-
BA have cancelled my flight to PVG in March and have reduced there operation (assumingly due to the 787 problem). I have a redmption booking with a 241 in First. they ahve offered the following options:
1) Day earlier on BA – not an option for me as already a short trip.
2) Same departure day on Swiss in First – tempted to try Swiss First as it seems to get good write ups,
3) Same day departure on QR either both sectors in business or one sector in First (DOH-LHR).For the Qatar option, the agent on the call suggested I would not be reimbursed as business costs more (in Avios) than First due to quirks of the RFS pricing model. She suggested that because the change was announced months in advance Iwould not be entitled to any compensation for the downgrade. Can anyone help me with the above, in particular:
1) If I flew QR, both sectors in J would I be entitled to any compensation for the “downgrade”?
2) If I fly QR, one sector in J, one in F, would I be entitled to any compensation as the longer sector would be in J? It was suggested that as I was given several weeks notice and an option for refund, I was not entititled to any compensation for the downgrade.
3) As I used an Amex 241, what would the compensation (if any be for this)
4) If I turned down the Swiss option and went with QR, would I be lose any compensation as theyoffered be an F option?for info I paid 102k Avios + Amex voucher + c£700 tax
A couple of key things:
1. The length of notice is irrelevant to downgrade compensation under EC261. The 14-day cutoff relates to delay compensation only.
2. Your use of Avios and Amex241 is irrelevant to BA’s EC261 obligations.
In theory downgrades should mean you are eligible for 75% of the total flight cost excluding APD and airport fees (including 75% of the full Avios for both travellers in this case). There is case law which defines how that should be applied in the case of a partially downgraded itinerary, and several cases where BA has tried to argue that no Avios is due back on the second seat where a 241 has been used and lost at CEDR).
The tricky thing with this, as you point out, is that you are being offered an F option and they are therefore likely to say that you chose to downgrade all or part of the booking. I’m not aware of any case law in that area (others might be), though I’d argue no compensation is unreasonable, especially since those with a CW booking are being offered the same QR J reroute options.
I suspect you will be in for a fight if you go that route, albeit one you probably have a good chance of winning.
Is there a reason why you wouldn’t just opt for Swiss F?
I think you meant the 14 day cutoff relates to *cancellation* only.
Swiss First seems the safest most reliable option unless the flight times are horrible. You’re entitled to reject times that cause you issues eg commitments at either end or can’t get to airport on time, even if they do offer you an F replacement.
I’d be all over it for Swiss F
@victairinternational – BA has a different view on temporality than stated above in respect of downgrades, so have tended to fight with mixed results; whether they are right or not is a different issue. The question of eligibility for downgrade reimbursement/compensation for one or both QR sectors if you rejected an F rerouting with Swiss is again a bit grey, but at a minimum you would get the fare difference for the whole journey or pro-rata for any individual sector flown in a lower class. I think some like the QR option because there is the possibility of getting TP/Avios by mistake. Presumably one of the Swiss flights won’t be in F, but any downgrade element would be minimal on the short haul sector.
BA have cancelled my flight to PVG in March and have reduced there operation (assumingly due to the 787 problem). I have a redmption booking with a 241 in First. they ahve offered the following options:
1) Day earlier on BA – not an option for me as already a short trip.
2) Same departure day on Swiss in First – tempted to try Swiss First as it seems to get good write ups,
3) Same day departure on QR either both sectors in business or one sector in First (DOH-LHR).Swiss first is great, but if its convenient for you, why not ask to be put on a BA flight in first for a date after your original booking? There doesnt need to be avios availability so long as there is a cash seat available and I think BA would also be liable for hotel costs for the additional days, but then they will also probably claim that you arent entitled to request a date change cos they lie about everything.
@slidey – if someone has been offered two very reasonable rerouting options on the same day, BA isn’t going to pay, and has no legal obligation to pay, for extra hotel nights as it would be entirely voluntary. BA will allow rebooking +/- 7 days so the pax has plenty of options.
If a passenger voluntarily extends a trip then BA absolutely will not just cough up for the extra nights hotels.
They will if their rescheduled option extends a trip but not otherwise.
A good few years back I read of a case on flyer talk where a flight was cancelled. Due to the time of year and destination there were limited rebooking options.
One passenger was rebooked the next day another passenger for three days later. The former decided they’d like to stay the extra time and expected BA to cough up.
BA declined other than to reimburse the first night. Passenger took them to MCOL and lost because the judge said BA had met its obligations both on rebooking and right to care and aren’t liable for extra costs a passenger might incur because of their decisions.
BTW suggesting BA “lie about everything” isn’t helpful let alone accurate.
I disagree, they will pay up for extra nights. I had this several times and even won on this at MCOL. Flight with connections is not comparable transport conditions to a direct flight. BA will pay up if you press them.
If BA were offering a direct flight on the same day then they wouldnt be covering hotels for any extra night, but they are only ofering an indirect alternate when there are directs available at a later date, so would that still be considered to excuse them of costs incurred for a later direct flight?
As for BA truthfulness, at different times Ive been told they dont have to rebook a cancelled flight, that it has to be within 12 months of the booking date, that they can only rebook a canx if theres avios availability, that uk261 doesnt apply, that BA conditions of carriage supercede legal rights, forcibly issued a refund after telling them repeatedly not to refund it and once one said he knows the legal rights but theyd been instructed to not follow them lol so I no longer expect them to actuqlly offer anything beyond whats convenient to them.
