BA information on passenger' whereabouts

[grimmrad]

Here is the situation. My son traveled on 3/22 with BA from JFK to LHR with his Grandma on a spring brake trip (he is 8) to Italy. Their onward flight to Pisa on 3/23 as cancelled due to snow. Their cell phone ran out of juice so they couldn't keep us informed. The last info we got before they couldn't call anymore was that it may take several days. After that we got silence (my mother in law is not very technically adept, charging a US phone in the UK on a non planned hold... Probably not).
We called BA to get info on what flight they were and BA declined us, the parents, ANY information. They also declined my request to talk to Tamarra's supervisor since we were not named on the ticket (grandma bought it). We had ticket and record locator number, besides of course DOB, address etc. since the ticket was bought in the US and AA was code share I next called AA and they were very helpful up to even calling BA on my behalf. At that point my mother in law called (from Italy) so I thanked her and said not needed any more (should have find out what BA would have done in retrospect).

Question. Does BA had the right to decline the parents information on our son's whereabouts while traveling with BA and being stranded in LHR while booked on a BA flight? Is US law different than UK?
I wrote to BA but just today.
Tx much

[Alanwsg]

I would think that BA have a legal duty to decline you any information, rather than a right.

[Hartington]

Just because you said you were the parent what proof does the person answering the phone have that you are the parent? Nothing. All they have is a voice that they know nothing about. If they had given information to a stranger who then misused that data how would you feel?

Next time, get a note put in the booking giving explicit permission to talk to you.

[mixture]

If you didn't buy the ticket, and there are no additional notes on the booking record about you as a point of contact, then its your fault, not theirs. How do BA know you are the parents ? They're not going to waste time digging up birth records etc.

Data Protection laws are very strict in the UK.

If you want to know what can happen when protocol isn't followed, look up the story of Kate Middleton, the hospital and the australian radio station. Granted Kate isn't a minor, but it demonstrates the importance of strict telephone privacy protocol.

[grimmrad]

Well, to be honest that is the first time he traveled with someone else than us so it never occurred to us that there might be this problem. I had all information on him, the flight, ticket number etc. his mother was ccd on the ticket issuing email by the airline. A simple information like "they are still in London" or "en route" would have been sufficient. With the ticket itinerary on my hand I can usually track the flight but this failed in this case. It's not I am calling without any information provided by me on the identity of the person, I had the ticket number and everything. There must be privacy etc I understand. But there must also some customer service and middle way, which I still think BA failed to provide. E.g. We were never told (probably in the 10 pages of 8 pint small print) that they would decline information.

[GrahamO]

There must be privacy etc I understand.

No, I don't think you do. Privacy is like pregnancy - you are, or you are not. Its private or it isn't. You want others to keep things private, but make exceptions for strangers (you) who cannot prove whom they are.

But there must also some customer service and middle way, which I still think BA failed to provide. E.g. We were never told (probably in the 10 pages of 8 pint small print) that they would decline information.

In other words they told you, but you didn't read it because you expected BA to hand out information on your child to unsubstantiated people ?

The way to hell is paved with good intentions.

As has been said already, if information on your child was handed out to a third party, you would be screaming about BA breaching confidentiality.

Time to back off I think. You're on your own. Glad junior is none the worse.

[ExXB]

Next time give him your iPhone. You can track it (and him - likely) with a number of apps. (Competing phones likely have the same).

And if worse comes to worse, you could even call him ...

[grimmrad]

Wow, quite hostile environment here. A lot of BA followers I assume. Hope you are never in my situation.

