BA Baggage Allowance Cuts

[Jordan D]

Not sure if this has come up in the last week (whilst I was away), but it appears that BA is changing its baggage policy - which can mean an upto 18kg cut in checked luggage allowance, and difficulties for ensuring luggage is under limits.

Changes are summarised at http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bagpolicy/public/en_gb

Comments...?
Jordan

[Railgun]

Not sure if this has come up in the last week (whilst I was away), but it appears that BA is changing its baggage policy - which can mean an upto 18kg cut in checked luggage allowance, and difficulties for ensuring luggage is under limits.
Changes are summarised at http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bagpolicy/public/en_gb
Comments...?
Jordan

18 kg been the biggest cut. What about the +23 kg increase for WT+ pax traveling towards the east? or the +16kg increase for F or J pax traveling to the east? And club europe pax have had the same increase in baggage allowence. Its only west bound travel that has suffered a 18 kg cut.

[hapzim]

email from BA

We're making a few changes to our hand baggage and checked baggage allowances.

The new baggage policy is easy to follow and will reduce airport queues, making your journey quicker and hassle-free. The policy changes include hand, checked and excess baggage allowances and will be phased in over the next five months. I’ve included a quick guide below, and a link to the complete policy if you'd like to read more.

HAND BAGGAGE
From 5 July 2006, all customers will be able to take one standard-sized bag (maximum size of 56cm x 45cm x 25cm), plus one briefcase, laptop bag or equivalent into the cabin as hand baggage. You must be able to lift your hand baggage into the overhead locker unaided and the briefcase or laptop computer bag or equivalent must fit under the seat in front of you.

CHECKED BAGGAGE
From 11 October, we will be making changes to the number of bags that you can check in. This will vary according to your class of travel and route. The maximum weight per bag will be reduced to 23kgs to comply with health and safety recommendations.

EXCESS BAGGAGE
Excess baggage charges will also be standardised from 11 October. A fixed fee, dependent on the journey length, will be charged for each bag in excess of the free checked baggage allowance. In the majority of cases the new charges will be less than those currently levied and a further 20% discount will be available by pre-paying on line at ba.com

[lexxity]

Is current health and safety guidelines not 32kg then? BA have always been more generous for economy pax with a 23kg limit, but what if you've paid for a club or first ticket? What if you're flying to the US where according to IATA allowances are 2pieces at 32kg? (Although a lot of the US airlines are now ignoring this!):confused:

Flying is getting more confusing by the chopping and changing of things like this it is more hassle for the average pax to understand easily.

[manintheback]

So BA think all passengers will put one piece under the seat and the other in the locker? dream on. Thos onboard early will fill all the lockers up. Pity the poor CC trying to sort this out and the Pax who are going to find their hand luggage chucked into the baggage hold.
It might work up front with fewer passengers per locker but not a chance in the back.

[Globaliser]

Some discussion was kicked off about this here in this thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2651611#post2651611) over on Airlines, Airports and Routes.

FWIW, I'm not a "kitchen sink" person, but my problems with this are the reduction in flexibility with the new approach, and the fact that too many people will now bring too much cabin baggage for the economy cabin, with all the associated problems that are well known.

[slim_slag]

Flying is getting more confusing by the chopping and changing of things like this it is more hassle for the average pax to understand easily.I think it's getting simpler, the differentiation in service levels between carriers is becoming less and less. BA is just following the leads set by Easyjet (take what you like on board as long as you can lift it) and Ryanair (checked baggage is a profit centre). It's getting to be the only difference between the carriers is how much you pay (Ryanair < Easyjet < BA), and whether they are late/cancelled or not (Ryanair better than Easy better than BA).

[manintheback]

Having now read the regs:
1 Bag per Economy passenger checked in?. Guess WW has made it clear where he wants to position BA in the market.

[patdavies]

Is current health and safety guidelines not 32kg then?

32Kg is defined as a two man lift. 25 Kg is a one man lift.

[Seat1APlease]

Whether the numbers are better or not is arguable, what is clear is that it is long overdue to have a policy and stick to it.
Most of us will have found ourselves waiting in the check in queue whilst the couple at the front load their 8 various packages and parcels on the belt, including TV sets, fridges etc. (you know the sort), then start to argue whilst the check in agent tells them that they are X kgs. overweight and that will cost Y dollars or whatever, whilst all those behind them get more and more frustrated.
If the agent now says that two bags are free and the others cost Y$ per bag, with no haggling, then that would be quicker for everyone.
I am a bit dubious about a hand baggage limit controlled by size rather than weight because I suspect many will just try it on, with bigger and bigger bags.
On a recent flight from Nice some economy passengers were coming on with 2 large wheely-bags and expecting to stow them overhead, meaning others couldn't even find room for their coats.
Provided they make it clear that anything over the size limit goes in the hold with the appropriate charge, and no arguments then it might just work.

[Jordan D]

Whats also cr*p about this policy, is that say I am travelling and want to split my 23kg allowance from one large bag into two smaller bags (for convience, or for any other reason, because I am the traveller, I've paid for the ticket and I can pack how I want), I am now no longer allowed to do this.

Why? Surely if I turn up with 23kg of checked luggage, and my allowance is 23kg, thats all that should matter. Not how many bags I've chosen to put said luggage into.

Its a bloody disgrace.

Jordan

[FloridaCandle]

I agree with a previous comment, this is a bloody disgrace, but especially to Club and First passengers who pay so much more. I've a keen interest as I'm flying out to the States on the day policy comes into effect. I've booked a ringside seat for the Passengers v Check In fight, likely to go over a hundred or more bouts!! I'm now trying to change my flight to avoid the riot.:eek: :ouch:
I booked Club partly because of extra hand luggage allowance, checked luggage was never in question. In so doing paid £1,000 more than economy seat. Why did I bother? I can now travel with the same luggage as if I pay £400 on a sale fare (travel allowance is same whether F, C, WT+ or WT on US routes). Scandalous!:mad:
Despite paying more I'll still get clobbered by excess fees should I dare to bring the amount of luggage BA's contract says I can have. This is outrageous.
Cabin baggage is now unlimited in weight so I look forward to mini fridges, car engines, and other wonderful items on board - if they fit in the size of bag who cares how much it weighs. This will alleviate any savings BA hope to make on fuel, and could raise a safety issue if weight is not determined for items. I personally would be interested to see how BA react when a fridge falls out of an overhead and lands on a passenger!
BA say its down to health & safety but other baggage handlers at Heathrow are still able to manage to deal with 32kg limits. I am a 5'2" 51 year old lady and if I can manage to lift my bags, then I'm sure a strapping baggage handler can do the same. If not, perhaps they should be in a different role.
Or perhaps BA are trying to cut out the baggage handlers altogether??!! :hmm:
Note VS still allow 3 pieces up to 32kg each. Despite my strong preference for BA, I will have no hesitation in changing my carrier next time round. I'd do it this year, but realistically would be "cutting off my nose to spite my face".

[Jordan D]

You can, but only....

Ah, but what if I was travelling elsewhere?

Jordan

[Globaliser]

I agree with a previous comment, this is a bloody disgrace, but especially to Club and First passengers who pay so much more.
...
I booked Club partly because of extra hand luggage allowance, checked luggage was never in question. In so doing paid £1,000 more than economy seat. Why did I bother? I can now travel with the same luggage as if I pay £400 on a sale fare (travel allowance is same whether F, C, WT+ or WT on US routes).There are things about this policy which are not good, and about which I've vented elsewhere. But we also have to keep this in perspective.

Current North Atlantic (broadly speaking) allowances:
First: 2 bags x 32 kg each
Club: 2 bags x 32 kg each
WT+: 2 bags x 32 kg each
WT: 2 bags x 32 kg each

New North Atlantic allowances:
First: 2 bags x 23 kg each
Club: 2 bags x 23 kg each
WT+: 2 bags x 23 kg each
WT: 2 bags x 23 kg each

So for current piece count routes, First and Club pax currently have the same baggage allowance as WT+ and WT. There isn't really a valid complaint on these routes that because you've paid more, therefore you should have more baggage allowance - it's already the current position that everyone gets the same.

The real complaint should be that 2 x 23 kg isn't enough for First and Club.

Current rest-of-world allowances:
First: 40 kg
Club: 30 kg
WT+: 23 kg
WT: 23 kg

New rest-of-world allowances:
First: 2 bags x 23 kg each = 46 kg (increase of 6 kg over current limit)
Club: 2 bags x 23 kg each = 46 kg (increase of 16 kg over current limit)
WT+: 2 bags x 23 kg each = 46 kg (increase of 23 kg over current limit)
WT: 1 bags x 23 kg each = same weight as current limit

So nobody is allowed less weight than before, and all the premium classes are allowed more weight than currently.

As I say, there are other problems with this, with which I'm not happy. But let's make sure that criticism is directed where it belongs.

[FloridaCandle]

Hi Globaliser - put it that way it doesn't sound so bad!! But I booked in good faith without any forewarning they were planning this, and am now having to pay even more. Most people I've spoken to agree they'd be p....d off! Yes I can put more items into my hand luggage, but the 1,000 metre sprint to Immigration in the US is bad enough with light hand luggage, let alone heavy stuff.:D
The decent thing to do would be for BA to honour their commitment of 32kg to those pax who booked before the change was announced, but travelling on or after implementation date. Provided of course that those pax do not exceed the old TOTAL checked limit of 64kg, ie. instead of 2 bags at 32kg, 3 bags at 21 or 22kg each. That would be a fair compromise for all.;)
Another quick thought - the overhead bins on the upstairs of 747's are often smaller than others on the a/c, so that will place a further, albeit slight, limit on pax seated up there. The side bins are handy, but not very roomy being so slim.
Does anyone know if VS are planning to follow suit with this? Their allowance is better and they offer more to premium pax, ie. limo transfer, etc. I just happen to prefer BA because of my history with them and their professionalism on board.

[Globaliser]

The decent thing to do would be for BA to honour their commitment of 32kg to those pax who booked before the change was announced, but travelling on or after implementation date.I agree with this. It's one of the wrinkles that they ought to have sorted out in the policy before they announced it. They had long enough to think about things like that, especially during the delays in the announcement.

[Swedish Steve]

I am a bit dubious about a hand baggage limit controlled by size rather than weight because I suspect many will just try it on, with bigger and bigger bags.
.
We have got some new bag size gauges to put at check in and at the gates. They are like the scales BA had a few years ago. The bin is about 3ft off the floor and if you can lift your bag in it is OK.
Lets see how they are used.

[Globaliser]

The decent thing to do would be for BA to honour their commitment of 32kg to those pax who booked before the change was announced, but travelling on or after implementation date.I've seen it posted elsewhere today (another BB) that if you had a confirmed reservation made before the policy announcement for travel after the new checked baggage policy comes into effect (11 October 2006), and your reservation is ticketed by 10 October 2006, you will have 2 x 32 kg as it currently is now.

This is sensible (as I've already said). You may want to confirm this with BA. I hope they'll make this clear on their website.

Ticketed means exactly that; a confirmed reservation with a PNR locator is not itself enough. If you have a BA locator, use it on www.checkmytrip.com to see whether there is a ticket number showing in your PNR.

