-
Hi all,
Had an RFS flight booked NCL-VIE on 24 Oct, leaving NCL at 605. Received a text to say flight NCL-LHR was cancelled the night before(presumably because of the storm that evening). MMB could only offer me a flight on the 25th in the evening, overnighting in London. I was attending an event on the 25th so this option was useless. Phone lines were impossible to even get in the queue. I booked a train ticket to London, and a flight on the 1530 BA flight LHR-VIE on the 24th(total cost around £160, cheaper than the hotel they would have used if Id accepted the overnighter).
BA have responded and given me a refund of the train ticket, but claim that ‘under EU law, they cannot reimburse my travel expenses’, although, theyve done exactly that by refunding the train ticket.
Is this correct? My understanding is that they are required to reroute me as quickly as possible, and so should be paying the cost of the flight I booked. I dont expect compensation as the weather was pretty extreme by all accounts.
Cheers.Did you give them a chance to provide the LHR-VIE flight to you without charge as a reroute? Or were circumstances such that you couldn’t reach them to ask?
The general advice is that even if you think they will refuse you need to make a serious attempt to contact them and ask so as to give them the chance.
If you have phone records to show you made attempts to reach them but couldn’t, or if you were at an airport and couldn’t find a representative to help, this might explain why you weren’t able to give them the opportunity. And of course you may have had to move quickly to secure alternative transport.
I think they owe you and you should persist but being aware of your circs and steps you took as above will help. The fact that they paid the train indicates they accept liability. So send them a Letter Before Action snail mail signed for to BA Legal at Waterside giving them 21 days to pay.
Since they’re being so mean make sure you include every single food and drink receipt for your delayed journey out too which you’re also entitled to.
This seems so solid I think I’d even be prepared to trust to CEDRing it and not MCOL trusting that even high-risk, bungling CEDR would produce the flight cost you are also legally entitled to.
If they don’t cough up after the 21day warning, give them 7 days more then contact your UK credit card to s75 the replacement ticket costs which might even save the bother of CEDR. Don’t, whatever you do, accept any offer of a refund of your original ticket in the meantime.
Thanks for confirming Lady London, helpful as always. I phoned them 3 times, and have the records, couldnt get through, of course. Had to act quickly as it was 915pm when I received the cancellation text.I find it odd that theyve paid the train fare without question, but then wont pay the rest of the journey. Will escalate as advised.
I am bemused by this oft repeated advice to use s75 as a back door to a UK261 claim as it won’t work (except potentially as a goodwill gesture) for a variety of reasons but more importantly, if you start a s75 claim, before the credit card company will consider any such claim, they will initiate a chargeback, the airline will likely agree and you have thus accepted the refund you are strongly advised in the same post not to accept, so you would be stuffed. A well drafted LBA would hopefully yield a good result, but if not you could consider CEDR or MCOL. However, given you are seeking £160 less the train ticket already refunded, it may not be worth the aggro. It is just possible, since you are seeking a fairly small sum that it might be covered under the travel inconvenience section of a travel insurance policy once the airline has failed to pay, but this might be subject to an excess.
The idea is that if the merchant (airline) doesn’t meet their obligations then the credit card issuer is jointly liable. That means they are liable for fixing the problem, not just for a charge back. While I’m sure there are pitfalls (if the flights were paid for by PayPal, or through a travel agent, would be an obvious one) I doubt the card issuer could close the issue with just a non-requested refund. Section 75 is not the same as charge back.
The idea is that if the merchant (airline) doesn’t meet their obligations then the credit card issuer is jointly liable. That means they are liable for fixing the problem, not just for a charge back. While I’m sure there are pitfalls (if the flights were paid for by PayPal, or through a travel agent, would be an obvious one) I doubt the card issuer could close the issue with just a non-requested refund. Section 75 is not the same as charge back.
I am quite aware that s75 and a chargeback are not the same! Card providers however, in the first instance automatically and quite naturally seek the chargeback before they will consider their own liability under s75. That is just how the process works and a card provider is fully entitled to do this.
Where you refer to a card provider’s ‘obligations’, what s75 provides is joint liability for “misrepresentation or breach of contract”. Failure to comply with UK261 is different and not tye responsibility of the card company which clearly isn’t able to get involved in determining ‘extraordinary circumstances’ or ECJ judgments etc.
Just an update on this. After a bit of to and fro with BA customer ‘service’ team, sent an LBA to Waterside. Received no response from BA, so in mid-January took it to CEDR. CEDR responded, asking for confirmation that I had given BA 8 weeks to respond which I provided. 13 March they ruled in my favour, giving BA 15 working days to respond(plus an extra 10 days because of Covid(!). Yesterday the time was up and they contacted me to say BA needed an extra 10 days because they were ‘awaiting information regarding your case’. However, today they contacted me to say BA have agreed to pay up in full.
So, the system works, albeit rather slowly. BA will lie and delay as much as possible, but if you know you are right you should persevere.
Thanks to people who replied with advice.Yaaaay well done PerkyPat. Very glad you managed to hang in there till naughty BA paid up
Just a question of waiting, once youve put the initial stuff together. Would be quicker if BA didnt clog up the system by refusing to honour legitimate claims like mine.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