Again - a simple "They are booked on another flight tomorrow" would have been sufficient, doesn't even need to be a flight number - could be any flight and I have no idea where exactly they were routed and when they are traveling - but I know they were taken care off. That simple information BA declined.
It's not like I was calling without any information on my side to prove that I have something to do with the child (name, DOB, address, ticket number, record locator, accompanying person). Rules are good, common sense is better - and please don't come again with its either or - it is not. In my business we have very strict policies, a lot. But on occasion in special circumstances if justified correctly we brake them, to do what is the right thing in the situation. Remember the russian officer who saw back in the sixties I believe blips on his radar screen which could have been US missiles in a first strike. He decided against it - against all rules and wisdom. The fact that he did allows me I guess to write these lines and you guys to come up with the next rant against me. (BTW I do not work in the military)

[grimmrad]

Don't have a spare iPhone to give him. If he were travelling on his own I would have gotten him one (but too young).

[mixture]

In my business we have very strict policies, a lot. But on occasion in special circumstances if justified correctly we brake them,

How big is your business, how big is BA ?

Fact is the bigger a business becomes, the more rigorously policies and procedures need to be applied because it simply isn't viable to make case-by-base exceptions when your customer base is measured in numbers of denominated in millions.

[James 1077]

I can honestly say that if any airline gave my kids details to anybody without any evidence of who that person was then that would be the last time I, or anybody in my family, ever travelled with them. And they would be reported straight to the privacy commissioner!

[ExXB]

I personally hate BA and have sworn never to fly them again.

However, there is legislation in effect which severely limits BA's ability to share data without the informed consent of the person concerned. This legislation contains additional provisions for sharing this data with entities outside of the EEA. I think that would be you.

BA's legal team clearly has instructed BA staff not to break the law and may also have issued specific instructions on the release of passenger information to third parties.

Don't blame BA, it's not their fault. If you want to blame somebody, look a little closer to home.

[Hipennine]

Let's just say that you are a very wealthy family with assets in the country your child was travelling to. A criminal gang who has been monitoring your family and assets decides to take advantage of the travel chaos by raiding those assets when the family is expected to be there, but is delayed. Ringing the airline with some sob story (and bear in mind that the ticketing details etc that you gave are easly hackable by identity theft experts), the airline confirms that all is fine, they will be on a flight tomorrow, so the criminals can take advantage of the delay, safe in the knowledge that they won't be interrupted. Would you be happy that the airline have offered this customer service.

I have personal experience of being identity hi-jacked at a "secure" bank with "secure" systems, and the theft was possible only because a bank staff member responded with non SOP customer service to the criminals who had a sob story.

The fact that BA was so steadfast in refusing you any information encourages me to fly with them.

[Captivep]

I think the OP was, for some reason, expecting sympathy and was rather surprised by the unanimity of the responses.

How else could one explain his characterization of reasoned replies as "rants"? Not to mention comparing this issue to some cold war armageddon scenario...

[Hotel Tango]

Very unfortunate and frustrating situation. However, I have to support the airline. For me the onus lay on grandma to contact you - which is in fact what she eventually did, so, no problem. To expect an airline to give confidential information to an "unknown" person over the phone was, to say the least, a little naive. Hopefully you have now learned from the experience and will make an appropriate back-up plan in the future. This isn't a rant at you, simply a point of view.

[WHBM]

This is one of those things about travel involving your own small children. You have to take the responsibility yourself, not send the child on an intercontinental journey involving a third-country transfer with a "companion" who you state was known as not particularly travel-savvy, and whose abilities run to having their mobile phone go flat (they all last for days nowadays) at the first stopover, in midwinter, is something that probably looked convenient to you at the time, but is not a parentally-wise thing to do at all. And it's no concern of the airline, whose skills are in transportation, and indeed in complying with the law.

Next time please take the 8-year old yourself.

[mixture]

Next time please take the 8-year old yourself.

Or use the airline's UM (Unaccompanied Minor) service... I think BA call it Skyflyer Solo.

[grimmrad]

Wow again, hostile (not all here though), sorry, I stick to my opinion and don't need advice how to travel with my kids, I probably travelled more often with kids then some of you. I totally agree with the circumstances of law and privacy. My business is medicine, the biggest probably therefore in the US in terms of costs and i know all about privacy, HIPPA etc. At no time was I really worried, his grandmother is a frequent international flyer so there is no issue there and I know to whom I can give my 8 year old - heck, he would be able to get by on his own.

