I just read an interesting story (below) that B.A. is the target of a class-action lawsuit by passengers over lost luggage. According to story the suit would represent every person who had their luggage lost or delayed over the past few years --- and considering B.A.’s problems at Heathrow, that could be quite a large number. Most interesting is the claim in the suit that B.A.’s liability should not be limited to the $1,500 cap.

_____

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsourc...ritish+Airways

So if BA loses my luggage in Oct., can I join this lawsuit?

Why shouldn't the limit of $1500 apply? We can argue about whether BA ought to give miles or compensation for commercial reasons, but surely their contractual obligation is clear? Otherwise, what would be the point of the Montreal or any other agreement?

It is always possible to argue in law than an agreement is unfair to one of party even though both parties are signed up to it; not easily but possible.

If someone in the US can successfully sue MacDolands for not warning that hot coffee is hot and can scald, anything is possible.

Now be careful - what is quoted in the press and what the full story of what seemed like the ultimate in frivolous actions make interesting reading. We always get the icing and never the cake from these rather sensational stories which do have an element of apocrypha (if that is properly spelt).

Now I do have a question - can one of our US friends tell me why it is called a class action? I am probably sounding ignorant but I hate using expression when I do not really understand what they mean.

A class action enables a very large group of individuals (the "class"), each of whom has a similar claim against a common respondent, to pursue their claims as a single legal case.

It is useful in cases such as this where the effort and legal costs involved would be prohibitive for a single individual. Who would spend tens of thousands of pounds and a great deal of energy pursuing British Airways over lost luggage worth a few thousand pounds? A decision that British Airways have been reckless and that claims can be paid in excess of figures laid out in the Montral Convention would have to be made in the High Court - it isn't something the small claims court could decide!

Although I would appear to be virtually the only regular customer of British Airways not be in a position to benefit directly from this (they have never lost my luggage) the case seems to have a great deal of merit.

Although I am not a "US friend", I'll try my best .
In the phrase, "class" is taken in the sense of group or category.
A class action is an action that is meant to settle a dispute affecting a large class of people in a similar situation, so as to avoid having multiple lawsuits with exactly the same issue. One single lawsuit can therefore resolve thousands of legal disputes in one go between a defendant and multiple individuals belonging to the same "class" or group of people being affected in the same or similar way by the action of the defendant.

A bit like how you join a union for collective barganing. By yourself you would probably get nothing like the deal that the Union could negotiate with the power of a large number of people behind it.

I think it's unlikely they would overturn the airlines obligations under the Montreal convention though - surely this would set an international precedent with a massive knock on effect.

I suggested a Class Action on the "LHR lost luggage 26.000" thread back in July. I just got my suitcase back after 7 weeks and a lot of my belongings, most of it brand new, was ruined with growing mold. I'm hoping the cleaners will perform miracles on what was salvaged. The comp check doesn't begin to cover my losses ~ and there was not one word of apology.

I don't normally approve of lawsuits, so many are frivolous. However, this case is different because of the sheer number of lost/dealyed/ruined property of BA patrons; this, compounded by the indifference and incompetence of solving an obviously enormous problem. Thus far, BA has been able to avoid addressing this scandalous state of affairs because of the "limits". Many victims have no interest whatsoever in the future T5 as being the end-all to the problem. A Class Action might give BA the incentive needed.

My limited understanding of this issue is that they are not trying to overturn the Montreal convention, but rather saying that the 1500$ limit does not apply because Article 22, para 5 of the article states that "The foregoing provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall not apply if it is proved that the damage resulted from an act or omission of the carrier, its servants or agents, done with intent to cause damage or recklessly and with knowledge that damage would probably result; provided that, in the case of such act or omission of a servant or agent, it is also proved that such servant or agent was acting within the scope of its employment." [underlining mine]

They are trying to use an alternate provision of the convention, not reject the convention. Whether they will succeed or not is another matter.

I can't say I like the analogy. This case (like many legal actions) is about remedying a wrong. The point is that BA would simply like to ignore the problem and a single individual cannot make them take notice. Bargaining over a contract relating to future obligations is very different.
Yes, if a union had negotiated a deal for me it would be "nothing like" the one I actually have, which was negotiated solely by me: I'd probably get paid about a quarter of what I do.

Unfortunately, I agree it is difficult to see that they are likely to do this unless it could be established that BA have behaved in a reckless or extraordinary manner; this is quite a hard test.

The Montreal Convention cap is far from the only problem with the way BA (and some other airlines) handle missing baggage complaints. It's the hoops they make people jump through in order to get any compensation or even information. Whilst a Gold may get a quick telephone response and some monetary compensation, it seems the most customers just get the runaround and have to satisfy all sorts of unreasonable criteria - such as producing receipts for the contents of their suitcase - before they get anything. This is all clearly designed by BA as a means of evading its responsibilities to customers. They arrange things so that 90% of customers just give up asking for anything. They are happy to pay out a little to the small minority who can be bothered to pursye the matter to the end but - just like the UK clearing banks and the issues of unfair charges - the last thing they want is for a case to end up in court and for a precedent to be set.
For this kind of behaviour BA frankly deserve to be hammered very hard indeed by the courts. I'd be only too pleased to see them forced to pay exemplary damages to everyone whose luggage has been lost.

As others said---a claimant or claimants sue on behalf of a number of people with similar complaints. The amount in controversy for an individual may be too small to be worth filing a lawsuit (especially in federal court, where the jurisdictional amount req't is $75,000), but when the claims of the class are combined it can be economical to proceed. Once the class of claimants is determined and notice is given, individuals can opt out of the lawsuit if they want to--if they don't, they are bound by the outcome of the class action.

Steve Berman, the plaintiff's counsel in this case, specializes in this sort of litigation. His firm have also been filing a series of individual lawsuits on behalf of KAL passengers in the past few weeks, alleging damages as a result of the fuel-surcharge price-fixing business. I expect that at some point in the near future he will seek to have those consolidated into a class action. Haven't seen any fuel-surcharge filings against BA, however.

Wow aren't you so highly paid then, big boy.

You have completely misunderstood the whole point though. That's like saying "I'm a premier card holder and spend millions a year with BA so I'm not joining the class action because I wouldn't get anything near what BA have offered me".

Collective bargaining and class actions are for the people who AREN'T in such an elite position as your lofty self.

Ahh, that is an interesting take on it. Leaving bags out in the rain for weeks is certainly reckless. In that case, good luck to them and I hope they succeed and give BA/BAA a bloody nose! ^

It may mean that damaged bags just "go missing" in future to get rid of the evidence both of mistreatment and the contents of the bag (BA could then dispute the presence of valuable items)

Of course, all the plaintiffs would have to do is to get a (credible) BA employee to testify that BA took such malicious steps and punitive damages would probably kick in.

Maybe BA should start investing in a palm tree plantation.