-
Headed down the HFP party on the last Sunday night BA flight. Very much an evening of everything going wrong. BA lounge closed at 8.30pm and all asked to leave even though the 9.20pm last flight was delayed. Eventually boarded at almost 10pm then held until departure around 11pm. En route to LHR no Club Europe meals loaded then advised diverting to Stansted as Heathrow closed.
Captain advised to get taxis as bus provision could take ages.
Got a taxi and arrived at Heathrow over 3 hours later than original arrival.
Put in a claim and they will only refund the £90 for the Uber. Any advice on GOGW compo or points?
BA Reply
We’re sorry it was necessary to delay your flight to London Heathrow on 25th June 2023 and understand why you needed to get in contact about this. We take all reasonable measures to avoid delaying a flight and we’ll always consider if there are any alternative solutions available before we make a decision.We’d also like to thank you for your patience while we got back to you about this.
Your claim’s been refused as BA1451 on 25 June 2023 was delayed because the flight was diverted to Stansted due to ATC air space slot restrictions. Therefore, we’d deny this as it was outside of the airlines control.We take all reasonable measures to avoid disruption to a flight and we always consider if there are any other alternative solutions before we make a decision. The delay was out of our control and caused unforeseen disruption to our schedule.
There’s a thread discussing the ATC issue – the feeling is that BA are going to get away with saying it’s beyond their control for compo purposes.
You should get 5k avios for not getting a meal though, did you mention this?@AlanC while there can sometimes be questions over delays being attributed to ATC, the fact your flight was diverted to Stansted at huge cost/disruption for BA and passengers suggests that it was genuinely ‘extraordinary circumstances’ such that no compensation is due. It’s good they are offering to pay your taxi to Heathrow. They won’t offer any GOGW in respect of the delay/diversion; it’s either the statutory sum or nothing. It’s not clear whether you asked for anything in respect of no CE meals being loaded in your original claim, but it would probably be rather churlish to chase them for that now.
Another point of order. Heathrow didn’t close.
BA (and all the other LHR airlines) have a number of night quota points to use, allocated monthly, and on this night they decided not to use their points for this flight. ATC restrictions which cause slot times just delay flights. The airline will then decide whether they want to operate a certain flight given its level of delay.
That’s interesting information from @Heathrow Tower. It suggests BA made a commercial decision to divert the flight @AlanC was on.
The difficulty is trying to prove that.
What intrigues me is at what point was it decided the flight would divert to STN? From the initial post it looks like the Captain only announced mid-flight that he was diverting.
What explanation was given for the initial delay in departing from EDI? Was the plane already at EDI at the scheduled time or was it late arriving at EDI?
We’re there any announcements in the airport to explain the delay?
I’d also be interested to know what actions BA took in order for this statement to be true:
We take all reasonable measures to avoid delaying a flight and we’ll always consider if there are any alternative solutions available before we make a decision.
I suspect BA is being economical with the truth behind the actual reasons for the diversion and are using ATC restrictions as a convenient excuse as it is very difficult for passengers to fight that even with @Heathrow Tower’s very helpful post.
If you want to pursue this it is very likely you will need to go MCOL rather than CEDR but that is risky and costs you mote money.
I would definitely be expecting some Avios for the lack of catering in Club and for the fact that BA were too mean to pay to keep the lounge open if they knew the flight was going to be delayed beyond scheduled departure time.
I won at CEDR against BA where a flight was delayed to be too late to land at LHR – if you want to challenge this then you need to find out why the flight was delayed in the first place
@AJA – the information from @Heathrow Tower in this post and a couple of other posts in the last few days isn’t strictly correct, and the CAA confirms this in publishing lists of ‘pre-tactically’ cancelled flights. The OP also says ATC slot restrictions just cause delays, not cancellations which is patently incorrect at a slot congested airport such as LHR. If landings are say halved (which is common) for a couple of hours, that’s maybe 50 landings that can’t possibly be re-accommodated, so flights have to be cancelled. NATS imposes the restrictions and even if the airports or airlines then decide how those restrictions are applied, any cancellations are justifiably attributable to ATC reasons.