[FloridaCandle]

Hi Globaliser - thanks for this, I do hope you're right. As I said before, this would be honourable thing to do.
I have e-ticket, and ticket number's shown in the res with all the pricing details, etc. Manage my Booking still shows 2 x 32kg, but BA Res said they were working to change this. BA web site still doesn't say anything about those already booked. We wait and see. :confused:
Meanwhile, I've decided might be best all round to try and change flt to day or two before so as to avoid chaos at check-in on first day of new policy. Now just have to wait for right class of service to come up to allow me to do it!!
Thanks again - much appreciated. :)

[lexxity]

Florida as you have ticket numbers on your e-reservation that means that your flights have already been ticketed so the old baggage allowance will apply. Which will be 2x32kgs for your transatlantic sectors.

[FloridaCandle]

Hi Globaliser and Lexxity - just wondered where your info came from. Just spoken to BA res and they advise that what you say is NOT the case, I will only be able to take 2 x 23kg NOT 2 x32kg. :mad:
Are you ground staff - have you been told differently? Would love to know where you heard this.

[lexxity]

Hi Florida I've been searching the BA website for their terms and conditions and here is what it says in their general terms and conditions of carriage



General Conditions of Carriage for Passengers and Baggage - effective 1 March 2005

8. Baggage

8a) Your free baggage allowance

We will carry some of your baggage free of charge. Your free baggage allowance will be shown on your ticket, or in the case of an electronic ticket, on your itinerary and receipt and will depend on our baggage regulations applying at the time of your flight. If you are in doubt, please ask us or our authorised agents for details of your free baggage allowance and our baggage regulations.

It also states on ba.com

19. Our Regulations
When we carry you and your baggage you must obey our regulations. These concern, among other things:

- unaccompanied children;
- passengers with a disability;
- pregnant women and sick passengers;
- carrying animals;
- restrictions on using electronic devices on board the aircraft;
- smoking and drinking alcohol on board the aircraft;
- forbidden items in baggage; and
- limits on the measurements, size and weight of baggage.

It also states:


General Conditions of Carriage for Passengers and Baggage - effective 1 March 2005

2d) Differences between these conditions of carriage and our regulations

If these conditions of carriage are inconsistent with our regulations, these conditions of carriage will apply.

So from what I can make out your allowance is 2x32kgs. Time for Flying Lawer to take a look at this I think.

(BTW, I don't work for BA, but I do work in the industry.)


Link here. (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/genconcarr1/public/en_gb#8a)

[FloridaCandle]

Hi Lexxity - thanks your response. I'd already looked into the T&C's but you know BA with their heavy legal team would never let a man on the street get away with suing them for something like this. Even in the terms you sent, the phrase "and will depend on our baggage regulations applying at the time of your flight" will no doubt cover them if they want to change the rules. :mad:
Whilst at Sir Freddie Laker's memorial last week one of the things that made everyone laugh was the way Sir F always used to say "sue the B.....ds" when anything went wrong - believe me I'd love to do it, but know I don't have a leg to stand on.:ugh:
Fairly new to PPrune - who is Flying Lawer? If it's someone with the forums who can give any legal advice, would be greatly appreciated.

[FloridaCandle]

Meant to add this to previous message - the attached was taken from BA's website
Customers booked to travel should arrive at the airport two hours before the scheduled departure time, as normal. However, we advise customers to minimise the amount of hand baggage they carry with them and allow sufficient time to clear central security searches.[/I]
It seems like the left hand doesn't know what the right's doing at BA. Sure a lot will agree with me there. Either that or total hypocrisy.:ugh: :=
I look forward to getting as familiar with the VS product as I have BA over the years. World's Favourite Airline? Not for much longer.:uhoh:

[Globaliser]

Hi Globaliser and Lexxity - just wondered where your info came from. Just spoken to BA res and they advise that what you say is NOT the case, I will only be able to take 2 x 23kg NOT 2 x32kg.I was only passing on what I'd seen on another BB. I'm sorry that BA are denying it.

What I'd read did have the ring of truth about it: It looked like it was a carefully-crafted policy that got around the potential contract problems that BA would have if they strictly applied the new allowances to bookings made before the announcement. Some other airlines in a similar situation have adopted a grandfathering attitude towards existing bookings, which is why I thought that it was sensible. It was also too carefully-crafted to have been something dreamt up on the spot by a res/sales agent on a frolic of their own.I look forward to getting as familiar with the VS product as I have BA over the years. World's Favourite Airline? Not for much longer.:uhoh:Unfortunately, history suggests that VS will not be far behind; they often lag BA in unpopular changes, sliding them in quietly. Of course, VS' better relationship with the media also means that the media conveniently ignore the changes that VS make first and hit BA when BA comes second (eg the last round of fuel surcharge increases, and the reduction for Y trans-Atlantic pax from 2 piece x 32 kg to 2 pieces x 23 kg).

I agree, though, with your point about minimising cabin baggage. This whole thing is a policy shambles.

[FloridaCandle]

Thanks Globaliser. I'm still hoping they will do the honourable thing - guess there's time to do so - I'm saying my nightly prayers!
When I made the comments about VS, I admit I was wrong in reading their info and hadn't realised VS was already down to 2 x 23kg in Economy. :O
However, their premium cabins have allowance of 2 x 32kg for PE and 3 x 32kg for Upper Class, which is equivalent to BA Club. That's recognition of extra they've paid. Let's not forget VS provide limo for UC pax within 50 miles of M25 (I am!) - that's another plus BA don't offer.
A further point, BA Res said how would check in staff be able to cope with some at 32kg and some at 23kg. Quite easy really if the PNR was flagged appropriately, even easier for those in premium cabins who check in at separate desks!

[lexxity]

Hi Florida, Flying Lawer is a very nice chap on this site who is a lawyer. He would be able to advise you in clear terms where you stand. He is great at putting legal jargon into plain english.

[Haven't a clue]

I am trying to understand how these new baggage rules apply to the whole BA empire. Most of my sectors start with what is now BA Connect from the Isle of Man. Now as they are not BA Mainline I guess there's a bit missing at the moment from the policy to warn those pax flying subsidiaries that the new policy does not apply to them.....?
So I anticipate those wonderful people who crew G-MABR (the BAe146-100 which unfortunately replaced the much missed and possibly sold in error 146-200 G-MIMA on the IOM-LGW route) to be confronted with over burdened pax fighting for a slice of the totally inadequate locker space on this aircraft in the mistaken belief that their BA ticket entitles them to carry their two huge bags on board. Of course I will be arguing equally strongly since I am connecting with another BA service which offers to carry my overweight carry-ons, provided I can lift one of them into the locker (which of course I can, 'cos I've been training for this moment..!)
Perhaps the bigger driver for this new policy is the realisation by BA management that allowing the customer to print out his own boarding pass permits him/her to bypass all the human checks including an assessment of carry-on baggage until he/she is almost on board the aircraft, so what the hell - if he/she can carry it, let it on board.
Oh and I'll have to pack some scales to check the weight of my checked luggage on its return journey to ensure I don't exceed the new maxima (which incidently we did on our return from our family holiday last month).
As a Gold card holder and a BA shareholder I have to wonder what is really going on here.

[reuters77]

According to the BBC, Heathrow are now going to be imposing their own limits on the amount of hand luggage that passengers can carry through security. I'm not sure how this works with BA's new policy. It would appear that not only are different parts of BA not speaking to each other but also that no one is speaking to BAA!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5097328.stm

[Globaliser]

I'm not sure how this works with BA's new policy.As I understand it, the gauges will be sized to match exactly the new BA limit. Or maybe it's the other way around.

[manintheback]

I am flying to SAfrica next Feb, tickets booked 8 weeks ago for the 2 of us. BA have confirmed today that the new limits apply (they have even 'kindly' changed the allowance limits on my exec club ebooking page), and not the ones in the T&Cs when I purchased the ticket for which I have a written copy. Pathetic and probably not lawful

edited to add: And further after a long discussion with BA Customer Services, they were exceptionally careful not to answer my question 'will you honour the T&Cs of my booking' repeated a number of times. Good politicians I will grant them that.

[FloridaCandle]

Hi ManintheBack - I'm in same situation. No matter what you ask them - they won't say anything except the new policy will apply to all passengers.:ugh:
I agree it may not be legal with those holding ticketed reservations, but if you look further back in this thread you will see something which is along the lines of carrying your baggage free of charge, subject to the terms and conditions which exist at the time of travel. Something like that. As others have said on this and other sites, this has not been worded the best and may or may not be a get out clause for them. It'd be interesting to hear if any legal bods have any viewpoint.

[flyyy]

hey maninthe back.
for you it should not really make a difference (assuming you fly from italy to south africa. baggage limit on that route has always been 23kg per person on that route. the only difference is, that now you only have 1 bag per person.
actually you ar winning, as you are allowed to take more handluggage.
if flying from the US it is a bit different, but overall (including handluggage) you are still allowed to take about the same amount of luggage.
if flying business class it 2*23kg, so more than you were allowed to.
only passengers really loosing is pax flying from america. but there it seems it is not a standard to have only 2*23 (instead of 2*32) kg (saw the same limits on CO).

[apaddyinuk]

EXPECT DELAYS....

....when this fully comes into effect. As crew for BA we have been instructed by the company (and totally backed up by our union) not to touch any bag in any circumstances as a result of the revised weight limit. Many of us even have little cards in our pockets to back this up should we develope any grievences with customers.
So make sure you can lift your heavy bag into the lockers by yourself (keeping in mind some lockers are smaller/higher than others and lets not even get into a discussion about the 767) or you will be asked by the crew to wheel it up to the door and have it placed in the hold, even if your a little old lady.
Sounds harsh I know but unfortunately why should we risk injuring our own backs (which is very easy to do even with a light bag) for the sake of this new baggage policy especially when the company wont pay for any treatment.

[FloridaCandle]

if flying from the US it is a bit different, but overall (including handluggage) you are still allowed to take about the same amount of luggage.
if flying business class it 2*23kg, so more than you were allowed to.
only passengers really loosing is pax flying from america. but there it seems it is not a standard to have only 2*23 (instead of 2*32) kg (saw the same limits on CO).
My bolding applies
Your post is not 100% clear. If you are referring to flying business class to the US, luggage allowance is NOT more than you were allowed, but rather 18kg (or 20lbs) less over the 2 bags. A BIG difference.:*
You add "there it seems it is not a standard to have only 2*23 ..." - again this doesn't make sense and not sure what you mean - whether it is standard or not.
Most, if not all, US carriers now only allow 2 x 23kg, though they will allow passengers to have bags up to 32kg, provided excess is paid.
Furthermore, VS continues to allow 2 x 32kg for PE pax and 3 x 32kg for Upper Class - equivalent to BA's Club. It is only Economy that is restricted to 23kg with VS.
Yet BA will charge their WT+, Club and First passengers for anything over 23kg. :=
This is why it's so unfair on the transatlantic routes and has the potential to lose them a lot of high end business.

[ZFT]

apaddyinuk
What is the policy for a disabled passengers cabin baggage if BA’s policy is “not to touch any bag in any circumstances”?

[Leclairage]

Without wishing to detract from all the factual information given by others, my view of this is a tad cynical - particularly with BA. When it comes down to it, their preferred customers (the big-ticket, silver/gold club members) will be allowed to bring on board what they please, just as now.
Who hasn't had to struggle to find overhead space anywhere near their seat because of this, or watch others bring cabin luggage on board that beggars the rules when one has been denied modest items?

