Flight delay and cancellation compensation, BA ONLY

Vauban

Tudcos: It doesn't matter when the technical fault was discovered. Though the absurd NEB list makes that distinction, it is not underpinned by any law. Wallentin sets the clear legal test: and "ordinary"technical failures are not extraordinary accordingly.

Vauban

Robinwood: the beauty of litigation is that you can argue both. You can say that the risk of staff falling ill is an inherent part of running a business, and managers must make sure that contingency plans are in place so that an airplane always has a crew (and therefore that this is something within its control).

In the alternative to this sickness being deemed extraordinary, you can argue the points about BA's response and the "all reasonable measures" test (eg your points about wet leasing, etc).

serenseren

tudcos wrote: »

Now I've had a chance to do some more digging and check my timings ...

offshore1 - made "basource" work eventually by choosing a month, thanks for the link.

Serenseren - from "basource", it seems clear that my flight was the inbound plane that you then caught back to LGW. So you were delayed because my flight/plane hadn't arrived. In turn, my flight/plane was delayed taking off for (apparently) repairs for an air bleed fault. Suspiciously, the plane for my flight had also arrived late from its previous flight, but only 1 3/4 hours - to which repair time was added to get the 4 3/4 hour final delay!
As you were, I am unclear when the air bleed fault was discovered, and can't get a straight answer from BA. If the fault was discovered during the flight inbound to me, that would appear to fail the criteria of "immediately prior" to my flight. But I doubt I will get BA to acknowledge that. However, I can confirm that the fault was fixed a whole flight before your scheduled journey.
Cheers

Thank you very much for posting your findings, it is really helpful to get some extra pieces of the jigsaw!

The one thing I think we can be sure of is that this LGW - TPA - LGW flight was delayed for some reason or other from Saturday 9th. I understand (I think from the Flyertalk forum which is also very helpful) that the LGW - TPA flight on the Saturday was delayed when the aircraft was help up in Antigua and they had to wait for a part from Miami. The delay knocked on until at least our flight back to London on the Tuesday.

If BA have made a commercial decision to keep that aircraft on that route carrying a delay, even if the air bleed fault was not the source of the original delay, it shouldn't matter. Certainly, our flights would not have suffered the length of the delays that they did. In my view, in keeping the aircraft on the route, BA have taken themselves out of the extraordinary circumstance category.

It is interesting that we were given information by both the BA check in staff at Tampa and the crew on the aircraft that the flight had been delayed since the Saturday, and both expressed frustration with BA that they were carrying the delay from one day to the next by operating the same aircraft. That is something that BA customer relations have failed to acknowledge.

I will definitely update with any further information I find out, hopefully we will eventually get the full picture.

serenseren

Ok, so another piece of the jigsaw. According to http://www.thebasource.com, the flight on Saturday the 9th November we were told had the original delay and carried that delay onto the Tuesday flight was in fact not the same aircraft. It shows the flight delay LGW-TPA on 09NOV was operated by Boeing 777 registration G-VIIP and our flight TPA-LGW on 12NOV was operated by Boeing 777 registration G-VIIR.

I am curious as to where this information comes from and how accurate it is, because we were told by the check in staff, the stewards on board but perhaps most importantly the pilot that it was the same aircraft being used on that route since the Saturday, hence the knock on delay.

I don't know how much this matters to our claim in any event, because whatever aircraft was used, that route ran with a significant delay for at least 3 days, whenever the air bleed fault occurred it was not 'immediately prior to departure' as the guidance states it must be, and I would argue BA did not do everything in their power to avoid the situation and can therefore not rely on extraordinary circumstance. I just want the facts from BA - it's now 5 weeks of no reply!

JPears

serenseren wrote: »

Ok, so another piece of the jigsaw. According to http://www.thebasource.com, the flight on Saturday the 9th November we were told had the original delay and carried that delay onto the Tuesday flight was in fact not the same aircraft. It shows the flight delay LGW-TPA on 09NOV was operated by Boeing 777 registration G-VIIP and our flight TPA-LGW on 12NOV was operated by Boeing 777 registration G-VIIR.