There is no way BA diverts an aircraft to Stansted for fun, commercial reasons or any other reason for its benefit. Why would they, in these circumstances, be economical with the truth? How much does that diversion cost BA? It isn’t up to BA whether to breach curfew or not; there are strict quotas and absolute caps so permitted breaches are not easily granted and if BA were allowed to decide, it would be a disaster. What is odd is the suggestion that the aircraft would have left EDI without a landing slot at LHR (if that is indeed what happened), so it is possible something happened other than the curfew.
In terms of ‘reasonable measures’ I think you often interpret that much too liberally. It doesn’t mean an airline is required to do everything humanly possible to avoid a delay or cancellation or in a rerouting case that they must immediately put them on their chosen flight. In order to allow flexibility, many statutes are governed explicitly by the term ‘reasonable’ and there are tests. There was a case here recently about an easyJet flight from Paris being cancelled because a delay meant they would have to break the curfew to leave the gate/take off at a cost of €60,000 and penalty points that could lead to not being allowed to use the airport, so the pilot refused. Some here suggested that meant compensation was owed because not all reasonable measures had been taken.
I’m not sure why you say it might be better to go to MCOL in this instance when the airline very likely has an absolute defence so the fee will be lost and quite a lot of work presenting a good case wasted.
I won at CEDR against BA where a flight was delayed to be too late to land at LHR – if you want to challenge this then you need to find out why the flight was delayed in the first place
Yes, it’s the original delay that matters. Was your flight cancelled as they knew it was going to be too late to land, rather than diverted mid-flight?
@JDB I absolutely agree that no airline diverts an aircraft without due consideration of the reasons for doing so. And they don’t just do it for the fun of it.
But just because the flight is diverted does not mean that automatically absolves the airline of paying compensation for the ultimate delay it causes to passengers.
The point you make that
CAA confirms this in publishing lists of ‘pre-tactically’ cancelled flights. The OP also says ATC slot restrictions just cause delays, not cancellations which is patently incorrect at a slot congested airport such as LHR
is not relevant in this case. @AlanC flight was not pre-cancelled. It was initially delayed and then diverted (mid-flight apparently).
Someone within BA made that decision. Was it due to extraordinary circumstances or was it a commercial decision? That is what determines whether compensation is payable or not.
BA is blaming ATC slot restrictions for the diversion – therefore extraordinary and no compensation. Heathrow Tower is providing a contrarian view saying it is a commercial decision BA takes whether it uses one of its “quota points” to allow the flight to land at LHR.
My focus on “all reasonable measures” is because that it quoted by BA as part of its explanation why they denied paying compensation. And sometimes BA does not take all reasonable measures.
I suggest that what BA interprets as all reasonable measures is sometimes in their interests and not in the customer’s.
BA could have cancelled the flight but that would have resulted in putting the entire plane load of passengers in a hotel at EDI and somehow re-accomdating them on flights the following day. That plus the aircraft then out of position might have been a factor in deciding to fly. I suspect that the decision was made to operate the flight knowing in advance that it would be diverted but not to tell passengers until they were in the air. If I was placed in the position fo arriving at Stansted late at night or being able to cancel and not fly imight have chosen the latter.
Did BA take all reasonable measures to communicate the delay and the possible diversion?
@AJA – it isn’t in BA’s gift whether or not to breach the curfew; the airline doesn’t have a quota, the airport does. I don’t think the cost of a diversion would be very different (and might even be more expensive) to putting people in a hotel etc. and they still had aircraft and crew displaced, albeit much nearer. Something obviously went very wrong in this situation, but BA didn’t have someone on a calculator deciding whether to cancel or divert. The decisions taken by the BA ops centre are also looking at more than just the individual flight but also the knock on effects; they are having to juggle a great many things and balancing the least disruption to the least number of passengers vs cost, risk and achievability.