[WHBM]

If BA try to enforce rules that were not in force and not advised at the time of booking they will, at least in the UK, come under the Unfair Contract Terms Act, which will hold them to be unreasonable and therefore unenforceable.

[sixmilehighclub]

Whats also cr*p about this policy, is that say I am travelling and want to split my 23kg allowance from one large bag into two smaller bags (for convience, or for any other reason, because I am the traveller, I've paid for the ticket and I can pack how I want), I am now no longer allowed to do this.

Why? Surely if I turn up with 23kg of checked luggage, and my allowance is 23kg, thats all that should matter. Not how many bags I've chosen to put said luggage into.



Why?

It's unlikely everyone would, but if every passenger on a Jumbo split their allowance into 2 bags, it would take twice as long to load the bags! Twice as long to offload them and twice as long for a bag to be found if a passenger fails to make the flight they've checked in for. BA are trying to improve punctuality, because this is one of the most important factors discovered in results from customer feedback.

BA have been fairly laid back until now. Many passengers have taken advantage. This has been recognised and it has spoilt it for everyone.

Previous to this new policy, review any of the flights during boarding. You would regularly see the Cabin Crew fighting with overhead lockers, lifting overweight bags about the cabin themselves just to get all the bags in to approved places so that the flight can leave on time (Gents, would you expect a female on a train to help you with a heavy bag and risk injury?).

I have sat and witnessed people turning up on a plane with a large wheelie bag, a laptop bag, a cabin bag and a jacket, as well as duty free shopping and whatever else they've collected from various other airport shops. Well above the allowance. Then expect the crew to help or put their heavy bags into the wardrobe, which it is not stressed for to be safe. (And Leclairage, its not the cardholders who are the guilty party as they have already paid extra for the privelege, but on European routes tend to be on businees for a day or two, whereas the majority in Economy are leisure and carry more in the cabin as they are going fopr longer).

I know that for one night away, I can fit all of my belongings and clothes into a bag twice the size of my laptop. For 5 days everything fits into a small trolley bag. If i'm away for longer I have my laptop bag for the cabin, and a suitcase for the hold but I don't go overweight.

Passengers know the rules and have relied on BA's discretion and goodwill for so long. Now they are changing it no-ones happy!!

[manintheback]

If BA try to enforce rules that were not in force and not advised at the time of booking they will, at least in the UK, come under the Unfair Contract Terms Act, which will hold them to be unreasonable and therefore unenforceable.

And as large companies like BA know, the man in the street isnt going to sue them.

[bealine]

Let's get something straight here - the short-haul fares nowadays are comparable to EasyJet or Ryanair, with some being even lower than the charterers.

Nobody bats an eyelid when EasyJet or Ryanair charge for every grramme of excess (and their allowances are significantly less than BA's new ones), but somehow you feel BA is being unreasonable when it enforces the allowances.

The US carriers have disallowed bags over 23 kgs for over eighteen months now (AA, CO, US, UA etc) and charge $50 if a bag is over 23 kgs.

BA has chosen to have 23 kgs as the absolute upper limit - our prerogative, end of story! The terms and conditions of carriage are perfectly fair and reasonable and sufficient notice has been given for you to find an alternative carrier if you don't like the new allowances. The vast majority of passengers will notice little or no difference. The "traders" who have made vast profits at the airlines' expense for so long will now have to pay their way - and what's wrong with that?

If you ask for a refund of an existing ticket because the changes to the Terms and Conditions are no longer acceptable to you (ie You use the Trading Standards Terminology, asking to speak to a supervisor in necessary, that the reservation is "Not Fit For the Purpose For Which It Was Sold!") that we will undoubtedly refund your ticket price. British Airways usually acts fairly and reasonably under UK Law.

The aviation industry is undergoing rapid change. As fares are being driven ever downwards, managers are being forced into lateral thinking in order to replace the lost revenue.

[Globaliser]

Nobody bats an eyelid when EasyJet or Ryanair charge for every grramme of excess (and their allowances are significantly less than BA's new ones), but somehow you feel BA is being unreasonable when it enforces the allowances.

The US carriers have disallowed bags over 23 kgs for over eighteen months now (AA, CO, US, UA etc) and charge $50 if a bag is over 23 kgs.

BA has chosen to have 23 kgs as the absolute upper limit - our prerogative, end of story!Certainly, it's BA's prerogative. But if that irritates BA's regular and loyal customers, we have an equal prerogative to make our feelings known.

BA is not EZY or RYR, in at least two respects.

First, we generally pay more money to fly BA. Sometimes it's a little more; some people pay a lot more. In return, I think that we are entitled to expect that there will not be a rigid technical penny-pinching attitude. There should be some flexibility built into the system. That flexibility does not have to be enough to encompass those who completely take the p1ss - and we've all seen our fair share of those. But the regular economy traveller who, on this trip, happens to have his bag at 25 kg rather than 18 kg is entitled to feel a little disgruntled. Airlines that want loyalty on the basis of service quality must allow for a bit of give and take.

Second, to a very large extent, comparing BA to EZY and RYR is comparing apples to bars of soap. BA operates a worldwide long-haul network; that is the backbone of its operation. The majority of BA's RPKs are clocked up by people flying several thousand miles at a time. The nature of that sort of travel demands a bit more flexibility. Applying a short-haul approach to long-haul travel is, again, apt to irritate.

The sort of flexibility I have in mind is precisely demonstrated by what the US airlines are doing. If you happen to be at 25 kg one day, it's USD 50 = GBP 27. In BA's new world, if you happen to be at 25 kg one day, it's GBP 120 - plus the cost of buying a new bag to put your excess in.

That's just stupid, IMHO.

Personally, I'd prefer not to have to pay anything, particularly in the light of all the times I've done long haul trips with nothing more than a 3 kg backpack under the seat in front of me, using none of my checked baggage allowance. BA could at least give me some credit for that. But if I have to pay something because I'm a couple of kg extra, don't make it the same amount as if I'd brought another whole suitcase along.

And the worst thing is that the most valuable customers, those holding higher tier FF status, are getting no extras. That is contrary to the practice of many major airlines, including BA's own partner QF. That, at least, would be a start.

[manintheback]

BA has chosen to have 23 kgs as the absolute upper limit - our prerogative, end of story!

Absolutely


The terms and conditions of carriage are perfectly fair and reasonable and sufficient notice has been given for you to find an alternative carrier if you don't like the new allowances.


Not if you've already purchased a non refundable ticket and had the T&Cs changed afterwards


If you ask for a refund of an existing ticket because the changes to the Terms and Conditions are no longer acceptable to you (ie You use the Trading Standards Terminology, asking to speak to a supervisor in necessary, that the reservation is "Not Fit For the Purpose For Which It Was Sold!") that we will undoubtedly refund your ticket price. British Airways usually acts fairly and reasonably under UK Law.


Wrong, they will not refund non refundable tickets, I've asked.
Conditions of contract have been broken, this is a breach of contract, nothing to do with 'fit for purpose'. BA have been exceptionally careful in the wording of response and will not give a yes or no as to wether they will honour the paid for booking conditions - I think most could hazard an accurate guess why this might be. One suspects that anyone turning up on the old conditions will be allowed through to prevent the actual breach occuring, most people however (including myself) wont take the chance.

Ultimately - really stupid. Why open yourself up to such bad publicity for what must be very limited numbers and effectively near to nil cost for those with pre-existing bookings?

[Globaliser]

One suspects that anyone turning up on the old conditions will be allowed through to prevent the actual breach occuring, most people however (including myself) wont take the chance.

Ultimately - really stupid. Why open yourself up to such bad publicity for what must be very limited numbers and effectively near to nil cost for those with pre-existing bookings?I agree.

BA may have been advised that, even if it charges for those who booked before the change and who would have been within the limit but are now over, their liability is limited to ... the amount of the excess charged. That, after all, is the extent of the loss that you've incurred through the breach.

BA may also have been advised that the announcement of a change in the limits may amount to an anticipatory declaration that it will breach the contract, but not one that entitles the passenger to terminate the contract and get a refund.

I can see how this might be absolutely correct legal advice. It may be legal, but it isn't fair play. It's not what BA ought to be known for.

But waiting for the consequences is a bit like watching a train crash. You know the accident is going to happen, you know that it's going to be messy, and you just can't help but watch it happen.

Madness. Is this another consequence of the pursuit, at any price, of the totally arbitrary 10% margin figure?

[apaddyinuk]

apaddyinuk
What is the policy for a disabled passengers cabin baggage if BA’s policy is “not to touch any bag in any circumstances”?

Well ZFT, as awful as it sounds but if you cannot pack a bag which you cannot take to the gate on your own and place into an over head locker, then you will need to check it in, unless you are travelling with someone who can do it for you. However if it fits under your seat then you are ok. This is the rule from above and regardless of whether we agree with it or not, has to be enforced. But I am sure that even a disabled passenger would not want a crew member risking the injury of their back just to stow your heavy bag.
I am usually rather pro BA but this particular policy is one that is really grinding me. I do agree that crew should not be expected to lift luggage anyways but I dont believe that BA are telling the passengers this and perhaps expecting us to lift bags anyways despite not being covered by insurance should we injure ourselves.

[ZFT]

apaddyinuk
Thanks. The reason I enquired is that I have a wheelchair bound friend who travels alone LHR – BKK rtn every year to visit me and this is really quite a significant issue.
Getting to the gate isn’t a problem as his cabin bag sits on his lap on the wheelchair.
Obviously he can’t reach the overhead bins even with a light bag and we both know the limited room available under the seat.
As a direct flight is essential for him, looks like his options are now limited to either EVA or TG next year.

Edited to add that I totally support any sensible initiative that restricts cabin baggage to the allowed weight & size

[Bluejay]

I just want to clear something up here, it appears that everyone thinks that BA are implementing this new handbaggage and checked baggage poilicy to annoy all who fly with them. Let me point something out it has been highlighted in earlier posts that some of you travelling with BA are actually getting an INCREASED allowance. Now if I have read this wrong then I am sure it will be pointed out by one of you, but I am also pretty certain that Bealine will back me up. ALL european passengers (Eurotraveller and Club Europe) are actually getting a BIGGER allowance, if you look at the total weight allowed I am sure you will agree.
Club Europe - checked 2pcs @23kg each plus one hand luggage item (max weight will be 23kg) therefore total is - 69kg
Eurotraveller - checked 1pce @ 23kg plus one handluggage @23kg total - 64kg
Now before I continue I can see you all now reading this post and saying where the **** did he get the 23kg limit on handluggage from!!!!
Well here goes and this is the main point of my post. In the not too distant future the maximum weight of ANY bag passing through ANY UK airport is going to be 23kg that means checked luggage and hand luggage! This change is inevitable and BA are merely prempting the change. So can we stop the BA bashing and making out like they are doing this to **** you all off. You will also note in the new policy that BA will not accept any bags more than 23kg in weight so even if you think you are super strong and THINK you can lift a 30 to 40 kg bag into the overhead and then get on board the aircraft and find you can't, I think you will find that as they won't accept a bag of more than 23 kg (unless you have preadvised them that it will be heavier and there are only a few exceptions) then chances are you will be offloaded and once escorted landside will be left to your own devices to rebook and comply or go home!!!

