-
Hi, hoping for some advice for a family member recently delayed on an LX service. I’m not quite sure which jurisdiction it falls under or what they are eligible for, so any advice is very welcome!
Single PNR booking LHR-FRA-HKG-SYD//SYD-HKG-ZRH-LHR via Lufthansa website, all on LH/LX codes operated by a mix of LH/LX/CX. Return flight HKG-ZRH was delayed by 4 minutes resulting in a missed connection at ZRH and a 10+ hour delay returning to Heathrow.
Claim submitted to Swiss refused as HKG-LHR leg was delayed by weather which is extraordinary circumstances under Swiss law.
Where do we stand here?
Weather events are generally classed as being outside an airline’s control. If you’re satisfied that that was the reason for the delay, there’s not much more you can do here.
There’s nothing to stop your family member escalating the claim via whichever route would apply in this instance if they disagree with the response though. It’s very likely that someone here will know which one applies to LX/LH if you keep checking back.
Do you believe that there was another reason ? Otherwise if it was weather then that isn’t considered extraordinary circumstances and your family member is only due any duty of care expenses they incurred whilst waiting
https://onemileatatime.com/news/swiss-compensation-mechanical-issues/ – this might be an interesting read – Swiss plays hardball even on causes that other juristictions will pay out on
As an aside I flew out of Munich at the weekend – very quiet apart from the huge line at the LH rebooking counters. I had a friend misconnect there earlier in the summer and the queues were even worse.
Really does seem like the short connection times they sell are unachievable in many circumstances especially this time of year and with all the geopolitical issues in the middle east!
@adder – Swiss airlines are covered by EC261 and while you mention Swiss law, for these purposes, ECJ rulings apply. Weather can very often be a basis for an airline to claim ‘extraordinary circumstances’ and legitimately deny compensation to which your family member might otherwise be entitled.
In this case, the question as to whether Swiss took all reasonable measures could apply – why didn’t they reroute the pax earlier given how many flights they operate? Where was the weather issue?
If your family member isn’t happy with the explanation, they have two avenues to escalate – complain to the Swiss regulator – FOCA (see link below) or go to ADR where Swiss uses söp. The latter is a bit slow and can seem a bit airline friendly so I might start with FOCA who Swiss might be more scared of.
I would suggest asking Swiss for more detailed reasons and evidence for the rejection of the claim, requesting a response within 14 days, failing which the matter will be escalated to FOCA or söp.
https://www.bazl.admin.ch/bazl/en/home/passagiere/air-passenger-rights.html
PS you didn’t specify who operated the HKG-ZRH leg but if it was CX that is more problematic but not necessarily terminal!
One issue with LX is that whilst it signed up to EU261 not every ECJ ruling applies to it due to the arrangements Switzerland has with the EU.
And also clarification needed on which airline operated the HKG-ZRH sector (flight numbers don’t matter but whose metal does)
@NorthernLass / @SamG not disputing weather delayed the HKG-ZRH flight but given the delay was 4 minutes (and the connection was still within MCT for ZRH) I’m not sure what bearing it has on the subsequent missed connection/significant delay getting to London?
Thanks @JDB, a very helpful response as always, will go back to Swiss. At least 3 LX flights to London left before they eventually got a seat, plus several BA so it’s unclear why they weren’t rerouted earlier. And apologies, HKG-ZRH was LX not CX.
Good post @Adder. You’ve been very precise over the routing and how it was ticketed which gets quick answers as it’s clear.
In their 2 posts @SamG has more or less said what the cause almost certainly was.
The problem is that for exceptional circumstances Swiss only has to find an exceptional reason lastng 4 minutes. In that area of the world though, I’d consider patches of nasty weather routine and to be planned for within normal operations timings, not exceptional. So perhaps one could say that whatever they claim is exceptional, and I doubt that, they should be allowing more time for flights on the routes concerned.
I’d absolutely pursue it but then that’s me. Know that Swiss got themselves a very bad reputation during Covid and after, for just ignoring claims and simply flat refusing to pay refunds due. Anecdotally despite a few pious words by them having been reported since, I don’t think their orientation to paying passenger rights has improved much, and it generally seemed never good. So I’d pursue it certainly at arbitration/BAZL level as it’s free and might just take elapsed time for a decision once you’ve put in a short well organised claim.
@JDB’s angle of alternative connections they could have put you on is worth a look and worth a mention in any claim but my gut feeling is won’t quite work as there’s kind of an implied 5 ? hours or so it can be late on that distance before eligible for compo. They could say it could take 2-3 hours to look at options for a planeload, so not much left of that 10hrs (not law, just reasonableness). I’d be happier if a 24 hr delay or at least something much more than 10, on that, but absolutely put that into the mix as well as it does go towards “efforts not made to provide passenger rights”, which I think is a theme for Swiss.So I think they’re lying and SanG has pointed out there does seem to be a pattern of them not allowing enough time for regularly encountered events in normal oprations. So a claim to arbitration as it’s free is worth a go as after that it’s just waitibg time and no cost.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
