Flight Cancellation / Compensation Query

Sam_Bee

Mmm, I probably should know the answer, and I should be able to find by searching but I can't. But,

I've a friend who was travelling Tokyo - London on JAL, flight cancelled due to captain sickness, was re-booked onto following days flight, accommodated and fed.

Am I right in saying that's the extent of their liability? Nothing else due?

I'm only asking as any compensation would go to her work (a charity) to pay for an event she missed as a result!

dmg24

It is the old 'extraordinary circumstances' situation again.

The airline is not obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the cancellation was caused by "extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken". Such extraordinary circumstances might occur "in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier".

I would say that it is an extraordinary circumstance (no one could foresee it happening), but it could be argued either way.

http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=306&pagetype=90&pageid=4408

pmcgurk

Did your friend suffer any other loss (meetings missed, others losing out on travel expenses, lost salary, extra costs) as result of cancellation? If so, these are in theory recoverable...

dmg24

pmcgurk wrote: »

Did your friend suffer any other loss (meetings missed, others losing out on travel expenses, lost salary, extra costs) as result of cancellation? If so, these are in theory recoverable...

No they are not, the original contract will exclude liability for consequential loss. However, it may be able to claim on travel insurance, if such items are covered.

pmcgurk

dmg24 wrote: »

No they are not, the original contract will exclude liability for consequential loss. However, it may be able to claim on travel insurance, if such items are covered.

Actually, such losses are recoverable in certain circumstances under the Montreal Convention: see http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=306&pagetype=90&pageid=3312 - an airline is liable for "damage occasioned by delay...

Alan_Bowen

The EU rules as such would not apply to flight on a non EU airline into Europe from Japan but even if they did, unexpected illness combined with full care by the airline is really all you can expect. The alternative is force an ill pilot to fly, and I know which I would choose!

Sam_Bee

I'd rather they forced the ill pilot to fly. Would make a long journey more interesting. Will they / won't they - who knows? Always wanted to hear those magical words 'Is there a pilot on board'?

mad_rich

Alan_Bowen wrote: »

The EU rules as such would not apply to flight on a non EU airline into Europe from Japan

Quite true

but even if they did, unexpected illness combined with full care by the airline is really all you can expect. The alternative is force an ill pilot to fly, and I know which I would choose!

Now this is the card that the airlines and their cronies play. It's a clever argument, because nobody wants a sick pilot to fly, so we meekly walk away from the customer service desk mumbling "I suppose so, I don't want my life to end in an almighty fireball because I forced the pilot to fly just to get home a bit earlier".

But it's not a simple choice between flying with a sick pilot (or a broken safety wotsisname, or dodgy weather or......) and cancelling the flight. They could choose to

- bring in the standby crew (we're talking about an airline flying from its home base here!)
- reroute the passengers, perhaps on a different airline
- cancel the flight but take responsibility for the problem and compensate passengers anyway

The third point amounts to a question. Who should take responsibility for the inevitable !!!!-ups when things go wrong? The airline or the passenger?

And (not that it matters, cos we're not actually talking about EU compensation here) pilot sickness is hardly 'extraordinary circumstances which could not have been forseen even if all reasonable measures had been taken'.

Most airlines have standby crew for such problems and if that's not foresight, I don't know what is!

mad_rich

Oh, and just wanted to point out that the test for extraordinary circumstances, which dmg24 posted from the EU regs, is not iron-clad.

dmg24 wrote: »

Such extraordinary circumstances might occur "in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier".

(My emphasis).

The key here is that one word, 'might'. The list is just a suggestion of things that the EU chaps and chapesses thought could be extraordinary, but a judge may rule differently.

So there may be other circumstances that turn out to be extraordinary, and it may be that the circumstances above turn out not to be that extraordinary at all...

In short, don't necessarily take an airline's word for it when they say "there was a strike - extraordinary circumstances - you're getting nowt". It's open for debate!

Sam_Bee

mad_rich wrote: »

- reroute the passengers, perhaps on a different airline

This is what bugs me. There is one flight on BA an hour after the JAL flight, and 3 more within the hour beforehand. Plus numerous indirect airlines.

And it wasn't a busy period, or a full flight (the entire flight fitted onto the next days JAL flight with ease apparently!).

This would have minimised any inconvenience, and is fairly commonplace with other carriers.

mad_rich

Unfortunately, it's a commercial decision by JAL. Rerouting via competitors would likely cost them a fortune, so they may decide it would be cheaper to send everyone home and bring them back for the flight the next day (especially if the next day's flight had plenty of availability).

Then they offer hotels to the difficult customers, pay compensation to the really difficult ones who write in a week later, and still come out on top.

The more people who complain, and the more that costs the airline, the more financially attractive rerouting becomes.

I wonder what options were available to the Japan-bound passengers in the UK, presumably stranded and waiting for an inbound aircraft that never arrived? That they might have been entitled to EU compensation would likely have an effect on what they were offered.