For Longhaul travel I beleive that all they have done is restrict the max baggage weight to 23kg however the allowance of two bags hasn't changed (unlees you are heading East form the UK) in any class.

Next point - I beleive that you will also find that although BA have rarely charged excess in the past for sports equipment (it has never been a free allowance) I beleive that this has been added to the allowances with restrictions.

Lexxity - sorry if this has been pointed out before but the policy states

"We will carry some of your baggage free of charge. Your free baggage allowance will be shown on your ticket, or in the case of an electronic ticket, on your itinerary and receipt and will depend on our baggage regulations applying at the time of your flight."
As I read it you will have to comply with the new policy.

So I think the bottom line is that we will all have to accept the change, but please believe me when I say that BA are not doing this to inconvinience anyone they are merley prempting the inevitable.

Rant over

[manintheback]

ILexxity - sorry if this has been pointed out before but the policy states
"We will carry some of your baggage free of charge. Your free baggage allowance will be shown on your ticket, or in the case of an electronic ticket, on your itinerary and receipt and will depend on our baggage regulations applying at the time of your flight."
As I read it you will have to comply with the new policy.


No such clause exists on tickets I have in my possesion purchased before the new policy was introduced. Much of the discussion above is about changing the conditions of those who already had tickets.

[Bluejay]

No such clause exists on tickets I have in my possesion purchased before the new policy was introduced. Much of the discussion above is about changing the conditions of those who already had tickets.

That may indeed be the case, however it does exist on ba.com and I think that you will find that that is where you will find the full Terms and Conditions of Carriage.

[manintheback]

That may indeed be the case, however it does exist on ba.com and I think that you will find that that is where you will find the full Terms and Conditions of Carriage.

I have the full written terms and conditions. The ones on the BA website you mention are new and apply to the new bookings. Thinking about it a bit more its a bit low to start putting in clauses that allow for fundamental alterations at a later date. Most if not all PAX would like certainty as to what they have paid for. Intangibles are for the likes of the insurance industry - not aviation.

[Bluejay]

I have the full written terms and conditions. The ones on the BA website you mention are new and apply to the new bookings. Thinking about it a bit more its a bit low to start putting in clauses that allow for fundamental alterations at a later date. Most if not all PAX would like certainty as to what they have paid for. Intangibles are for the likes of the insurance industry - not aviation.

I am sorry but that is not the case the T's&C's on the BA website are the CURRENT T's and C's and have not been amended. Can I suggest that you have another look. Go to www.ba.com at the top right hand side of the page click on legal and then click on General Conditions of Carriage followed by the link that says View the British Airways Conditions of Carriage, scroll to section 8a 'your free baggage allowance' and read. You will note if you scroll to the bottom of that page that the T's and C's were last updated on the 13 April 2005. The new baggage policy is simply a change of free allowance, as before you can take as much as you like, it can even weigh more than 23kgs subject to
"Advance notification is required 24 hours before departure for exceptional items that weigh between 23kg - 45kg (50 - 90lbs) and which cannot be repacked e.g. musical instruments, electrical wheelchairs, some sporting items, TV news cameras, commercial spares"
however if after the policy is implemented (11th Oct) your bags are in excess of 32kg you will have tto repack or you have more than your free baggage allowance then you will be charged.

Personally I think it is pretty clear, as to what you are allowed and when, you will also note that on tickets that are issued currently if the allowance is part of the piece system then it states the number of pieces you are allowed - for example I am looking at a ticket that I recently purchased for a round trip to Canada and it clearly states 2PC in the allowance box on the ATB ticket, there is no mention on the ticket of the maximum baggage weight, the onus is on ME the passenger to fully check the Conditions of Carriage and any other policies and regulations and comply or risk being charged! Basically you can't expect BA to read out to you all of the Conditions of Carriage in full for every ticket purchased if they did then nobody would get anywhere as it would take so long. The point I am trying to make here is that it is the PASSENGERS RESPONSIBILITY to make sure that they are in compliance with all of the T's and C's and that they are aware of any policies that may affect them. They are all on the website in black and white.

[manintheback]

I think this will be my last post as its getting towards a flame, probably boring one and all but once and for all please note:

I HAVE THE WRITTEN TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 2 copies for 2 tickets issued at time of booking. Consisting of many thousands of words. There is NO reference to this new clause. end of. As posted earlier, the entries on the website and relating to my bookings WERE altered when the new baggage conditions were introduced and now differ to what I have in writing.

So how can you possibly say its pretty clear as to what you can carry and when, then quote a clause (which I havent got) saying it only applies at the time of your flight (potentially a year away) where it may be completely different (as has now happened).

[Bluejay]

OK for the LAST time - here is the link it is current and if you travel with BA and are affected by one or both of the policies you will have to comply regardless of when you purchased your tickets!

http://www.britishairways.com/travel/genconcarr1/public/en_gb#8a

And if for some reason the above doesn't work here it is in black and white as seen earlier.

"8. Baggage

8a) Your free baggage allowance

We will carry some of your baggage free of charge. Your free baggage allowance will be shown on your ticket, or in the case of an electronic ticket, on your itinerary and receipt and will depend on our baggage regulations applying at the time of your flight. If you are in doubt, please ask us or our authorised agents for details of your free baggage allowance and our baggage regulations."

This is the actual clause on the website, I have not made it up!!!!

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[10secondsurvey]

BlueJay,


I think manintheback is making a pretty valid point, and I'm not sure where you are coming from on this. You say "it is the PASSENGERS RESPONSIBILITY to make sure that they are in compliance with all of the T's and C's and that they are aware of any policies that may affect them", and whilst this sounds well and good, in reality, you, I and every airline in the world knows that no passenger will read all of the small print, for the same reason you state that BA can't possibly read out all the T&C's of each and every ticket. So that all sounds, and is, a bit disgenuine.

If you are not a BA employee, I cannot see much sense in defending this type of double standard by any airline. Whilst you fervently point out the web site terms and conditions, you really seem to be missing the point. At the time he bought his ticket, he was given the full t&c's, and he still has them, and those are the conditions under which he purchased the ticket. BA may like to imply that things are different just because they have changed their webpage, but the facts remain the same.

Whether it is legal or not is beyond me, but even so, it is shoddy behaviour, and will not encourage long term loyalty. If a garage did this to you, would you buy a car from them again? Thought not.

I personally think the new man in charge at BA, will simply achieve short term profit growth, in order to achieve his bonuses, will then leave, and the airline will be a mess, having lost most of it's premium passengers (just take a look at the letters in this month's business traveller magazine - mainly from real premium top level FF's). BA will be left in tatters, but hey, who cares, the numbers will look good for a year or two.

[FloridaCandle]

Let's get something straight here - the short-haul fares nowadays are comparable to EasyJet or Ryanair, with some being even lower than the charterers.
Nobody bats an eyelid when EasyJet or Ryanair charge for every grramme of excess (and their allowances are significantly less than BA's new ones), but somehow you feel BA is being unreasonable when it enforces the allowances.
The US carriers have disallowed bags over 23 kgs for over eighteen months now (AA, CO, US, UA etc) and charge $50 if a bag is over 23 kgs.
BA has chosen to have 23 kgs as the absolute upper limit - our prerogative, end of story! The terms and conditions of carriage are perfectly fair and reasonable and sufficient notice has been given for you to find an alternative carrier if you don't like the new allowances. The vast majority of passengers will notice little or no difference. The "traders" who have made vast profits at the airlines' expense for so long will now have to pay their way - and what's wrong with that?
If you ask for a refund of an existing ticket because the changes to the Terms and Conditions are no longer acceptable to you (ie You use the Trading Standards Terminology, asking to speak to a supervisor in necessary, that the reservation is "Not Fit For the Purpose For Which It Was Sold!") that we will undoubtedly refund your ticket price. British Airways usually acts fairly and reasonably under UK Law.
The aviation industry is undergoing rapid change. As fares are being driven ever downwards, managers are being forced into lateral thinking in order to replace the lost revenue.
My bolding applies
Firstly - BA did NOT advise me of this planned change at time of booking in April - not made online, but through res office. Had BA advised this was to be the case in October I WOULD have taken my custom elsewhere. Yes it is your prerogative to change your policies, but I booked in good faith based on your policy at time of booking, not those which nobody bothered to mention until June.
Since April and date of announcement of changes, other plans have been made (both business and personal) which mean I can't change my dates of travel. So I either waste my ticket, or pay even more to bring home what I would've been allowed when I entered a contract with BA.
Secondly, I've asked what the situation is regarding refund, and unfortunately because of my ticket type they won't allow it.
So I'm sorry to say BA are screwing me every which way.
You say it won't affect many people, maybe it won't but the fact it affects those who booked in good faith with you is wrong. What about those people go on specific shopping trips to the US - it'll certainly affect them.
I use my October trip to buy different Christmas pressies for family and friends and have never had a problem in the past. BA have now made sure I will in the future.
I see VS are still keeping their 3 x 32 kg for UC pax and 2 x 32kg for PE pax, and remember their UC is equivalent to BA Club, not even First. Yes, I agree there's time for them to change, but they haven't done yet.
If things remain the same for my next trip in February, I WILL have a choice then and know which airline I'll use.
Finally, BA are planning to charge £120 a bag (discounted to £96 if pre paid), considerably higher than the US carriers rate of $50 (as you quote above)!

[marlowe]

Floridacandle just except that BA have in the past allowed you to flaunt the baggage allowance along with everybody else and now BA have decided to put restrictions on you and fellow flaunties!!!!! go to VS but i bet there policy changes soon as well. I for one look forward to sitting under a locker thats not full to bursting point !!!!

[Bluejay]

Ok I seem to be going around in circles here. For the last time the clause that I am referring to has not been added all of a sudden to take advantage of unsuspecting passengers thinking they will get away with the old allowance and then charge them excess.

manintheback sorry if I have caused any confusion but if you don't have those words on your t's and c's then you may not have the complete printout. However to save any embarrasement at the airport may I suggest you bring those t's and c's that you do have with you and be ready to show them to the check in agent when you get to a desk.

As a few other people have realised on this thread the change is inevitable, the DfT (not BA) are bringing these changes in, they will effect you and the airlines are bound by law to comply, so feel free to go to VS and take advantage of there baggage policy, but in the not too distant future they will have to comply as well.

[FloridaCandle]

Floridacandle just except that BA have in the past allowed you to flaunt the baggage allowance along with everybody else and now BA have decided to put restrictions on you and fellow flaunties!!!!! go to VS but i bet there policy changes soon as well. I for one look forward to sitting under a locker thats not full to bursting point !!!!
Wrong - I have NEVER flaunted my baggage allowance. Everyone else may have done it, but I NEVER have. Both my cabin and checked baggage have always been within their limits. So I am not a flauntie and strongly resent you calling me that. :mad: :*
My cabin baggage is never over 7kg. I don't buy booze as I don't drink so my duty free bags usually have a carton of ciggies and a few newspapers! WT+ always allowed 12 kg, J allowed 18 kg. So how can you say I flaunt the allowance. :=
My checked luggage has always within my allowance and if I've had a third suitcase, I've always been prepared to pay and have done so on a few occasions. Again, I've followed the rules, not been a flauntie.:rolleyes:
The one thing I agree with you on is wanting to sit under a locker not full to bursting point. But it's BA who've changed the rules to make this more possible, NOT ME, so don't blame me for it. :*
Finally, paid for my ticket three months before these changes were announced so terms I booked under are no longer the same. This is my REAL point - all I'm asking is give me what you've contracted with me to provide - nothing more. This is a perfectly fair and reasonable request and you will see from this and other forums that I'm far from alone in thinking this way.
As far as VS, if you read my thread correctly you will see that I made reference to the fact they could change their policy and went on to say "if things remain the same ..." . I'll say no more.