And my suggestion of MCOL rather than CEDR is because BA is blaming ATC restrictions and saying that is extraordinary circumstances. My view of CEDR is that it tends to side with BA when presented with such defences. This is totally without hard evidence on my part.
I also take the view that if you are prepared to go MCOL route, which costs you money, then it shows to BA that you are serious and believe you have a strong case.
The problem is how do you prove that it was a commercial decision to operate and divert the flight? That comes back to the “all reasonable measures” that BA took to reduce the delay, how it communicated about the initial delay, what options it presented to affected passengers, when it communicated the fact that the flight was being diverted etc.
The fact that BA did not cancel the flight suggests that it was a commercial decision to operate. The fact that it did not use one of its slot “quota points” and instead diverted also suggests a commercial decision rather than one made as a result of extraordinary circumstances. As Heathrow Tower says LHR did not close down therefore why the decision to divert?
And I acknowledge that you say BA doesn’t have a quota. But I am interested in why then Heathow Tower says BA does? I mean s/he plainly works in ATC so has no vested interest in defending BA but does have an inside track on how LHR works.
@AJA the thing is, BA is allowed to make commercial decisions while still being allowed to use an ‘extraordinary circumstances’ defence. This happens regularly when there are weather/ATC restrictions – it’s a commercial (and practical) decision by an airline to choose the flights it cancels to fit in the reduced landing or take-off flows. The same applies when there are ATC strikes.
BA doesn’t consider MCOL or CEDR differently; a lot of people waste a lot of fees and discover that when you need to make out a legal argument, as the MCOL guidance tells you, it’s a bit harder than they realise. This shouldn’t be a complicated case and there isn’t the nuance of say ticket validity cases which have proved to be hit and miss via MCOL or CEDR.
And I acknowledge that you say BA doesn’t have a quota. But I am interested in why then Heathow Tower says BA does? I mean s/he plainly works in ATC so has no vested interest in defending BA but does have an inside track on how LHR works.
I don’t think @Heathrow Tower said BA had a quota. HAL is the holder of the airport licence and is responsible for operating within the constraints of that licence which include a hard annual cap, curfew/night time limits and other limitations. BA, by agreement, uses some of the night allowance for its very early arrivals which would otherwise not be permitted. Quite a lot of the quota gets used after severe weather disruption as planes get repatriated; it needs to be held back for in extremis cases. What @Heathrow Tower is, I think, saying is that ATC doesn’t directly require the cancellation or diversion of flights – it sets a framework depending on conditions and airports/airlines then adjust their schedules accordingly.
It’s the same with Eurocontrol or the recent French or Spanish strikes; the relevant authorities advise airlines what the capacity will be and they then have to adapt.
That makes sense. So ultimately it is down to BA to choose which flights get affected. That sounds like a commercial decision. The question is the underlying reason for that decision truly extraordinary circumstances outside of BA’s control? I don’t know the answer to that and it comes back to did BA take all reasonable measures to mitigate the delay and subsequent diversion?
Something funny occurred this night, I remember there were a few diversions late at night which is unusual, BA would usually just cancel the round trip or overnight delay the flight at the origin. Being a Sunday night I suspect T5 couldn’t service the out of hours arrivals even if they did have any quota to use as they’re usually very short staffed in the first place but this was only decided last minute once aircraft were in air.
But IIRC ATC was the root cause of the issues in the first place so I can’t see you getting anywhere with compo beyond some Avios.
Like @Matt I also won a case against BA for diversion to Stansted instead of Heathrow a couple of years ago. It was also announced mid-air. BA initially said ATC slot restriction due to weather (lie as weather was perfect), but then when they actually had to produce the proof they said it was a commercial decision. Settled the case before hearing.
Although I agree with @JDB that decisions are made because they have to make them, I also think there is a total disconnect, deliberate or not, between various departments at BA. I’m sure BA CS agents have a set percentage of cases they simply need to reject based on made-up reasons in hopes that customers will not pursue it further.
