Banning PAX 'for life'
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the record she was given an invoice, not a fine. It will be interesting to hear if she pays it, although that's not the type of news to get wide circulation.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many disruptive passengers are off loaded in Shannon each year?
The aircraft involved wasn't Irish registered so the offence wasn't committed in the State so I'd question why in addition to the fine this passenger shouldn't also be billed by Irish Revenue for the cost to the State of police and courts time.
The aircraft involved wasn't Irish registered so the offence wasn't committed in the State so I'd question why in addition to the fine this passenger shouldn't also be billed by Irish Revenue for the cost to the State of police and courts time.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
billed by Irish Revenue for the cost to the State of police and courts time.
Paxing All Over The World
Jet 2 bans pax 'for life'
Sounds like a start:
Jet2.com Bans Passengers for Extreme Aggressive Behaviour | Jet2.com
also reported in various tabloid papers but I thought it better to have the Horse's Mouth, rather than the Daily Fail.
Jet2.com Bans Passengers for Extreme Aggressive Behaviour | Jet2.com
also reported in various tabloid papers but I thought it better to have the Horse's Mouth, rather than the Daily Fail.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Vienna
Age: 50
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minor point: Unless I have missed new trends in gender-neutral naming, the cited source reports a lifetime ban for two men and a six-month ban for a woman. More important: I agree, sounds refreshingly un-permissive.
Paxing All Over The World
Thanks, I was careless on that, I've asked SoS to amend the thread title. Still, let's hope that if the LCCs start doing this, the big boys might take it up too.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Presumably costs billed to Jet2. Not sure how they can pass them to the passenger given that it was their decision to divert with probably little advance notice. Probably needs a court opinion.
Well perhaps.
If she declines to pay then they'll have to sue her for it, and even if they do manage to satisfy the court that a contract existed, they'll also have to show that the litigator to all reasonable steps to minimise their losses before awarding damages.
PDR
If she declines to pay then they'll have to sue her for it, and even if they do manage to satisfy the court that a contract existed, they'll also have to show that the litigator to all reasonable steps to minimise their losses before awarding damages.
PDR
Resident insomniac
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Could the (ex)passenger be made bankrupt if refusing/unable to pay?
You can be made bankrupt if you don’t pay your debts and you owe £5,000 or more.
You can be made bankrupt if you don’t pay your debts and you owe £5,000 or more.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears this disruptive passenger was charged for costs incurred by the airline purely as a result of her unreasonable behaviour. She had a clear contract with Jet2; the terms of which are contained in their Conditions of Carriage. But by going over £5,000 she can be forced into bankruptcy and even though suing her in court might not yield much in cash terms, the publicity would be priceless. Even more valuable would be be "reality TV" type of fly-on-the-wall documentary when the bailiffs arrive and strip her house bare.
I don't care much for anti-social people and it is always nice to hear that they end up paying a heavy price for their unpleasant behaviour.
PM
I don't care much for anti-social people and it is always nice to hear that they end up paying a heavy price for their unpleasant behaviour.
PM
Keeping it brief:
Trying to catch a flight 45 years ago (as a teen), we were delayed by an ice storm enroute to the airport. Dashed to the ticketing booth literally at the departure time, told them "We're here and on our way" and ran to the gate (no security stops at all at that time - about 4 minutes). They (Continental) held the flight for us.
A week later, my dad received a polite letter simply pointing out that holding a flight could cost as much as $10000/£3500 (1970 currencies) and requesting that we plan better in future. No bill.
Times have changed, and while I am/was deeply grateful for what the airline did back then, now that I have first-hand knowledge of airline costs, I figure this person got off lightly at £6800 in 2016.
Trying to catch a flight 45 years ago (as a teen), we were delayed by an ice storm enroute to the airport. Dashed to the ticketing booth literally at the departure time, told them "We're here and on our way" and ran to the gate (no security stops at all at that time - about 4 minutes). They (Continental) held the flight for us.
A week later, my dad received a polite letter simply pointing out that holding a flight could cost as much as $10000/£3500 (1970 currencies) and requesting that we plan better in future. No bill.
Times have changed, and while I am/was deeply grateful for what the airline did back then, now that I have first-hand knowledge of airline costs, I figure this person got off lightly at £6800 in 2016.
A lifetime ban from that airline doesn't look that light to me.
Or maybe I'm becoming a softie...
Also, instead of diverting with costs, delays and such, wouldn't it be more economical and effective if the cabin crew would have the authority to arrest and detain an unruly pax until destination?
What do you guys think?
Or maybe I'm becoming a softie...
Also, instead of diverting with costs, delays and such, wouldn't it be more economical and effective if the cabin crew would have the authority to arrest and detain an unruly pax until destination?
What do you guys think?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dirty prop
You simply don't understand the dynamics of the disruptive pax situation, the cabin crew will use all the training they have in conflict resolution to defuse the situation how ever if they can't get the person to behave in a reasonable manor they have to do something before the inccident gets out of control.
An airliner cabin is a toxic place when conflict starts, you can't run away from the situation and people who are near the trouble but are not directly involved are likely to be drawn in, for instance a parents of small children would normally just get their children way from a conflict if they are on the ground but in an aircraft they can't. In this situation even the most mild mannered parent will become violent to defend their the safety of their children.
Effectively with the authority of the captain the cabin crew can restrain the unruly pax but three small girls vs a number of drunk men is not usually a fair contest and given that cabin crew have safety related in normal flight you don't want them unable to perform these duties.
At one time the appearance of the Captain ( or more effective the flight engineer with a large maglite ) was enough to deal with the situation but the security situation as taken away that option.
The only way to defuse the situation is to get the aircraft on the ground once it looks like control of the cabin is likely to be lost. This decision is not taken lightly but sometimes it is the only option.
An airliner cabin is a toxic place when conflict starts, you can't run away from the situation and people who are near the trouble but are not directly involved are likely to be drawn in, for instance a parents of small children would normally just get their children way from a conflict if they are on the ground but in an aircraft they can't. In this situation even the most mild mannered parent will become violent to defend their the safety of their children.
Effectively with the authority of the captain the cabin crew can restrain the unruly pax but three small girls vs a number of drunk men is not usually a fair contest and given that cabin crew have safety related in normal flight you don't want them unable to perform these duties.
At one time the appearance of the Captain ( or more effective the flight engineer with a large maglite ) was enough to deal with the situation but the security situation as taken away that option.
The only way to defuse the situation is to get the aircraft on the ground once it looks like control of the cabin is likely to be lost. This decision is not taken lightly but sometimes it is the only option.
Last edited by A and C; 11th Jan 2016 at 07:08.