[FloridaCandle]

I think this will be my last post as its getting towards a flame, probably boring one and all but once and for all please note:
I HAVE THE WRITTEN TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 2 copies for 2 tickets issued at time of booking. Consisting of many thousands of words. There is NO reference to this new clause. end of. .....
The post from manintheback prompted me to look at my e-ticket receipt and t&c's sent by BA (6 A4 pages in total). Under the section headed Baggage it states "Your hold baggage allowance is 2 Pieces per person. No single piece may exceed 32kg."

At no point does it say that this is subject to the terms which exist at the time of travel.

If I no longer had a computer, this information would be all I had, and it clearly tells me 2 x 32kg. :ugh:

[bealine]

I will back Bluejay up in that he is right in what British Airways are telling us, the staff, to do and that the Terms and Conditions applicable on the Date of Travel are what we, the staff, are being told to implement.

As far as the law stands, I cannot profess to be an expert, but I would expect there to be reasonable grounds for complaint if the new Terms and Conditions are unreaonable and would have stopped you making your booking had you known about them at the Point of Sale. (In the same way as if you ordered a 7 seater family car and the manufacturer changed the design before build to a four seater!) I would, indeed, be very surprised if the Sale of Goods Act does not cover this sort of eventuality - perhaps Flying Lawyer could enlighten us!

What I do know is that it is important, if you are going to ask for a refund, to include the phrase "Unfit For The Purpose For Which My Booking Was Purchased!" (Under the Sale of Goods Act, which also covers services, both parties are responsible for ensuring suitability. If the supplier changes the goods/services to something unsuitable before delivery is complete, you should be entitled to a refund.)

Certainly, British Airways will never act outside of the law - so if Flying Lawyer could offer some advice to those who do want a refund it would be most helpful.

Then - once we have given refunds to those who want them, we can move forward with the new allowances and get back to normal harmony.

However, Florida Candle, you will find that no carriers that will allow the 2 X 32kg allowances - CO / AA / UA will allow over 23kg to 32kg at extra charge for a short period, but once the BAA / CAA clamp down on maximum bag weights, even that will have to stop!

No Flames - I'm only interested in getting back to decent customer relations!

[rugmuncher]

My situation is that I am due to return to the UK from over the pond since Feb', and am trying to establish what ny return allowance will be, I flew out with 2 x 32Kg, do they expect me to return with 2 x 23 Kg,,,

BA are giving me the run around,,, but checking their site this morning I found this reference:
http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bagchk/public/en_gb

Will post anything new I get from BA!

[L'aviateur]

How does this affect IATA special fare customers who have excess baggage allowances of 40-60kg

[FloridaCandle]

Hi Bealine - thanks for your response. :)

Think your suggestion of offering refunds to those that want them is a good one. In my case, I don't necessarily want a refund, just to be allowed to travel with what I paid for. No problem on o/b as before 11th October, but return is after so that will be a problem with the 23kg.

Another sensible idea would be to allow those who were ticketed before announcement was made, and have confirmations showing the 2 x 32kg, to allow them that even if it means splitting it into 3 x 23kg (or thereabouts).

It saddens me that a very few BA staff seem to be laughing in our faces over this. As Bealine says how would you like it if you buy a 7-seater car only to find you're getting a 4-seater. Or perhaps buy a 3 piece suit, and then once you've paid up front, you discover you have to pay more for the jacket. You wouldn't like it. A little more understanding might be nice. :hmm:

[marlowe]

Nobody is laughing in your face its just that you seem to be making such a big fuss of this im sure that BA have the right to ammend there rules and regs as they see fit and latest R&Rs supercede all others.

[FloridaCandle]

Nobody is laughing in your face its just that you seem to be making such a big fuss of this im sure that BA have the right to ammend there rules and regs as they see fit and latest R&Rs supercede all others.
You're quite right BA have the right to amend their r&r's if they so wish. However, the honourable and decent thing to do would be to honour their commitment and contracts with those ticketed before changes were announced. It would be minimal (if any) cost to BA and would solve a lot of ill feeling which currently exists among pax in this situation. It could easily be done with appropriate notation in the PNR.

Maybe to you I'm making a big fuss but, as I said before, others feel just as angry as me so I'm not alone. I'm far from wealthy and have saved hard to be able to afford the premium cabin. If I was paying a £300 Y fare, I'd probably just say "stuff it" and live with it. Having paid over £2,000 to travel in J, I don't then expect to have to pay at least £120 more to carry my luggage which was included when I paid.

I'm travelling for almost 4 weeks, part business part pleasure, so I will have quite a bit of stuff with me - allowed on the way out. Because allowance reduces whilst I'm away I have to figure a way to get it back - either use BA at £120 for 23kg bag (£96 pre booked) or send it by luggage courier at £129 for 30kg bag door to door. If BA insist on charging me I will certainly go for the latter option! :hmm:

[bealine]

FloridaCandle - as I understand it, the whole reason for change is to remove our (the staff) use of discretion so that the shinybums in the office can be sure no passenger has "got away with it!"

The annotation in a PNR would suddenly give reservations staff a bit of discretion so its something Willie Wonka and his not-so-merry-men would never agree to!

Our Check-In Systems are being tweaked as well to ensure we can't print an extra bag tag without payment. The belts are being calibrated so they won't move if a weight over 23 kgs stands on them!

That is why we can't give any discretion - the whole thing goes live on 11th October!

[FloridaCandle]

FloridaCandle - as I understand it, the whole reason for change is to remove our (the staff) use of discretion so that the shinybums in the office can be sure no passenger has "got away with it!"
The annotation in a PNR would suddenly give reservations staff a bit of discretion so its something Willie Wonka and his not-so-merry-men would never agree to!
Our Check-In Systems are being tweaked as well to ensure we can't print an extra bag tag without payment. The belts are being calibrated so they won't move if a weight over 23 kgs stands on them!
That is why we can't give any discretion - the whole thing goes live on 11th October!

Thanks Bealine - First Luggage is looking more appealing by the day with their 30kg door to door service! :D

Seems like Willie Wonka (is this miss-spelt! :hmm: ) doesn't want his staff to have a brain - perhaps he should be put on check-in desks on 11th October instead and see how he likes the customers' reactions. :D

[FloridaCandle]

My situation is that I am due to return to the UK from over the pond since Feb', and am trying to establish what ny return allowance will be, I flew out with 2 x 32Kg, do they expect me to return with 2 x 23 Kg,,,

YES if flying back on or after 11th October! :rolleyes:

[Globaliser]

I just want to clear something up here, it appears that everyone thinks that BA are implementing this new handbaggage and checked baggage poilicy to annoy all who fly with them. Let me point something out it has been highlighted in earlier posts that some of you travelling with BA are actually getting an INCREASED allowance. Now if I have read this wrong then I am sure it will be pointed out by one of you, but I am also pretty certain that Bealine will back me up. ALL european passengers (Eurotraveller and Club Europe) are actually getting a BIGGER allowance, if you look at the total weight allowed I am sure you will agree.
Club Europe - checked 2pcs @23kg each plus one hand luggage item (max weight will be 23kg) therefore total is - 69kg
Eurotraveller - checked 1pce @ 23kg plus one handluggage @23kg total - 64kgI think you mean 46 kg for Y.

But more to the point, although I'm sure BA didn't aim to annoy all their passengers. But the new rules are likely to have this effect.

I've said it before, and it's probably worth saying again: The worst part of the new rules is not the limits, it's the lack of flexibility.

For example:-At present: 23 kg in one bag is fine; 24 kg in one bag means you pay for 1 kg excess (although it probably wouldn't be collected). New rules: 23 kg is fine. 24 kg -> Buy a second bag, then pay £120 for checking it in. At present: 8 kg in one bag and 8 kg in a second bag is fine. New rules: 8 kg in one bag + 8 kg in a second bag = 16 kg total = £120 excess baggage charge. At present: pax 1 with 14 kg in one bag + pax 2 with 14 kg in one bag is fine. Pax 1 + pax 2 pool their luggage in one bag, eliminating the (say) 4 kg weight of one empty bag -> 24 kg in one bag is fine. New rules: Pax 1 + pax 2 cannot pool their luggage. BA insists on carrying 28 kg instead of 24 kg, plus each of pax 1 + pax 2 have to drag their own bag around.It's this sort of thing which is madness. You expect it of the low-fare nickle-and-dime merchants, but not from an airline like BA.

[10secondsurvey]

I think Globalier has hit the nail on the head here, in the final sentence above. It is exactly the kind of nonsense you would expect from the likes of ryanair, but not of BA.

I guess the problem is that someone within BA put this forward thinking they could 'pull a fast one' - that is, tell pax they have a higher luggage allowance, but insist it is split over two bags, that way it will be difficult for anyone to criticise, and BA will win, as most pax will just elect to carry less luggage, and take one bag. Genius!

The point is that this is what I and many others think of as 'sharp practices' and BA shareholders will do themselves no long term favours going down this route. Premium passengers choose BA partly because they do not want this kind of crap, and are prepared to pay for the privilege.

I think the reality is that BA have appointed a CEO with a recent track record of converting a 'full service' airline into what can only be called a 'budget' airline. Had they wished to appoint someone to raise standards at BA, that person would not have been chosen.

It is abundantly clear from the choice of the man in charge, that BA are heading in only one direction - so things can only get worse. Mark my words, exec club point/miles/lounges/service standards will be next for the grinder, along with any other reason a person would choose to fly BA.

Soon it will no longer be called British Airways, just BAdotcom (with a big dot!). Virgin, Cathay, singapore and the likes better start ramping up capacity, as they are going to need it - soon!

[FloridaCandle]

It's this sort of thing which is madness. You expect it of the low-fare nickle-and-dime merchants, but not from an airline like BA.

Well said Globaliser - you hit the nail right on the head. Guess that's BA now want to position themselves in the market. :rolleyes:

[Final 3 Greens]

I stopped using BA (unless there is no other option) after their ground staff in Brussels were particularly unhelpful after my case was broken in transit last year.

I asked for help to get a replacement case before I returned home from a 3 day business trip.

It could not be done, they said. So what can you do, I asked. Check your broken case in under a limited release, at your risk.

Wonderful, just the sort of service that you expect from a wannabe low cost carrier, except the ticket cost £444!

Coming after the catering shambles, it was the final straw.