If the OP asked to move the flight to a later date, Id be expecting them to say theres no avios availability rather than saying they can because theres a cash seat available for example.
That said, every so often you do get a very good agent on the phone who is helpful so Im not sure if its lack of training or actively trying to get away with offering the minimum
I think you meant the 14 day cutoff relates to *cancellation* only.
Compensation for delayed arrival / early departure as set out in Article 5 (cancellation).
@slidey – you ought to try exercising your 261 rights with a few other airlines and then see where BA fits in the scale. As for the “lying” even you grudgingly admit that much of the alleged lying is just incompetence and lack of training. I have also previously mentioned that when one reads transcripts after someone has made allegations of lying and/or illegality it’s amazing how the conversation can vary from people’s recollections. There are also some complete misconceptions/misunderstanding of the rules (unfortunately assisted by the odd poster who is totally off beam) particularly in relation to the requirement for Avios availability and the failure to understand that BA doesn’t have ‘last seat’ availability for advance disruption passengers.
Finally, while there are good and bad BA agents, it’s also very clear that quite a few passengers don’t help themselves in pursuing their rights and go about it in a way almost guaranteed to fail. Sifting through the KUL thread was very telling in this regard.
Interesting thread. I’d be inclined to accept the Swiss flight in F. I also think that it’s interesting the BA rep said no refund if you choose to fly Qatar in business class. That suggests that BA is using redemption space on Qatar. You should not be restricted to redemption space when being rerouted at the earliest opportunity. Any available seat in a comparable cabin should be available to you. Redemption space may come into play if you choose a later date at your convenience as the regulations state this is subject to availability of seats. BA usually interprets this to mean same fare conditions and class as originally booked, not just the same cabin.
If BA places you in a cabin lower than booked then you should be entitled to downgrade reimbursement up to 75% (depending on distance) of the fare paid for the sector downgraded excluding APD / government imposed fees. That gets complicated to calculate when the only rerout option is an indirect flight versus a direct flught as originally booked. But I would work out how many Avios it costs to fly the route in F on Qatar on the downgraded sector and then use that figure multiplied by 75% as the downgrade reimbursement.
BA also has a habit of saying you voluntarily accepted the downgrade so no reimbursement due but I would argue that violates your rights to be rerouted in comparable conditions. And arguing offering you First on Swiss means you forfeit rights to downgrade reimbursement if you choose seats in a sector in J on Qatar sounds wrong to me too. It is BA offering the choice of reroute in a lower cabin. It is not the passenger asking for that. Arguably they should be offering seats in F for the entire reroute.
As for the arguments about BA lying or not it is definitely the case that BA will offer the minimum, not necessarily in full compliance of the regulations, that they can get away with.
For my recent trip to Faro when my second flight was cancelled BA initially offered to fly me only to Lisbon on BA and then make my own way from there to FAO at my own expense. It was only when I asked if there was space on TAP via Lisbon all the way to FAO that they then offered that. BA also only initially rebooked me on flights 2 days later despite availability on TAP the same day which would get me to FAO a day earlier. BA may claim their suggested reroute 2 days hence was the earliest opportunity in comparable conditions ie a direct flight on BA but it ignored travelling via LIS on TAP in J departing the same day.
Seems odd to me then that rerouting in J instead of F on one sector on an indirect route is classed as comparable conditions when it comes to refusing downgrade reimbursement and yet an indirect reroute in the same cabin is not seen as comparable conditions when complying with rerouting obligations at the earliest opportunity.
The reality is that passengers have to assert their rights to get what is due. That assumes you know your rights and how to exercise them. Sadly there is no right to expect airlines to do the right thing first time of asking without needing the passenger to correct them.
My view of BA is jaded by experience and sadly I am not surprised they do the minimum and often not in full compliance of the regulations.
It’s all about poor training of customer facing staff and not having crisis/risk management policies. The lack of plans around cancellation is pretty bad. It’s either deliberate or complete negligence. It suits BA’s bottom line and its shareholders. Obviously passengers really don’t care either as otherwise BA would go bust, so the blame is on both sides. Illiteracy all around.
If BA places you in a cabin lower than booked then you should be entitled to downgrade reimbursement up to 75% (depending on distance) of the fare paid for the sector downgraded excluding APD / government imposed fees. That gets complicated to calculate when the only rerout option is an indirect flight versus a direct flught as originally booked. But I would work out how many Avios it costs to fly the route in F on Qatar on the downgraded sector and then use that figure multiplied by 75% as the downgrade reimbursement.
As per Mennens vs Emirates it would be pro-rata based on distance:
Length of downgraded sector
————————————————————— x Avios paid x 75%
Sum of distance for all sectors flownAnd similarly for any cash element excluding taxes and airport fees. Where a return has been bought and the reroute is only in one direction, the sum of distance flown would be the original BA route plus the two rerouted legs.
If I were taking the Qatar downgrade option in this case, I think my starting point would be the greater of that formula or the Avios difference for the downgraded sector.
That said, I would also take the Swiss F option unless I had a good reason not to, but would probably put in a claim for the downgraded shorthaul connection on principle even though it will be a small amount.
Where a voucher has been used, ‘Avios paid’ would include the voucher saving – i.e. 204K avios as per @victairinternational’s case.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