All I wanted to know is why BA could not give out just the simple information without any details which is they are or are not yet on their way - not where to, which flight, from where (London has several airports). With that information I would know what I wanted. If I were a criminal I still would not know with which flight, maybe they were re-routed, maybe not, I wouldn't know the time nor the airports. In short - I would not have known much more then what I would have known already (I have the ticket number, so I know the destination, BA telling or not). Its interesting that AA did try to help why the BA service was unfriendly, not explaining and not even trying to help. Yes you can hide behind laws - or you can try to use some common sense and be human. Anyway, I guess all the perfect BA lovers and lawyers here will continue to hit on me, I can live with that and I sure learned what to do next time. A) Don't fly BA and b) try to find the area on the web booking service where they actually let you enter an additional email address to confirm that you are the parent...

[Captivep]

Grimmrad, you really are touchy about this, aren't you?

No one who replied has suggested they themselves are perfect, nor have they claimed that BA is a perfect airline. All they have said is that it is perfectly reasonable for a company to refuse to give information about one of their passengers to someone who is unable to prove that they have a right to know it.

Your contention that they show "common sense" is premised on the rather illogical basis that, given that you know you're your child's parent, BA should believe you. If you can get you head around the fact that there is no reason why they should "know" that you are the parent, then hopefully everybody's replies should make a bit more sense...

[jackieofalltrades]

All I wanted to know is why BA could not give out just the simple information without any details which is they are or are not yet on their way

BA couldn't give you that information because legally they were not allowed to. It's as simple as that. There's nothing hostile in anyone on this thread telling you this. I understand it's frustrating, but it is the law.

As has been suggested, next time get a note put on the booking that confirms permission to talk with you. Captivep has summed things up very nicely in my opinion.

[grimmrad]

Captivep did, I agree. And that is the level of discussion I was hoping for. Yes, I learned my lesson and I have to admit we didn't even think about these issues before. The only thing is I did not call without any information wanting to know whereabouts of person X (har har, evil lough) - then I wouldn't even be posting here. But I had name, date of birth, name of accompanying person, ticket number and record locator - so I had some information that not everyone was privy to but only persons with access to that information, e.g. the parent.

In any case, I guess I might have been less touchy if the handling BA staff would have been a bit more understanding and friendly and maybe explaining then my frustration would have been considerably less. The AA person tried with the same result of course as she referred at the end to BA - but the impression left was for me that I am not using BA again and that AA customer service was in contrast to BA really good.

Maybe we can agree that the one thing BA should have done differently in this case is the way how they are dealing with a customer who has an issue and is frustrated.

[GrahamO]

All I wanted to know is why BA could not give out just the simple information without any details which is they are or are not yet on their way - not where to, which flight, from where (London has several airports).

You had been told multiple times that its illegal to so do, its unreasonable of you to expect others to be flexible because you are you and must be implicitly trusted and still you feel you aren't getting what you want.

People don't 'hide behind laws' as you put it - they follow them.

Nobody is hostile but you certainly have an exaggerated view of your own importance and rather a low view of people who follow a sensible law designed to protect all children.

Its a real pity you obviously cannot see that.

[ConstantFlyer]

Some people claim that Britons and US Americans speak the same language. While some words may be the same, this whole episode goes to show that different cultural backgrounds, understandings and expectations can lead to misconceptions and confusion. Would that we had 'cultural interpreters' to help us through such UK/US communications.

[grimmrad]

I am not originally from the US... And yes, the privacy laws are also very strict here, if not stricter, but still AA customer service had a different approach, apparently breaking the UK law according to the view of most posters (which I accept).

