[Anonymous]

[nathinfor]

Hello,

I was due to fly from london to Sao Paulo with BA and then on a separate ticket with a local airline from Sao Paulo to Rio.
The BA flight was delayed by 12 hours (technical problem so airline responsibility). Since I missed my connection to Rio (and despite the fact both flights were on separate tickets), BA rerouted me on a direct flight to Rio. Nonetheless, I still suffered a 12 hours delay to my final destination (happy holidays… Thank you BA).

This is an old story (last year) but I understand that the circumstances have changed since the EU recently forced airlines to compensate passengers for delays.
Do you think I can ask for compensation, given that I was rerouted?
BA already offered me 15,000 miles at the time (as the EU law wasn’t in application yet). Would that prevent me from claiming compensation? I’d much rather have £480 in cash than 15,000 miles…

Thanks in advance for your answers.

[first_class_please]

If the EU law you refer to was not in existance at the time of travel, then i`m not sure how you think you can ask for compensation against it?

BA actually assisted you by flying you to your final destination, which they had no requirement to do as you were on seperate tickets.

Your only claim would be against whatever rule was in place at the time of travel pertaining to being delayed by 12 hours.

I think being flown to your desination and 15,000 miles is more than satisfactory myself.

[HongKongLady]

I think you did very well to be rerouted and be given 15000 miles, I would quit while I was ahead. I would have been happy just to have got there, but then I am easily pleased.

[nathinfor]

Thanks for the quick answers.

The EU law is retroactive and applies to all delays from 2005 so this flight would fall into that law.

15,000 miles compensation for a 12 hours delay is pretty low in my view, especially when I could get £480…

Last, Rio is only 2 hours from SP and local flights are super cheap so the rerouting was not much of a compensation for this significant delay at the airline’s responsibility.

[Papillion53]

My goodness this is a classic example of what I call the “I’m due compensation” society, despite the fact you got to your destination safely, albeit a bit late, AND despite the fact your original ticket on BA was not to this destination AND you’ve already been offered miles – I think you need to get a grip on this.

As HK Lady said, most of us would have been happy and relieved to have got there, so quit while you’re ahead, but I guess there are some who are never happy.

Classic example of the “how much compensation can I get” culture that we so sadly see so much of these days! 🙁

[NameRemoved-18/12/14]

Hello nathinfor

If you purchase 15,000 Avios the cost is €293, so quite a big difference between that and £480.

I would have been quite happy with that, especially not having to change flights at SP. BTW, a flight between SP and Rio is much less than 2 hours.

[FormerlyDoS]

Let’s be clear, the law was in already in place (since 2005) and the ‘Sturgeon’ ruling (equating long delays to cancellations) was already being used in such incidents by all countries except the UK, where a group of airlines/travel companies sought a stay from the High Court and clarification from the EC.

The clarification came through in favour of the Sturgeon ruling, the stay was removed and UK airlines then had to comply and treat long delays as effective cancellations.

So this appears to be an open and shut case, the airline must pay you €600, unless they can demonstrate the the delay was caused by extra-ordinary circumstances that could not be avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. If you had been scheduled to travel on a 787 and the fleet had been grounded, this would have been an extra ordinary circumstance, I think, the burden of proof is on the airline.

To deal with the comments about compensation culture, EU261/2004 was put onto the statute books to try to stop airlines mucking consumers about and a 12 hour delay is certainly being mucked about. Thus some of the numbers involved include punitive elements, such as 600€.

By the way, you could have insisted that BA also get you from Rio to San Paulo 🙂 as they are obliged to re-route you to the destination booked, so you did them a favour in accepting a flight to Rio.

IMHO we should all use EU261/2004 to punish the airlines for these sort of delays and convince them to provide more resources in the area of maintenance and also disruption capacity recovery. The EC has always accepted that there may be a slight impact on airfares (e.r. Ryanair raise a couple of euro levy to cover EU261), but the main aim is to get better service for consumers.

So by claiming, we are supporting the EC objective.

[Papillion53]

FDOs – his final destination was Rio! He had booked BA only to São Paulo and then a separate ticket on another airline São Paulo to Rio, so he was booked direct by BA due to the delay, so in effect he had already had another sector if you like for “free” in addition to the miles!

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

BA only have to get you to the destination if issued as 1 ticket. If issued as 2 separate tickets they did not have to get the customer to Rio – only to Sao Paolo. This quoted from the Guardian suggests they wouldn’t have to pay compensation in events such as bad weather

“The EU’s court of justice ruled that passengers whose flights arrive more than three hours late are entitled to compensation of up to €600 (£488) each unless the delay is due to extraordinary circumstances outside the airline’s control, such as strikes or bad weather.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/23/passengers-delayed-flights-compensation-eu

Considering the situation I think have been pro-active and helped the client in a situation beyond there control so I think they have done OK on this one. I know the OP says cancelled due to technical reason but the official logs might show due to weather. Or technical reason caused by the weather – what happens then?

[FormerlyDoS]

No Papillion, BA were contracted to carry him to Sao Paulo, not Rio.

Article 5a states that in the event of cancellation, the passenger must “be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8;”

Article 8b states “re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity;” (8c says a similar thing, but at a later date at the passenger’s convenience.)

So Sao Paulo was his final destination under EU261/2004, the flight from there to Rio was under a separate contract to which EU261 does not apply.

As it happens, it suited the OP to finish his journey at Rio, but he also released BA from an obligation in accepting this solution and thus did them a favour.

Edited to add that Sao Paulo is about an hour’s flight south of Rio, so getting off at Rio suited both parties, but he was not obliged to accept it.

[FormerlyDoS]

Tim

The burden of proof on ‘extra-ordinary circumstances’ lies with the airline and the definition of extra-ordinary circumstances is not black and white or easy to prove, if one looks at the expert comments on the regs on various fora (I’m only an amateur, but as a 120 sector a year flyer, it pays to be informed.)

For example, I believe an airline cancelled a flight due to a hurricane preventing the aircraft scheduled to operate the service from flying.

However, as the hurricane was neither near the point of departure or arrival (e.g. the aircraft was coming from somewhere else), the ruling was that the cancellation was not caused by an extra-ordinary circumstance, but rather by the airline not making all reasonable effort to schedule another aircraft, sub-charter etc.

[nathinfor]

Thanks FDOs for the clarification.

I am somewhat shocked by some of the other comments.

Pleased to arrive safely? Er… This is 2013! It is the least I would expect and I should not thank anyone for that. Especially given that I paid for this service.

The rerouting just helped make the delay more bearable but did not lower the delay by much. Overall, I was still 12 hour late because of BA.

May I remind that: 1) a 12 hour delay is not unsignificant. And 2) that delay was entirely the responsibility of the airline (we’re not talking about snow here but a small technical problem which is the airline problem, no crew available to replace the one on board following the delay to solve the technical problem – again the airline responsibility).

I can live with a two-hour delay, especially on a long haul flight. But I think airlines should be made accountable for excessive delays (12 hours!!!) when they are responsible for it.

Last, 15,000 miles is clearly less attractive than £480/€600 cash.

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Hi FDoS

Yes I guess it is a grey area and trying to argue one way or the other is a good earner for lawyers and the legal profession no doubt!! Defining All Reasonable effort could easily get several hundred reponses on this forum!

[FormerlyDoS]

“Defining All Reasonable effort could easily get several hundred reponses on this forum!”

Probably, but the judges who arbitrate on these matters are usually sharp, informed and focused, so they will be able to resolve whether the airline have met the burden of proof with considerably less effort 😉

[Author]

Posts