@meta I don’t believe BA CR has a set % it works towards, but they do triage claims quickly on receipt in a way that may come to the same thing. From my admittedly small sample size (in the context of the claims BA gets) of a bit over 100, plus talking to involved people at BA and begging and borrowing CEDR/MCOL decisions, the very rough breakdown is:-
10-20% complete non starters – eg delays not long enough by any measure, delays on one leg of a connection that don’t affect whole journey, compensation claims for cancellations over 14 days, rerouting within the permissible time window, claims for hotel cancellation charges or shortened trips.
35-45% quick pay, compensation and/or claim accepted in full, goes higher in times of big disruption. Claim needs to be within norms and delay/cancellation reasons clear cut.
25% – grey area, many of these claims will most likely initially be rejected but quite a few may be reversed if there is some pushback or otherwise they fall into the litigation category. More than half of the rejections stick. These are often claims with complex/compound reasons for delay or cancellation, disputed arrival times, borderline extraordinary vs ordinary and far ahead downgrade claims. Also claims for ‘right to care’ on cancellations over 14 days ahead which are very likely to be reversed.
25% – will litigate. These include ticket validity, self re-routing (particularly if on another airline), pax surface travel expenses replacing a cancelled flight leg to the main flight (lots in Spain), unrealistic or excessive compensation claims, particularly for anything outside the scope of UK261 and some from the above category. BA has a fairly good success rate and they don’t perceive that CEDR does them any favours (as some here suggest) but they can possibly get a bit more past the adjudicators than judges.
You just made all this up and lost all credibility. Even at the lowest percentage your numbers don’t add up to 100% and at highest they are above 100%. You do say rough, but it should still add up to exactly 100%, not 95%, nor above.
Sorry for not getting back to thread quicker. Was on holiday in Malta.
I got this text message from BA.
BA1451 – Despite our best efforts, we’ve made the decision to reroute your flight to Stansted this evening. Please keep an eye out for an e-mail containing further info regarding pay and claim options for transportation. Thank you for your patience. British AirwaysI also got a message saying sorry for not loading club meals and here’s 2500 avios.
These were received on landing at Stansted.And this was the email at 23.59 same time as the text above on landing at Stansted
We would like to apologise for the rerouting of your flight to Stansted this evening due to night restrictions at London Heathrow Airport. Any disruption to your travel plans can be frustrating and we’re sorry your flight was affected on this occasion. As we are sure you were made aware, we have made the difficult decision to terminate the service at Stansted.
Rerouting a flight is never an easy decision to make, as we know how disruptive it is to our customers.
Our ground team in Stansted is arranging ground transport to London Heathrow, if you wish to take this option, please speak to a member of our ground team.
Alternatively, you can claim reasonable costs for local transportation. Don’t forget to keep your receipts and upload these here. We’ll always endeavour to process any requests for expense refunds within 21 days and you’ll receive a confirmation when we’re paying the amount into your account.
You can also find useful information at ba.com/helpme, however if you’d like to talk to someone, you can call us on 0800 727 800 from within the UK, where we’d be happy to talk you through your options.
Once again, we’re very sorry for any impact this may have on your travel plans, and thank you for your patience and understanding.
British Airways
@AlanC It’s not clear whether you asked for anything in respect of no CE meals being loaded in your original claim, but it would probably be rather churlish to chase them for that now.
Absolutely disagree. You paid BA for a service they didn’t deliver — OP, follow up and ensure you get what you deserve! They profited £1.1bn in the first half of this year. 2500 avios is a bit of a joke!
@AlanC It’s not clear whether you asked for anything in respect of no CE meals being loaded in your original claim, but it would probably be rather churlish to chase them for that now.
Absolutely disagree. You paid BA for a service they didn’t deliver — OP, follow up and ensure you get what you deserve! They profited £1.1bn in the first half of this year. Get your avios!
The OP actually advised above (albeit a month after the flight!) that BA automatically gave the passengers 2,500 Avios confirmed by text on arrival at Stansted which is probably a bit less than the going rate but a fair reflection of the ‘value’. BA also invited claims for transportation from the diversion airport, but no mention of compensation.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