[Terry K Rumble]

I have spent the past couple of weeks writing to and phoning BA on this subject.
I have just had a phone call from BA executive services explaining that there is absolutely nothing further to discuss, and as far as they are concerned the matter is closed. FWIW I booked and paid in Jan of this year for a trip to Phoenix with my wife.
I can understand that they may wish to bring their allowances in line with other carriers, but surely it would have been fairer to honour the tickets of those of us who paid well in advance. Frankly, this is the most outrageous thing ANY airline has ever done to me. I am not a legal man, but I will give all of the paperwork; e tickets etc (and a bottle of Scotch!) to my solicitor and ask him to check on the legality of it all. My e ticket clearly states 'terms of contract' on it, and I think this is a breach of that contract. Maybe we should all get together and give BA a bloody nose? (pm me if agree)
I too have remained loyal to BA over the years, safe in the knowledge that if I did have anything to bring back or fly out with, I would be within the weight limits. Now, that is not the case.
I have explained to BA that this trip in November this year will be the last I ever fly with BA. We might as well pay less, fly Virgin and get a better service, with the same baggage allowance
Shame on you Willie Walsh, BA will no longer be regarded as the 'worlds favourite airline' but as the 'world most immoral and unfair airline'
Where's that number for Virgin Atlantic gone?
Kind regards
TKR

[el @]

Do you have small claims courts in the UK Terry?
Bring you excess luggage and pay for it. Then have your day in court with all the receipts etc. If you win, you will become SLF idol, I promise you.

[FloridaCandle]

I have spent the past couple of weeks writing to and phoning BA on this subject. I have just had a phone call from BA executive services explaining that there is absolutely nothing further to discuss, and as far as they are concerned the matter is closed.
Shame on you Willie Walsh, BA will no longer be regarded as the 'worlds favourite airline' but as the 'world most immoral and unfair airline'
Where's that number for Virgin Atlantic gone?
Kind regards
TKR
Ditto for me - BA Executive Services absolutely refuse to budge - courteous and polite, but constantly repeat the new rules over and over again without referring to anything you've put in your letter.
I can understand that they may wish to bring their allowances in line with other carriers, but surely it would have been fairer to honour the tickets of those of us who paid well in advance
I agree, but according to them I have enough time to adjust my plans and make my cases lighter!:ugh: So now, instead of being able to enjoy the vacation that I paid for, I must now change my arrangements to fall in with new rules that didn't even apply at the time I paid. Totally and utterly wrong, and as others have said, not even sure how legal this is.
As el suggests, I will be keeping my excess baggage receipts and fully intend to take this matter further on return.

[FloridaCandle]

.....
However, Florida Candle, you will find that no carriers that will allow the 2 X 32kg allowances - CO / AA / UA will allow over 23kg to 32kg at extra charge for a short period, but once the BAA / CAA clamp down on maximum bag weights, even that will have to stop!
No Flames - I'm only interested in getting back to decent customer relations!

Following your post the other day bealine, I have had letter from BA telling me the reason for change in checked baggage allowance is to protect BA staff - it makes no reference whatsoever to any BAA/CAA clamp down at all. I know this is what they're telling you, but they're telling pax something entirely different. :=

And, sorry but VS still have the 2 x 32kg for PE, and 3 x 32kg for Upper Class (their Y is already at 23kg).

Again, no flames, just wanted to tell you what we as pax are being told. :rolleyes:

[PAXboy]

VS have this on their website:
From 5 July 2006, The BAA (British Airport Authorities) will be introducing new hand baggage policies to speed up and reduce the time you spend queuing through their security procedures at the airports.

Virgin Atlantic’s current hand baggage allowance policies are already in line with the BAA and the UK Department for Transports recommendations, but we advise all passengers to check our baggage allowance policy to ensure all hand baggage meets our required guidelines before travel.

Hand baggage size gauges will be made available at check in. Oversize hand baggage not complying with our baggage guidelines needs to be checked in at our check in desks.

For further information please visit the passenger information section of our website at: www.virginatlantic.com/baggageallowances
The details are there and easily set out and not worth reposting here. Some rotues are by item and some by weight.

FloridaCandleVS still have the 2 x 32kg for PE, and 3 x 32kg for Upper Class (their Y is already at 23kg).
Unfortunately, this only holds for Transatlantic, Caribbean and Nigerian routes. On routes to South Africa, Australia, Asia and Dubai they operate a weight system of allowance for checked in baggage. This reduces your allowance considerably. For example, PE has no benefits over Y for baggage (23kgs) and UC is limited to 30kgs. So it looks as if competition helps on those routes.

[FloridaCandle]

Unfortunately, this only holds for Transatlantic, Caribbean and Nigerian routes.

And it's the Transatlantic route which affects me, hence why VS is looking far more appealing next time round. ;)

[Terry K Rumble]

FloridaCandle,

You wrote earlier..
'And, sorry but VS still have the 2 x 32kg for PE, and 3 x 32kg for Upper Class (their Y is already at 23kg)'

If that is correct Sir, am I to believe that when BA told me that NO baggage was to be over 23kg for 'employee safety reasons' that it was not entirely telling me the truth? Surely not Sir!! I did explain to the same lady that after flying heavy jets in the RAF for 30 years, I knew just a little bit about reduced weight = less fuel etc. however, she was most adament that this was NOT at all a cost-cutting measure. Hmmmm, yeah, OK.

The nice lady at BA told me that it was to bring them in line with UK board of trade advice on company individuals lifting more than 23kgs. Clearly, if what you say is correct, then VS are not taking the same advice? I think I'll be joining you and flying VS from now on.

Willie Walsh, you are NOT an honourable man Sir! Shame on you.

TKR

[10secondsurvey]

Regarding the way the timing of this change has been handled is also interesting. For example, the budget airline Flybe introduced changes to its luggage policy earlier this year, yet it did not set a 'starting date' like BA, instead using infinite wisdom (clearly lacking at top level BA management), Flybe made its announcement that the changes would start for any ticket BOOKED AFTER 1st May.

The difference is critical, people therefore had a choice, as the changes only applied to tickets actually booked after a set date, whereas with BA the changes will apply regardless of how long ago you booked the flight.

BA management should take note, as many of those posting here, booked their tickets before the changes were announced, and they are rightly angry. Top marks to BA for sheer skill in p*ssing off its most frequent flyers.

As others have pointed out, Virgin claim their allowances meet any regulations already, so the line from BA about meeting safety requirements sounds even more like utter b*llocks.

[el @]

Maybe BA thinks that they are protect by the "..right to change conditions, etc ... without preventive advise" or words to that affect that inviariably are in the carrying contract
Aerolineas Argentina did exactly the same about one year ago, reducing allowance on transoceanic the day before my travel date. At that time it didn't even crossed my mind that in true fairness the conditions at the time of booking should prevail. So I gave in, a stoopid choice because where I live, small claims are free of any legal costs.

[slim_slag]

Aren't BA just doing a 'bait and switch'? Even Ryanair honoured the rules at the time of booking when they recently changed their baggage allowances, you BA apologists on here need to wake up and smell the coffee :)

[FloridaCandle]

Regarding the way the timing of this change has been handled is also interesting. For example, the budget airline Flybe introduced changes to its luggage policy earlier this year, yet it did not set a 'starting date' like BA, instead using infinite wisdom (clearly lacking at top level BA management), Flybe made its announcement that the changes would start for any ticket BOOKED AFTER 1st May.
The difference is critical, people therefore had a choice, as the changes only applied to tickets actually booked after a set date, whereas with BA the changes will apply regardless of how long ago you booked the flight.
BA management should take note, as many of those posting here, booked their tickets before the changes were announced, and they are rightly angry. Top marks to BA for sheer skill in p*ssing off its most frequent flyers.
As others have pointed out, Virgin claim their allowances meet any regulations already, so the line from BA about meeting safety requirements sounds even more like utter b*llocks.
My bolding applies. Over a month on and I'm more angry now than I was when this was first announced. One of the main reasons being BA's blatant bending of the truth in putting the facts to customers.

This from Business Traveller - So far BA is the only carrier which has opted to bring in such a baggage policy. An airline spokesperson (who wished not to be named) told Business Traveller, "All airlines are looking at reducing costs and now it seems that some carriers are focusing on baggage. But in my opinion BA's idea of a weight concept has taken it to extremes."

Also from Business Traveller - Travellers using other airlines can breathe a sigh of relief. At this stage spokespeople for Oneworld and rival Star confirm that their members are not looking at following BA. Says a spokesperson for Oneworld, "It's up to each individual carrier to decide its own baggage policy.

Yet we continue to be told BA's policy is to fall in line with others. Yes, I do know the US carriers have the 23kg in Y, but they have much more leeway for premium pax, and excess considerably lower.

BA have also advised me that the reason for the change is "due to concern over our employees lifting heavy weights" - no mention of any Government body there.

And 10secondsurvey has hit the nail right on the head. Yes, I'm one of those booked before changes announced, but having to put up with it.:ugh: The standard response from BA is "you have been warned in sufficient time to adjust your arrangements" - DUH :rolleyes: I'm going for vacation and shopping - how am I supposed to adjust my shopping arrangements when I'm allowed 2 x 32kg outbound and only 2 x 23kg on return - by the time I've tried to condense my outbound luggage into what's allowed on the return I won't be doing any shopping at all!!:mad:

[marlowe]

Florida candle hope you stick to the limits on what you can bring into the uk from America regards to what you can spend over there on shopping that weight limit sounds like a lot of shopping!!!! :) lol!!!!!!!!!!!

[FloridaCandle]

Florida candle hope you stick to the limits on what you can bring into the uk from America regards to what you can spend over there on shopping that weight limit sounds like a lot of shopping!!!! :) lol!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh I love my shopping :D One of my favourite hobbies in life! As for Customs, never buy anything expensive (can't afford it now with BA's excess fees ;) ) as most of my time is spent in Target (pronounced Tar - zhay for those posh ones out there!!)
Always within my limits, but not sure what I'm going to do this time. Can't miss out on my favourite hobby in US :{ :{

[Final 3 Greens]

Florida Candle

What I would do, were I in your shoes, is....

1) calculate how much more you are going to have to pay to take your original baggage allowance

2) write to BA and give them 10 days to agree to pay you these liquidated damages becuase of their actions

3) if they don't agree wihtin the timeframe, give them a further 7 days

4) if they still don't agree, issue a summons in the small claims court.

I reckon that a small claims administrator (judge) would look very dimly on what they have done and find in your favour.

If not, it will cost BA a lot of money to defend the action and they can't get costs awarded against you, so you are only risking your initial stake.

Iì'd be amazed if they let it get to court.

[Terry K Rumble]

Here is the original letter that i wrote to BA over a month ago now.

Mr W Walsh
Chief Executive
British Airways PLC
Waterside
PO Box 365
Harmonsworth
Middlesex UB70 0GB 15 June 2006


Dear Sir,

I am writing to express my extreme annoyance and disappointment with British Airways.

On April 19 this year, I booked and paid for 2 return tickets to Phoenix Arizona, USA. The booking ref is YQJDTP. My departure date is 5 Nov 06 on BA289 and my return date is 23 Nov 06 on BA288.

At the time of my booking, your staff advised me that my baggage allowance would be 2 pieces not more that 32 kgs each. One of the major reasons why I insist on flying British Airways, is that I know I can take all of my own personal flying equipment etc with me, safe in the knowledge that I don’t have to worry about baggage allowance because your allowance is better than other airlines.

Yesterday however, I received an e mail from Jayne O’Brien stating that with effect from 11 Oct 06, you would be changing your baggage allowance to 23 kgs per piece.