And to GrahamO - where you get the impression that I would have "an exaggerated view of [my] own importance and rather a low view of people who follow a sensible law designed to protect all children" from my comments I have really no idea. If you would have read my last comment thoroughly enough you may have understood what I by now was trying to get across. Too bad you didn't and continued in what I called earlier a hostile environment.

[RevMan2]

You're talking to a call centre agent. They have scripts. The scripts represent BA policy or the law. The law says that the law that a person provides to a third party is confidential unless a release is granted.

Now, do you SERIOUSLY expect a call centre agent to risk his/her job through a flagrant breach of the law?
No, I didn't think so either...

[Airclues]

grimmrad

Did they make it to Italy eventually? Did BA look after them during their delay?

Airclues

Edit.....sorry, just re-read your first post. I see that they made it to Italy. Hope their experience wasn't too bad.

[Captivep]

Grimmrad - I don't think anybody's been hostile to you; I think we're all just struggling to understand what you wanted BA to do given the legal situation.

It's been explained that they couldn't give you the information you requested. If they couldn't do that (which you now accept) then what could they possibly have done to satisfy you?

Or, to put the question another way - what, precisely did AA do that BA didn't?

[Di_Vosh]

grimmrad

And to GrahamO - where you get the impression that I would have "an exaggerated view of [my] own importance and rather a low view of people who follow a sensible law designed to protect all children" from my comments I have really no idea.

Could it be possibly that he gets that idea from the very same place where you get the idea that most of the replies to you on this thread are "Hostile?"

I've read this thread three times now and the only person I would identify as "Hostile" is YOU!

DIVOSH!

[WHBM]

... I stick to my opinion and don't need advice how to travel with my kids......
Hmmmm .......

In London Heathrow Airport T5 (the BA terminal) there are :

- Places to buy mobile phone chargers and/or plug converters.
- Payphones that provide international credit card calls, and also (as a last ditch) international collect calls.
- Prominent information desks provided by the airport operator with staff who have all this detail to hand and are familiar with in directing foreign travellers to them, or even suggesting them in the first place.
- Plenty of BA staff to ask who can direct you to the nearest information desk.

If the person travelling with your child was unable to handle any of these then I refer you back to the comment at the top.

[lakerman]

Grimmrad, the reason BA did not give you the information you wanted is the same reason in 1987 TWA would not give me the same info when my wife was flying from London to Pittsburg and got on the wrong flight in PHL. I arrived at Pittsburg to meet her and my daughter, no one turned up. I contacted the airline by phone and they would not give me any information either. Unlike you, I accepted this, maybe because I worked in the industry for 45 years, but I realised why they could not give me any info. You could be anyone on the phone, just accept it as you would not have gotten any more out of a US airline, and if you had I would make sure I never ever flew with them.

[Hipennine]

Perhapss AA could "act" more helpfully because they knew that the info would not be forthcoming, but they looked good for pointlessly trying ?

[Evanelpus]

Now, do you SERIOUSLY expect a call centre agent to risk his/her job through a flagrant breach of the law?

"More than my jobs worth mate, sorry"

[PAXboy]

If nothing else, this thread has served as a really helpful instruction to whoever may be sending people (of any age) on a trip. ;)

My contribution to emergencies is a tough lesson that I learnt in August 2003 when the whole of NYC and the surrounding area lost power for 24+ hours. :sad:

I had in my back pack: Cell phone with a fully charged spare battery; food, water. What I did NOT have enough of was $$$. When the electric has gone, the plastic don't work - so cash is king!!! So make sure folks have the Cell + Charger + Cash!

happy landings :ok:

[RevMan2]

@Evanelpus
WADR a fairly dim comment.
Complying with privacy laws has absolutely nothing to do with jobworthiness

[edi_local]

"More than my jobs worth mate, sorry"

Quite why someone should risk their job in the current climate is beyond me. Not exactly a lot of jobs going about these days...not sure why people who do their jobs properly are the subject of such abuse. I do think the term "jobsworth" says more about the ignorant person using the term than it does about the person on the receiving end.

