Reply To: HND to LHR BA0006 26th Nov 13:15 cancelled

[AJA]

JDB wrote:

@AJA unfortunately the system doesn’t work in the way you would like it to work and over twenty years there has been considerable clarification from the guidelines and CJEU and Court of Appeal judgments.

There is no specific accommodation or food cost limit specified by BA or the regulations but the courts have set the basis. You say that BA should be liable for some greater sum because they allegedly didn’t comply with other parts of the regulations but no adjudicator or court considers or is allowed to consider matters in that manner; they can’t order an airline to pay more Article 9 expenses because they failed to comply with another Article. The rules have to be strictly applied but you are trying to add a punitive element.

I am not saying BA should be punished for failing to comply with the regulations.

I am saying BA shouldn’t be quibbling over expensive hotel costs that were only incurred because BA cancelled a flight within 24hours of ETD

The rest of my argument is explaining why BA should be paying the customer’s extra hotel bill. The fact that the customer suggested a reroute that would have saved an extra night’s hotel accommodation but BA rejected it because you only get one bite at the cherry is a bit rich.

I also thought the £300 amount is supposed to be per person not per couple. Therefore for 2 passengers and 2 nights accommodation BA would be expected to pay 300x2x2=£1200. So the difference being argued over is £800. But BA merely offered £300. Not sure if that’s per night hotel or in total.