Originally Posted by
Piltdown Man
If summary of the Times article by David is correct, BA need to be taken to the cleaners by its former customers.
Here is the actual article
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...gers-jqgj69hlz
It may need a subscription to read it though. Two pages a week free for me.
Now I've looked closer, I see that they assert a 0344 number is costing some people 55p a minute. It would be in minute bundles. The cheapest pay as you go rates start at 3p.
An excerpt:
He told of two women whose flights to Tel Aviv were cancelled on Saturday, with a replacement failing to take off on Sunday. They were understood to have been given seats on a flight tomorrow but only if they paid £800 each to upgrade to premium economy — the only space available.
Confusion also surrounded passengers who had to travel with other airlines, with BA saying that booking “via different carriers would be at your own expense and would have to be claimed back through travel insurance”.
Hmmm, I can recall that when one or other cross-Channel ferry companies or the tunnel have had issues, it has been convention that they put people on rival operators at no extra charge.
Thus for instance years ago one time I turned up for Sally Line at Ramsgate and was sent to Dover to catch P&O or Stena. Another time, dock strike at Calais, so tickets valid on the tunnel.
Why doesn't this apply to airlines?
And if someone does rely on their insurers to pay for a replacement flight, will the insurers launch a claim against BA? Why should travel insurance designed more for unforeseeable issues such as the operator ceasing to trade be used to soak up this cost? Will premiums rise in future if you declare BA as provider?