[SimonS1]

I do think in this case BA have helped out, although of course it may have suited them anyway if the next flight to SP was full and Rio had capacity.

On the other hand a 12 hour delay is substantial, and I don’t get this bit that you should be “happy and relieved to have got there”. Flights between SP and Rio cost about £80 return and take just over an hour so BA have done well out of it if you settle for the Avios (assuming the Avios are any use to you).

[Papillion53]

FDOs – @13:33

Am I reading this correctly?

The OP was booked to São Paulo on BA with a connecting flight on another airline to Rio?

As his BA flight was late, he missed the second flight connection from São Paulo to Rio?

BA re-routed him on a DIRECT flight to Rio? Thereby not necessitating a connecting flight from São Paulo to Rio?

Didn’t BA help this pax out with this direct flight?

Or am I missing something here????? EU regulations aside!

[nathinfor]

I dont think BA helped with a 12-hour delay. With or without rerouting.

As explained, the rerouting was marginal: £30 and one hour flight…

[Papillion53]

SimonS1
He did do well, after all BA could well have re-booked him onto the next São Paulo flight and then he would have had to sort out another connecting flight as well.

I just don’t get all this “advice” from normally well-intentioned and respected travellers that he should claim, claim, claim!

And yes Nathinfor – I am grateful every time I fly when I reach my destination safely, that is primarily what I pay for, the skill and expertise of the flight crew, the safe performance of the aircraft – being in 2013 has nothing to do with it!

[FormerlyDoS]

“Or am I missing something here?????”

Yes, you are.

He accepted a shorter journey and did not insist on being flown the whole distance, as it suited him.

You are looking at it only from the airline’s perspective, not from their obligations under the regulation.

Now, as SimonS1 said, this may have have been done out of the goodness of their hearts to help the OP, but BA was released from the full EU261/2004 obligation, which could have even involved flying him to Rio and paying for the connecting flight.

[Papillion53]

FDoS –

Didn’t he get to his final destination? Without the hassle of a connecting flight?

IMHO that would have been much preferred to transferring for another hop, unless of course he knew that Alexpo1 would be asking how many airports one has flown into, and wanted to add to his list? 😉 🙂

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Just playing devils advocate here. But situation is BA cancel flight to Sao Paolo – next flight would have been 24 hours later. Client actually wanted to get to Rio (having had a separate onwards ticket). Luckily the flight to Rio leaves at midday from Heathrow, not late PM. So BA by allowing client to go to Rio direct (they didn’t have to do that) have reduced delay to 12 hours from 24 hours or so once connecting flight taken into account. Compensation issues aside – could one not think BA have done a favour in this instance – they could have just stuck to rules and regs if they had wanted to and insisted on flying to Sao Paolo.

[Papillion53]

TimFitzgeraldTF @14:31

Exactly what I was trying to say but getting shot down in flames! Thank you for your voice of reason. :-)))))

[FormerlyDoS]

Tim

Your argument is valid if BA is only obliged to re-route on their own flights.

Read the reg and have a think about it 😉

“re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their
final destination at the earliest opportunity”

Are you saying that only BA operates to SAO?

[Papillion53]

FDos – but the point is here that the OP was going to Rio as his final destination, not São Paulo! And in that BA more than met their re-routing responsibilities, surely???

FDoS – if you were in this situation and offered the same as the OP was, would you have taken this direct flight or would you have insisted on the original routing, thereby delaying you even more?

Or maybe I should ask the OP – would you now, with hindsight, prefer to have been re-booked on the next São Paulo flight, the next day? Thereby arriving at your destination of Rio even later? Just wondering 🙂

[FormerlyDoS]

papilion

You are still missing the point.

There is the pragmatic acceptance of the Rio flight by the OP, as it suited him and there is the regulation enforced “re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity”

The first is better for the airline, as well as for the passenger.

BA did not do the OP a big favour, they mitigated their losses.

Not sure I can make it any clearer than that.

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Hi FDos

The contract the traveller had with BA was to get him to SAO. That is all BA were obliged to do as the ticket to RIO was issued separately. If it had been issued on a through ticket then BA would have had to get the traveller to RIO. As it was not BA had no obligation to get the client to there final destination (as fare as BA are concerned SAO was the final destination). BA do operate to RIO but they had every right not to put the client on that flight. In terms of there obligations in this instance they have gone beyond there responsibilites (ignoring the compensation issue) and in doing so reduced the delay the client would have suffered from 24 hours plus to 12 hours – which is in this case better for both parties.

[nathinfor]

Papillon,

Yes the rerouting was convenient. But I’m still p*ssed off for the delay and believe BA should be made accountable for their mistakes.

But retrospectively, since this rerouting seems to have jeopardised my rights for compensation, I would have preferred to stay on the SP flight. The flight was delayed (and not cancelled) and arrived roughly in SP the same time as the Rio flight in Rio. There are flights SP-Rio every half an hour or so with several airlines, all very cheap and short. So it would have been very easy to re-connect once in SP.
Overall, I would have arrived one or two hours later than with the direct Rio flight. And £480 richer!

[TimFitzgeraldTC]

Hi Nathinfor

Had you waited for the next SAO flight you would have been delayed by at least 24 hours – not the 12 you suffered by taking the direct RIO flight (assuming that left on time at 12:05), rather than leaving at 21:25 to SAO.

Not making reference to compensation – just want to show the facts correctly on the delay you would have suffered should you have waited for SAO (and if that flight was full you may have been delayed even further).

[nathinfor]

Tim,

Just to clarify, the flight was delayed, not cancelled. The scheduled SP flight left London at 10am or so on saturday (instead of 9.25pm on friday). At no point was it mentioned I would fly on the next SP flight on saturday 9.25pm.
Had I choose to stick to the SP flight, I would have boarded my scheduled flight, albeit with a 12 hour delay. Therefore the delay would not have been 24 hours as you said.

The Rio flight left at noon. You do the maths but overall I could have made it to Rio not much later than the direct flight…

[Author]

Posts