I am curious as to where this information comes from and how accurate it is, because we were told by the check in staff, the stewards on board but perhaps most importantly the pilot that it was the same aircraft being used on that route since the Saturday, hence the knock on delay.

I don't know how much this matters to our claim in any event, because whatever aircraft was used, that route ran with a significant delay for at least 3 days, whenever the air bleed fault occurred it was not 'immediately prior to departure' as the guidance states it must be, and I would argue BA did not do everything in their power to avoid the situation and can therefore not rely on extraordinary circumstance. I just want the facts from BA - it's now 5 weeks of no reply!

If you google around you can sometimes pick up amateur logs of flights picked up from transponder data, these will show the flight number and aircraft registration, time date and sometimes altitude. This may help.

serenseren

JPears wrote: »

If you google around you can sometimes pick up amateur logs of flights picked up from transponder data, these will show the flight number and aircraft registration, time date and sometimes altitude. This may help.

I appreciate your reply, I will have a hunt around to see if I can find anything.

HollyGolightly

We travelled from Heathrow to Washington Dulles on 5th Dec 2013 (BA217) and had a delay of over six hours. We actually boarded the plane then were asked to disembark because the crew could "smell something electrical". Some firemen appeared and, to cut a long story short, the aircraft was replaced after a lengthy delay. How do I know if the airline was at fault? Has anyone else successfully claimed compensation for this delay.

Tyzap

serenseren wrote: »

I appreciate your reply, I will have a hunt around to see if I can find anything.

This seems to be the BAW2166 (BAW61T) flight sequence around that period, not sure if it helps tho.

Fri 8 Nov no flight
G-VIIP departs TPA Sat 09 Nov 240 mins late
G-VIIP departs TPA Sun 10 Nov 180 mins late
G-VIIR departs TPA Mon 11 Nov 106 mins late
G-VIIR departs TPA Tue 12 Nov 216 mins late
G-VIIP departs TPA Wed 13 Nov no delay

There was indeed an aircraft change on Monday and also immediately following your flight.

It looks like the court route may be the only way of getting to the bottom of it.

Delay times from FlightStats
Reg No's from Libhomeradar.org

flymeaway

flymeaway wrote: »

Due to depart 13.35, late boarding for no explained reason, sat in our seats and hey presto a technical fault said the pilot - hydraulics was the only word I got from the muffled speaker nearest to my seat. Off we all got, back into the terminal and given the obligatory welfare looking after voucher - eventually re boarded same plane but with different crew and arrived over 5 hours late. Have sent email to customer complaints, received acknowledgement and now waiting - hopefully the £505 each due will be paid with no issues (unlike Thomas Cook who I am stil due to have my day in court with). I just wish more people knew their rights and would claim the. Hopefully the airlines might treat us all with a little bit more respect.

And this is BA's response:

Your claim for compensation has been refused because flight BA0209 on 26 December 2013 was delayed due to unexpected flight safety shortcomings, which prevented the aircraft operating as scheduled. Under EU legislation, British Airways is not liable for a compensation payment in this situation.

During the final maintenance checks, we discovered a problem with the hydraulic leak on wheel anti-skid unit, which led to brake and wheel change. There are numerous parts that the airline may be required to replace within a specific timeframe. These parts are kept fully stocked and ready to fit. As this particular ‘part’ was not due to be replaced, this constitutes as extraordinary circumstances.
Unfortunately airline operations are subject to circumstances outside the airline's control. British Airways takes all reasonable measures to avoid delaying a flight in such circumstances. Consideration is given to whether there are any operational options available before a decision to delay is made. We are sorry that the delay was necessary in this case.

Anyone put there care to comment/advise please

Vauban

My comment is that BA's assertion that an unscheduled replacement of a part constitutes extraordinary circumstances is bunkum. That is not what the law says. And they know it.