If sticking to the rules and regulations and doing what you're paid to do is now a bad thing then I must be the biggest "jobsworth" in the world. I work in passenger services (face to face, not in a call centre) and I would never give out a passengers details and I don't know anyone who would. I've had all sorts of abuse from all sorts of people but I will never give out a single detail about someone, especially if a child is involved. The only time I would give it out is if someone is dropping off an UMNR and they have to be told about delays or rerouting etc, or if they are picking up an UMNR and have the documentation and ID to show they are the person picking them up. Anyone else can rant and rave all they like but they don't get a word out of me. Call me jobsworth, insult me all you like but I was told not to give out passenger details to third parties and I never do. That's part of my job, a job I like doing and a job I get paid pretty good money to do, so I have no intention of losing that job any time soon. :ok:

Sorry but in this case BA were 100% correct and I for one would feel that little bit better travelling with them knowing that my details are secure with their staff.

[grimmrad]

Don't see why and where I am hostile - I accept your position (well, for most of you, blocked some guys by now) and the legal situatuion, apparently many of you are not able to understand mine.

What I am trying to grasp is:

BA: "If you are not on the ticket I cannot give you that information." - But I have all the information, ticket number, dob etc. - BA:"If you are not on the ticket I cannot give you the information"

AA:"Oh, I am sorry to hear that. Let me see what I can find out. Hm, yes, that flight was cancelled, I am trying to find if they have another, can you hold a second - [some other tries here and there] sorry, you have to speak to BA..."

Maybe indeed they did both the same thing, they both adhered to the respective laws in their countries and, yes, I got it - they couldn't / woudn't give me the information - however, if I had a choice (and as a customer I have) - I know to whom I will not stick in the future just on the basis how they dealt with me as customer.

[grimmrad]

WHBM - that is an entire other story. Why she didn't call I have yet to find out and why I have no issues giving her my kids technically savvy she ain't.

[grimmrad]

Hipennine - yes, maybe.

[darkroomsource]

yeah, gimmrad, it's clear.
people on here tried to help you to explain why any company would be stupid to give out the information on the phone. Even if it was something like 'that flight was cancelled and they're on another flight'.
And you, having to comply with HIPPA, should know this more than anyone. Nothing is as restrictive as HIPPA. You can call the house of a patient, have met the husband of the patient, know it's the husband of the patient, been told by the patient that it's her husband, and told by the patient you can talk to her husband about it, but by law (and you can lose your license) you can't tell the husband the results of the test.
Even if you are both in the same PTA and you play bridge with them both on the weekends, your kids have grown up with their kids, but if you tell the husband the results of a simple test, you could lose your license.

Well, if an airline, any airline, any where in the world, including AA in the good ole US of A, were to tell you anything about a passenger travelling on their airline, guess what? they open themselves up to libel, law suits, and more.

We don't live in the world that we once lived in, there are too many people who want to take advantage of the rest of us.

If I were you, I'd write a nice letter to BA thanking them for protecting information about your child and mother. And a letter chastizing AA for giving you any information about your child and mother.

[Captivep]

Grimmrad - correct me if I'm wrong but the difference appears to have been:

AA told you there was another flight to Pisa

BA wouldn't tell you that a particular person was on a particular flight

My reading of that is that you asked two fundamentally different questions. I guess it might have gone something like this:

To AA - "My child's flight to Pisa has been cancelled - is there a later one?"

To BA - "My child's flight has been cancelled - can you tell me if he is on the next one?"

There is a (not so subtle) difference between the two questions.

[grimmrad]

I give up.

BA was short, unfriendly and and just basically gave one statement

AA was understanding, friendly and gave it a try, at the end referring to BA and at least provided information (when the next flight is).

