth task to give out free cash - there isn't going to be a business case.

What would be better is a proper independent regulator of airlines - CEDR is paid for by BA and the CAA, supposedly the National Enforcement Body, does no such thing. There is even a CJEU ruling that backs the CAA's "do the minimum" approach. They aren't a consumer body and don't want to be one either. If there was an OfAir regulator with hefty powers to fine airlines then behaviour would change. Note the efforts to maintain data privacy - sometimes there are incidents, but BA is terrified of getting another hefty fine from the regulator and does work to keep data secure.

On the BA side, what I certainly think they should do is be more forthcoming with a quick answer - 4 months is not acceptable - and to offer quickly an Avios style bribe, or GUF vouchers, as an alternative to cash. That keeps it as potential future spend on the airline, other airlines do this, and it's perfectly OK under the Regulation provided it's a genuine passenger choice.

Soupey202

Perhaps there should be a requirement that if a passenger correctly requests it and BA refuses then the amount doubles and if they refuse a second time and you need to take it further it doubles again! This might stop the pointless denials it is due when it obviously is.

mikeyfly

Very much agree, all CEDR slam dunks BA should pay double or more to prevent this months long protracted waste of time

CT-UK

I have had 100% success rate in claiming, more often than not confirmed within 24 hrs and paid within 5-7 days

dougzz

This would be very expensive for BA given their European competitors are I believe even less willing to pay what is due. From friends anecdotes and posts on other sites it’s said LH are very difficult, and IB and TP make it near impossible.

dougzz

I’ve made I think 2 claims and both have required CEDR, at which point BA have suddenly realised it was payable and their previous random and unrelated responses were errors.

HIDDY

If they could weed out the chancers/timewasters then those with genuine claims might get paid quicker.

mikeyfly

I’ve had 0% success rate yet 100% success with CEDR on those cases. My record was cancelled flight on Boxing Day to pay out 11th August.

dougzz

What evidence can you offer to support this?

In another thread corporate-wage-slave said

“76% of cases that are accepted (so over the first hurdle of being valid claims over 8 weeks etc) result in a finding against BA. Some findings don't always result in a monetary pay-out since CEDR covers 2 other areas apart from CEDR, mobility and unfairnes”

GM1985

It's a great idea. But even in the (highly unlikely) event that BA were to accept the premise, I doubt they could pull it off. The complexity involved in coding the automation would likely be a high barrier to success. Especially in light of other reports around here on 'simple' things like the app accurately reflecting status failing the best endeavours of BA's IT.

Example: in the past, I have arrived in to London from the USA on a flight that was 4 hours late. Slam dunk for UK/EC261? For passengers terminating in London, yes. But I had a lengthy connection on that itinerary back to GLA, so no dice on that occasion. Conversely, I've been on a flight that arrived 2 hours late to London. For those ending their journey there, no compensation. But I missed my onward connection to GLA, was rebooked and arrived home 5 hours later than planned, so compensation claimed and paid. Add in the even more complex cases - what if downgrade reimbursement is due on top of delay compensation?

Agree with others that a regulator with more teeth to punish poor practices and delay tactics would be better.

I also like the suggestion above of BA offering (at the discretion of the individual) alternative instruments to standard compensation and reimbursement. "Would you like £520 cash for your delay? Or £750 in future travel vouchers? Do you want a 75% reimbursement for your downgrade? Or a voucher for a no-questions-asked upgrade on a future segment?"

HIDDY

This forum for one shows the rules aren't exactly easy to follow. Even BA staff don't even seem to understand them.