Despite leaving messages for Ms O’Brien and her secretary to call, as well as leaving e-mails on your web site, I must tell you that neither of them has called me. I did finally manage to get through to a lady called Rosalie yesterday, who advised me that you had the right to change the baggage allowance whenever you choose, and there was nothing that could be done about it. In very simple terms ‘tough’

This is a quite appalling way to treat people Sir, and I am shocked that a company of the prestige of British Airways is prepared to treat its customers in that way.
When you sent me my E-Ticket confirmation of this booking you also sent me your ‘conditions of contract’. On page 2 of that contract, it advised me what my baggage allowance was. In my humble opinion, I believe that you are now breaching that contract. Surely you must agree that you have, at the very least, a moral responsibility to honour the conditions of tickets when they were purchased? If not, do you not feel honour bound to offer a refund on the tickets or a discount of some sort? You are British Airways after all, and I should have thought that you could have at least offered those of us affected something in return for this cut in our allowance?

I have always been a staunch supporter of British Airways all my life, and have been responsible for many people flying with you over the years. I have remained loyal to your company, despite your costs often being higher than other carriers, and I have always argued with my superiors that British Airways are second to none, citing your generous baggage allowance as one example why we should fly with you. However, I do genuinely feel aggrieved by this decision.

Sadly, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to remain loyal to you any more, particularly in light of this recent decision, and I am ashamed at the way you are treating me and no doubt countless others. Shame on you Sir.

I regret that, unless a satisfactory solution to this immediate problem of baggage for my trip to Phoenix can be accomplished, then I can assure you that I will NEVER fly British Airways again, and I will seek legal advice over this question of Breach of Contract.

I look forward to your earliest reply.


Here is the one I have sent today, following conversations with DofT and HSE:


Dear Sir,


Further to my letter dated 15 June, on Friday last week (21 July 06) I received a phone call from one of your Executive Assistants namely Kamlesh, who tried, in vain, to explain the reasons why you have reduced your baggage allowance from 32 kgs per piece to 23 kgs per piece.

She cited UK Department of Trade ‘rulings’ and other ‘legislation’ that was forcing you into introducing this reduction in baggage allowance, and thus bring you into line with other major operators. She was quite vociferous in arguing that this decision was not of your own making, and that you were being ‘forced’ into reducing baggage allowance.

She pointed out that, as there was nothing you could do about it, there was nothing to resolve. Despite requesting a refund or a reduction in the costs of the tickets, or an upgrade, she claimed that there was absolutely nothing whatsoever that she or British Airways could do about it. In very simple terms ‘sorry, but tough Mr Rumble’

I have today spoken with the Department of Trade and Industry at length over this matter. They have given me an assurance that they have had nothing to do with this whatsoever, and have introduced nothing of the sort. Indeed, they categorically denied being involved in any way with the amount of weight that any employee can carry, or the amount of baggage allowance given by an airline operator, stating that if anything, it would be a health and safety matter.

I have also spoken to the Health and Safety Executive today about the very same matter. They too completely deny any involvement whatsoever and even quoted to me the ‘manual handling operation regulations’ paper dated 1992, which states that the maximum advised limit is actually 32kgs, and NOT 23 kgs as your assistant seems to believe.

Clearly your assistant appears to be mistaken as to her explanation for the reasons behind your reduction in baggage allowance is concerned, or has perhaps been misinformed by someone within British Airways. Either way, these regulations have NOT been imposed by either the UK DOT or the UK HSE.

In light of these ‘errors’ by your executive staff, might I respectfully ask you Sir to reconsider your decision for those of us who have already purchased tickets from you in good faith, and who travel after the 11th October? It is, without doubt, the only honourable thing to do, and would go a long way to restoring faith amongst your regular and loyal passengers.

I very much look forward to hearing from you.

I will keep you all info'd on the reply!
best regards
TKR

[flyyy]

hey Terry K Rumble
you wrote flying equipment... is that sports equipment?

"Passengers will be able to carry one piece of sporting equipment free of charge in addition to their checked baggage allowance. "

Maybe that i worth a try. I always have my paragliding gear in my luggage when I go on holiday. Actually now flying BA seems more attractive to me because i can take my equipment with me.

[Terry K Rumble]

Morning All,
Below is yet another 'fudge' responce from BA ref my recent letter to them.
I am sure you will note that there is no comments made whatsoever regarding the Dept of Trade or HSE! - funny olds thing eh?

Dear Mr Rumble

Mr Walsh has asked me to thank you for your recent emails and to reply to you on his behalf. Please accept my apologies for the delay in doing so.
I am sorry you remain unhappy with the response you received from Ms Simnett. I understand you are disappointed with the new baggage allowance policy, especially as it has changed since making your booking with us. But, as explained by Ms Simnett, application of the new policy will be determined by the date of travel, and not the date the ticket was bought. So, I'm afraid we cannot meet your request for a refund of your ticket.


Please accept my assurance that we do pay close attention to what our customers tell us. So it is genuinely helpful to have your comments.
Thank you for following this up with Mr Walsh.




Best regards

Claire Alba
British Airways Customer Relations
Your case reference is:4671285

So, Mr Walsh himself thanks me eh? Yeh, I'll bet. If anyone has any other ideas, I'd be pleased to hear from you all.
Florida candle - have you had any luck yet?
Regards
TKR

[FloridaCandle]

Morning All,
Below is yet another 'fudge' responce from BA ref my recent letter to them.
I am sure you will note that there is no comments made whatsoever regarding the Dept of Trade or HSE! - funny olds thing eh?

[So, Mr Walsh himself thanks me eh? Yeh, I'll bet. If anyone has any other ideas, I'd be pleased to hear from you all.
Florida candle - have you had any luck yet?
Regards
TKR

Hi Terry
I'm afraid I received the same response, almost word for word. :mad:
They did however make comment on mine that if my bags are over weight, BA will provide me with another bag to put the items in. No mention is made on the letter as to whether I would pay for that!! So, yes I plan to use this as a get out clause and submit my bills to them on return.

But my thoughts are to use a luggage courier to bring my luggage back. They charge £129 for 30kg, as opposed to BA's £120 for 23kg. And yes, I will be submitting the bill for this to BA too. Refuse point blank to give BA any more of my money.

According to another forum, BA have already made some changes (at LGW) on the new hand baggage rules for First Class pax. Hopefully with a little luck the volume of complaints (which I know is huge) on checked baggage may force a slight re-think here. I'm not holding my breath though.

Again on another Forum, others have suggested Small Claims Court as the terms of our bookings have changed. It's felt by a number of people that BA would be unlikely to let it go that far. I will see what BA do with my bags on return, if they reimburse me any funds I paid, but if not that's a route I will be looking at.

[Globaliser]

If anyone has any other ideas, I'd be pleased to hear from you all.They did however make comment on mine that if my bags are over weight, BA will provide me with another bag to put the items in. No mention is made on the letter as to whether I would pay for that!! So, yes I plan to use this as a get out clause and submit my bills to them on return.I still harbour suspicions that the strategy for people who booked before the change is this: Tell them that the new baggage allowance applies. Most people will comply in order to avoid risking any arguments. The remaining pax who do not, but who comply with the baggage allowance in force at the time of booking, will be allowed the old allowance without extra charge, with charges being applied to anything over that.

This is based on what I think the strict legal position may well be: You have no claim to cancel and refund your ticket, even if BA would be in breach of contract to give you only the new allowance. Not every threatened breach of contract entitles you to cancel and get your money back, and this threat is not of the type that allows you to cancel. If, when you travel, BA only gives you the new allowance and charges you for the excess between the old allowance and the new allowance, then BA may well be in actual breach of contract as you suspect. But BA's liability for damages is exactly the excess charge paid by you.

And if you bring an amount which would be tolerated now, although outside the current allowance, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on if (after the new system comes in) you were then made to pay for the excess over the current allowance.

But, as before, this is not legal advice, get your own, etc etc.

[PAXboy]

That sounds logical Globes.

BA will get the majority of people to change their plans and so save carrying the weight.
Those that do not will get it carried as 'good customer relations' but not publicised as this will be done on the day, pax by pax.
Those that argue the case will be stonewalled until they stop or ...
They start legal action (ie actually raise papers not just threaten) and then settle quickly.

Good ol' Divide and Rule.

[FloridaCandle]

Hi Globaliser and PaxBoy
Thanks your comments - agree with what you say. Perhaps I should have worded things a little better :O

All I'd want back from BA is any money I have to pay for that which would have been allowed at time of booking. Globaliser has said before, here and on other forums, that the right thing to do might be to honour those terms.

Any excess over my advised limit at time of booking, I'm fully prepared to pay for. Honest - have before, will again if necessary!
However, I may still use luggage courier if this is the case, as their terms are better - more allowed weight and door to door for just £9 more than BA.

[Terry K Rumble]

Thank you all,
I have today received another e mail from BA, this time stating that the changes were made 'on recommendations' from the UK Dept of Trade.
A slight change from the being 'forced' upon them eh?
Either way, I have spoken to the Dept of Trade, and they have denied any involvement!
Globes, I am grateful for your input. I do NOT want a refund or to cancel my ticket, indeed, I don't want to argue with BA, but I do feel that if the supplier changes the 'goods', then the customer has the right to cancel or seek a reduction. I am sure you would not accept ordering and paying for a hire vehicle to carry 6 people, and then be provided with one that only carried 4 would you? There is little difference I feel here. Not to mention the fact that BA MUST have known something about this some time ago.
After all, I could have flown the same route, cheaper with another carrier, but I chose BA because of their (then) baggage allowance.
I will await their responce...again!

TKR

[Curious Pax]

Just had an e-mail from your friend Ms O'Brien advising that the policy will also apply to BA Connect. To quote: "in line with the UK's main tour operator BAA," - sounds like BAA's new owners are planning on diversifying, or no one proof reads their publicity shots!!

[Globaliser]

I do NOT want a refund or to cancel my ticket, indeed, I don't want to argue with BA, but I do feel that if the supplier changes the 'goods', then the customer has the right to cancel or seek a reduction. I am sure you would not accept ordering and paying for a hire vehicle to carry 6 people, and then be provided with one that only carried 4 would you? There is little difference I feel here.I understand your point of view, but I don't think that that is the law.

If I have got it right, you can only cancel if the threatened breach of contract (which has not yet materialised) is of a fundamental nature; in the air travel example, it might be BA saying that instead of flying you from London to New York, they're going to substitute a ship instead. Threatening to change the amount of baggage that you can bring wouldn't be fundamental enough to allow you to cancel in advance. Your remedy is to claim compensation afterwards, if and when the breach of contract actually materialises, and only to the extent that you have suffered a loss.

If the breach of contract materialises, in the form of the 4-seater car turning up or BA saying "We will charge you for the difference between 2 x 32 kg and 2 x 23 kg, ie £120 for the extra bag that's got 18 kg in it", then you can claim compensation. In the case of the car, it's the cost of getting the other two people to the destination in comparable comfort. In the case of BA, it's the £120 extra that you have had to pay which you would not have had to pay if there had been no breach of contract.

So if my legal analysis is right, you couldn't force BA to refund the ticket in this situation. BA's probably been so advised, and that's probably why it's taking the stance that it is. You'd come a cropper if you sued BA now on the basis that you're entitled to cancel.