None of them broke the law as none told me where my relatives were. One of them, BA, left me frustrated, the other not, even though the outcome was the same. I am not debating who should have not said what. I am debating the friendliness of their service since quite a few post but apparently few are getting that. And I forgot of course that this is a predominantly UK forum...

[Sunnyjohn]

You are being somewhat disingenuous. In the first post on this thread, you posed the question:
Question. Does BA had the right to decline the parents information on our son's whereabouts while traveling with BA and being stranded in LHR while booked on a BA flight?
Your question has been answered in a friendly, helpful and professional manner by those who know about these things. That's why we like Pprune. You might at least have the decency to say thank you.

[flydive1]

AA was understanding, friendly and gave it a try, at the end referring to BA and at least provided information (when the next flight is)

Well I would try and be friendly too if I knew that at the end I could blame someone else for faillure ;)

[Ancient Observer]

Grimmrad,
when I despatched my 15 year old daughter to hkg to one of her mates, on her own, I had concerns, especially as he did not get in touch for a couple of days. (She e-mailed us eventually)

So you have my empathy!

However, I knew that BA just would not tell me whether or not she had got on the flight, and whether or not she had got off at hkg. That's just how it is.

BA call centre people can be lots of things, but empathetic and mature is not always one of their strengths.

[RevMan2]

The understanding, friendly and giving-it-a-try AA call centre (who appear to have been blithely unaware of the existence of privacy laws...)

The classic Somerset Maugham quotation comes to mind:

"The Americans, who are the most efficient people on the earth, have carried [phrase-making] to such a height of perfection and have invented so wide a range of pithy and hackneyed phrases that they can carry on an amusing and animated conversation without giving a moment’s reflection to what they are saying and so leave their minds free to consider the more important matters of big business and fornication."

[Evanelpus]

BA was short, unfriendly and and just basically gave one statement

AA was understanding, friendly and gave it a try, at the end referring to BA and at least provided information (when the next flight is).

Vote with your feet. If there is a next time, boycott BA......simples!

[grimmrad]

I am not American nor British (but European, nevertheless)

I indeed got my answer and for those who tried to respond in a serious and non cynical way I am really grateful. I have learned my lesson and know what to do better next time.

Some comments but agreed not all, had a sarcastic and cynic undertone in it, which was not helpful. Maybe BA personnel ;)

Time to close the thread.

[RevMan2]

Some comments but agreed not all, had a sarcastic and cynic undertone in it, which was not helpful. Maybe BA personnel
Having a chip on both shoulders doesn't necessarily equate with a balanced opinion....

[Captivep]

Grimmrad

You started this thread with a complaint about not being given information that you thought you had a right to.

Now we're on page 3 it's turned into a complaint about a BA person not being friendly on the phone...

[Evanelpus]

Grimmrad

You started this thread with a complaint about not being given information that you thought you had a right to.

Now we're on page 3 it's turned into a complaint about a BA person not being friendly on the phone...

Well said, this is turning into a Bore Off thread. Answers have been given and the OP, for whatever reasons, doesn't seem to like them.:ouch:

What did he expect from PPRuNers?:ok:

[grimmrad]

See post 47. Nothing more to say.

[CI300]

I call troll ~
How many 8 year olds couldnt find a way to charge a phone for grandma.

Its been an entertaining read.

[SloppyJoe]

Depending where you live there may be a local BA office nearby or at the airport you would meet them, failing that an AA office may be able to get the info. If you had turned up in person with proof of your identity and that your child was who you said, birth certificate, I expect they then would have a legal obligation to give you any info you asked for about their travel progress.

[grimmrad]

Good point, thank you. Moot point though now thank god.

Edit: Glad someone got another stupid comment out of it.

[PAXboy]

Just to remain on thread: god had nothing to do with it. The airline did it's job and people in PPRuNe did their job.

= Result :ok:

[baggersup]

Some of us come every day up against rules and laws that 9 of us don't need but they are there to protect us from the 1 in 10 that might do something bad if that law/rule were not in place.