However, I think it's sh1t customer relations. I also think that this inflexible new baggage policy is not worthy of a major airline like BA, entitled though it is to introduce it. It's not the amount we're going to be allowed, it's how baggage will work in the future: All for BA's automated convenience, and s0d the passenger. Madness.

[Gonzo]

Hypothetical situation:

I don't like BA's new baggage policy. I decide to book my next trip to Oz with QANTAS. I go to their website and book my tickets. It turns out that I'm actually flying with BA on a QANTAS code-share. Which T&Cs/baggage policy am I subject to?

[PAXboy]

If your ticket as a Qantas flight number ... then Qantas it is.

I should print off the T&Cs and get them validated, or get a formal copy from QF. In fact, take two copies along on the day as they might not give them back to you. :}

[Terry K Rumble]

Morning All,
Just a quick update.
Yesterday i received a letter saying just the same as it has done all along, with one slight alteration. Despite much correspondance about the UK Dept of Trade - they are now saying that I have got it wrong, and that they claim it is from the UK Dept of Transport.
Guesss who I'm just about to ring?
Will keep you info'd
TKR

[dustybin]

I feel really let down and stressed about this new bagage allowance. I work as crew for a low cost carrier who has started this bagage thing. However i was planning my wedding and wanted to go abroad and go with BA because of their bagage allowance as i used to fly home with then all the time when i worked away from base. I booked my wedding to Mauritius in April flying with BA which i picked because i'm going to need to take my clothes for 2 weeks plus wedding dress,kilts etc so need that bit extra bagage. I have had no letter and only found out via work and these forums about the changes. I called and explained that i booked well before the new rules come into affect and it was a wedding so could they please take that into comsideration. I was told no, after 11oct 23kg apply. I said they will proberly loss alot of bussiness because of this and was told they just following other airlines as everyone is doing it. I explained that i worked for a LCC as crew and know all LCC are doing it but not a company such as BA i also pointed out that Airmauritius, virgin, Emeriates are not doing it so alot of customers will go to them, i got no reply!
In april i was so happy as booked my dream wedding, looking forward to it now i just worry about how much stuff i can take and if they will let my dress into the cabin as on the websit it says no but on the phone she said yes:confused: My guests ( around 12 ) have all booked via Emeriates, already they have lost 12 bookings. I am also having to get them to take some of my wedding stuff with them as i can't. I even going to try and change the flights to emerates as i want a stress free wedding, can't be doing with cold sweats just before you get to check in and that will they wont they feeling.

[Terry K Rumble]

Evening All,
Just a quick update on the UK Dept of Transport and the so-called 'recommendations and/or advice' they gave to BA.
I have this afternoon received an e mail from the UK Department of Transport which states that indeed, they DID offer advice on baggage, BUT ONLY BAGGAGE INSIDE THE CABIN. There was NO mention whatsoever of baggage in the hold. Indeed, the e mail goes on the state that this was a 'commercial decision by BA'
I will publish the full email tomorrow. and maybe give the nice ladies at BA a call also! But in the meantime, does anyone have any other ideas as to what we can do?
Best wishes
TKR

[marlowe]

Well i have operated a few trips since BA introduced the baggage limit last monday and its great to see lockers not stuffed full to bursting!!!! the worlds still turning pax still have there computers,Ipods,blackberries and phones to annoy other pax and crew with and they have room to do it!!!!! just let it go!!!!!!!!

[Terry K Rumble]

Marlowe,
I'm not entirely sure of what you are talking about Sir!
The NEW BA baggage allowance comes into effect on 11 Oct this year, and is regarding baggage in the hold, cut fom 2 pcs of 32 kgs down to 2 pcs of 23 kgs.
As for letting it go.......not a chance!
Best wishes
TKR

[10secondsurvey]

Terry

Good posts, very useful indeed, exposing the mis-information that has been given out through various sources, and it seems, BA.

Like you say, the changes have not been introduced yet, so the effects have not been seen. I think some people are getting mixed up with Cabin baggage.

[Terry K Rumble]

Morning all,

I Just wanted to give you a (final?) update on where I am with this.

Sadly, despite sending copies of letters from the Dept of Transport, HSE and Sept of Trade, (all of who catagorically deny any involvement whatsoever), BA have failed to reply to any of my recent correspondance. Indeed, they have now blocked my e mail link to them to reply via e mail on there own system.

Another little 'ditty' wis that despite having been told (in writing) that I could purchase the 'extra baggage' I have now found that on my particular flight to Phoenix, this is NOT possible! So I guess I'm screwed all ends up. You just cannot trust BA can you?

I understand that they have had more important things on their minds recently, however, I don't believe that everyone at BA is involved in anti-terrorism duties, and I should have thought that now was an ideal opportunity to put things right, and look after thier loyal customers. I cannot see the number of travellers increasing as a result of recent events, can you?

Sadly, this has not been the case, and like the rest of you, I feel it time to retire gracefully from the argument, satisfied in my own mind that I have been lied to and cheated by BA, like so many others.

My trip in Novemeber with BA will sadly be my last with them. I think I would rarther fly with anyone, than fly BA again.

So Willie Walsh, I give up. You have won on this occasion. But I'm sure you will lose in the end. You cannot keep treating your customers in this appalling manner. Sooner (or later) it will bite you in the behind!

Yours Aye
TKR

[Globaliser]

Another little 'ditty' wis that despite having been told (in writing) that I could purchase the 'extra baggage' I have now found that on my particular flight to Phoenix, this is NOT possible!Did you get that from Manage My Booking on ba.com, or direct from BA? If the former, I believe that's simply wrong - as in, it's another bug with ba.com.

[manintheback]

I received an email from BA informing that the new Baggage rules now suspended until further notice.

[Globaliser]

I received an email from BA informing that the new Baggage rules now suspended until further notice.Thanks for that news - mostly good news, and IMHO a sensible position for BA.

I see that it's also now up on ba.com, here (http://tinyurl.com/m22mb):-Delay to the implementation of checked and excess baggage policy

Summary
Following the introduction of new hand baggage restrictions by the UK Department for Transport, the decision has been taken to delay the implementation of the checked and excess baggage policy.

The new policy, announced in June, was due to be implemented from October 11, 2006, but will now be launched when we are clearer on the longer-term plans for hand baggage restrictions for all airlines in the UK and around the world.

We believe it is prudent to delay the launch so that we can undertake a full review of the policy, in light of the UK government's restrictions on hand baggage. This will allow us to understand fully the implications for the changes we had planned for our checked baggage allowances and excess baggage charges.

More information
We continue to work closely with the DfT and BAA to manage the implementation of the new hand baggage restrictions for customers departing UK airports and to ensure that we have a robust and sustainable long-term solution.

[slim_slag]

Ha Ha Ha.

Blame somebody else for introducing it, blame somebody else for withdrawing it. Typical BA.

[10secondsurvey]

Does anyone else think that considering the furore over the baggage allowance changes, BA might see sense, and use this as a convenient opportunity to drop the plans for good?

Or maybe listen to the feedback, and decide on a new set of allowances to be introduced at a later stage?

They have a perfect excuse - 'due to changing circumstances, the baggage allowances have been revised...etc'

[10secondsurvey]

Actually, I can answer my own question, as (pointed out by globaliser, above) they have stated on ba.com;

"...so that we can undertake a full review of the policy, in light of the UK government's restrictions on hand baggage. This will allow us to understand fully the implications for the changes we had planned for our checked baggage allowances and excess baggage charges."

Let's hope they get it right next time.

[Globaliser]

Unlike slim_slag, for whom BA can do no right, I think that the security brouhaha really has been the reason for the change. Management had otherwise seemed determined to push it through, and the change in reported mood only started when reduced cabin baggage began to look like a long-term thing. And so BA really can't make a final decision on what of the proposals they can bring back until the long-term future for cabin baggage is clearer.

[slim_slag]

Unlike slim_slag, for whom BA can do no rightDon't be silly Globaliser, BA get credit where it's due. For instance here. (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2448039&postcount=19.) In fact I'm flying them to New York in December for base fare of £12 each way, £150 round trip with all their surcharges. The missis will get me into their lounge too! They got that right :)

Never fall in love with a stock or an airline, you might heed that advice :)

[skydriller]

As regards the change in BA policy, I think it is indeed the new security rules that have forced a re-think.

What I cannot understand is why BA are not publicly critisizing the DofT/Gov. etc. in the same way as Ryanair to get some sense of normality back. The BBC quoted they had taken a loss of over £40 million in the single week after the bomb plots were uncovered, makes MOLs 7million look inconsequential....... this ignores the losses they are undoubtably acruing right now and will continue to take as business pax route away from the UK or just dont bother to travel due the hassle factor the continuing restrictions impose.

Regards, SD..

[Terry K Rumble]

Yes, I too received the e mail from them, and I for one am absolutely delighted at this re-think by BA, and if it helps their cause by relating it to or blaming it on recent security matters, then frankly I don't really care! Well done BA and many thanks for reverting back to the two pcs of luggage (for the US) of 32kg - (Mrs R is particularly pleased!!)
Thank you and kind regards
TKR

[Tigger4Me]

I don't fly BA any more after they scr€w€d me twice; they don't get a third chance.

I have followed this very interesting thread though and my observations would be that BA (any any other company for that matter) can change their T & C's as often as they want. Where BA have gone totally off the rails is by not honouring the T & C's in force at the time that the booking was made. As a contract, that is what both parties have agreed to and what both should honour and I'm sure that any Small Claims Court would soon recognise that.

Let us hope that when BA do finalise their new baggage policy, they take note of this point and only apply the new rules to bookings made after the date that they are announced. Nobody will then have any grounds for complaint. If you don't like the goods on offer you look elsewhere.

[Globaliser]

In fact I'm flying them to New York in December for base fare of £12 each way, £150 round trip with all their surcharges. The missis will get me into their lounge too! They got that right :)Wasn't that great? :D I've just got back from NYC this morning from that deal (although we did it in WT+ at the price it was going for).Never fall in love with a stock or an airline, you might heed that advice :)As if I need to hear that? The key is to maintain an objective viewpoint at all times, and avoid making ludicrous claims in any direction.

[Haven't a clue]

Of course it is entirely possible that because we pax are all now taking a hold bag with us when before we managed on handbaggage, the volume and weight of hold baggage will rise.

I'm off to HK on Thursday and for the past 7 or so years this four times a year trip has been survived on hand baggage only. As I have to take a case to house smellies etc, I'll no doubt pack a tad more.

Now how long will it take for BAA hold baggage screening to crack under this increased pressure and they dictate to the airlines a max baggage weight of, say, 23kg, and a max size just 1cm smaller than the average Samonsite or Delsey?

Then BA could have it's cake and eat it?

[WHBM]

Now how long will it take for BAA hold baggage screening to crack under this increased pressure and they dictate to the airlines a max baggage weight of, say, 23kg, and a max size just 1cm smaller than the average Samonsite or Delsey?
One thing is for sure, that any decision on such a matter by BAA would place passenger convenience LAST. Hey, it can all be dressed up as "for security" as usual.

[10secondsurvey]

Of course it is entirely possible that because we pax are all now taking a hold bag with us when before we managed on handbaggage, the volume and weight of hold baggage will rise...


Good point, If (god forbid, but seems likely) I have to fly again during this security mess, I guess I may just take a bit more, as I know it's going in the hold.