It's a bad world out there; and those of us who play by the rules and expect a little consideration from a big company to break the civil law can end up frustrated by legal red tape and protections.

But there you are.

There probably isn't anybody here who would not understand the need to find out if a child and his gran are okay. But the process to do that was hampered by law.

It was illegal for BA to tell you. Not sure how much clearer that is, however logically barmy it may sound on the face of it.

I think regular travelers through British airports will confirm that a man entering the country with his young son will often be stopped by border agents and questioned at length about his parentage--due to the emphasis on child trafficking right now.

Of course the parent will be put off .... but in the larger picture, it's understandable.

It's all about protecting the kids who aren't so fortunate as to be traveling with a caring parent.

So it's not just BA protecting information from "strangers," it's a more comprehensive child protection scheme as well I think.

[RevMan2]

Mute[sic] though now thank god.

Rarely a truer word spoken....

[SeenItAll]

Gimmrad:

A US airline would (these days) do nothing different from what BA did. And please don't say that AA did anything different. All it offered to do was to contact BA. It did not give you any information about your son -- and even if he had been on an AA flight, I doubt that they would have given you the information you wanted.

By not declaring your son to be an unaccompanied minor, he was just a regular passenger. The same as the several hundred thousand that BA also carried that day. They, or any other airline, cannot be expected to notify you of any passenger's whereabouts.

That over, let's talk about what you could have done.

1. Rely on Grandma notifying you of the information. But this is between you and her. Note, there were many methods available for her to achieve this task.

2. Send your son as a declared unaccompanied minor.

3. Finally, rather than demanding that BA tell you where your son is (if, indeed, they even know), instead request that BA tell your son (or Grandma) that they urgently need to get get in contact with you. The latter is a potentially feasible request.

Think of a hotel analogy. Desk clerks will not tell you a guest's room number, but they will call the guest and let you talk to them.

[grimmrad]

SeenItAll: He was an accompanied minor (Grandma) - but I had indeed thought about asking BA to ask them to please contact us but at that time they had already called. It's a good idea anyway.

I think my point by now having learned my lesson from other posters multiple times, was the way BA treated me versus AA. Yes, they both couldn't give me the information. But the AA representative was polite and understanding, trying to find something out while BA just blocked everything right away with "can't tell you". Its like two restaurants, one with friendly nice service and the other with grumpy and not polite one. Where would you eat again?

[Yellow Pen]

Given that neither of the 'restaurants' gave you any food it's slightly irrelevant. BA said they couldn't tell you, AA said they'd ring BA then said they couldn't tell you. Is there really a difference? It's like one restaurant saying "We won't serve you" and the other saying "Welcome, take a seat, here's the menu, what would you like, let me go and ask the manager whats on special tonight for you..................oh he says we won't serve you, I'm sorry, have a lovely day."

[blaggerman]

There is no law that says that BA cannot disclose such information. What the law says is that they can't disclose about someone without their prior consent. I can't think of any technical or legal reason why they could not allow a passenger to grant such consent to named people. They could add this information on their booking or frequent flyer profile. Some airlines gather next of kin or emergency contact information already - granting consent to those next-of-kin wouldn't be a huge leap either.

[mixture]

Is this sorry little thread still going? And up to four pages no less !

I can't think of any technical or legal reason why they could not allow a passenger to grant such consent to named people.

This is exactly what the OP was told on page one.... he should have put his details on the booking record if he expected to be able to talk to BA about the passenger. :ugh:

Round and round this thread goes....

[Tray Surfer]

blaggerman

Indeed, you are correct. There is indeed a feature of booking and also the Executive Club that will allow someone to add a 3rd party nominee to a booking, to allow the booking to be discussed and managed by someone else.

However, this was not done. Likely because the OP was not aware that this needed to be done. Which, is not fault of theirs.

It was an unfortunate situation, which could have been dealt with differently by all involved, not just the carrying airline.