can I take BA to court?

In message <elmvj.79317$k27.35400@bignews2.bellsouth.net> "Rog'"
<rcblinnNoSpam.DeleteThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>Its a shame that so few businesses seem to have an interest in
>generating good-will when their customers are inconvenienced.
>Once, a severe storm knocked out power from 7-10 PM at a
>hotel where I was staying. When checking out, I asked if there
>would be any compensation and was told, "No--force majure--
>we are not liable," in a rude fashion. "Okay," I said. In years
>past, I have received compensation from a variety of properties,
>ranging from a free dessert to a free night.

There are two sides to the issue, both of which I can understand.

On one hand, if the business was not at fault, receives no compensation
from anyone else, and potentially suffered losses of their own, why
should they compensate anyone for anything?

Conversely, should a corporation want a customer to return after a bad
experience, it's usually in their best interests to attempt to placate
the angry customer.

*shrugs*

As a small business owner, I am very much in the second group. I even
take returns on products sold AS-IS if a defect is discovered that I was
unaware of, or failed to inform the customer about, the cost of the
product is rarely worth the cost of the ill-will, and more then once
I've had a satisfied customer come back and spend far far more then the
original transaction and comment that it was because of how willing I
was to work with them on the original deal.

Conversely, some customers can't be pleased, and it's not worth the
hassle trying. They're usually easy to pick out.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:09:22 -0800, "Mr. Travel" <mtravel.RemoveThis@a.a> wrote:

>Rog' wrote:
>
>> "TMOliver" <tmoliverjrFIX.RemoveThis@hot.rr.comFIX> wrote:
>>
>>>I engage in continuing contractual agreements with US hotels,
>>>and have found to my occasional despair that the doctrine of
>>>"force majeure (sp?)/acts of God take precedence over all
>>>sorts of strongly held concepts of creeping consumerism.
>>
>>
>> Its a shame that so few businesses seem to have an interest in
>> generating good-will when their customers are inconvenienced.
>> Once, a severe storm knocked out power from 7-10 PM at a
>> hotel where I was staying. When checking out, I asked if there
>> would be any compensation and was told, "No--force majure--
>> we are not liable," in a rude fashion. "Okay," I said. In years
>> past, I have received compensation from a variety of properties,
>> ranging from a free dessert to a free night.
>>
>
>It's a shame that some people believe any problem deserve compensation,
>even when the business is not at fault.
>

To put it mildly.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

"John Kulp" <john_kulp.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Mr. Travel" <mtravel.DeleteThis@a.a> wrote:
>>It's a shame that some people believe any problem deserve
>>compensation, even when the business is not at fault.

> To put it mildly.

To me, its not an issue of "deserving" but, in some cases, a
smart business practice. At a hotel, if facilities are under
construction and it impairs use of a room, or at a restaurant,
if the food is late to the table or cold, the customer may not
be entitled to compensation, but a good-will gesture means
return business and favorable word-of-mouth.

I belong to a group of 16 people who dine out once a week.
Once, at an Olive Garden, half the table was served well, but
the other half had to wait on their food until the first half was
almost done. They comped the 2nd half, and that has meant
our return at least 10 more times since, and likely other visits
as well.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 00:10:07 -0700, DevilsPGD
<spam_narf_spam.DeleteThis@crazyhat.net> wrote:

>In message <elmvj.79317$k27.35400@bignews2.bellsouth.net> "Rog'"
><rcblinnNoSpam.DeleteThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>Its a shame that so few businesses seem to have an interest in
>>generating good-will when their customers are inconvenienced.
>>Once, a severe storm knocked out power from 7-10 PM at a
>>hotel where I was staying. When checking out, I asked if there
>>would be any compensation and was told, "No--force majure--
>>we are not liable," in a rude fashion. "Okay," I said. In years
>>past, I have received compensation from a variety of properties,
>>ranging from a free dessert to a free night.
>
>There are two sides to the issue, both of which I can understand.

In this case, I don't see two sides.

>
>On one hand, if the business was not at fault, receives no compensation
>from anyone else, and potentially suffered losses of their own, why
>should they compensate anyone for anything?

Exactly. BA didn't call a strike on itself presumbably.

>
>Conversely, should a corporation want a customer to return after a bad
>experience, it's usually in their best interests to attempt to placate
>the angry customer.

First, that's a decision for the company to make and it varies very
much by company but that is usually the case alright. Second,
however, it has nothing to do with this case, because it is rather
difficult to placate a customer that just takes off on you, does what
he feels like in total disregard of his contract, runs up his costs to
the maximum and then tries to get you to pay for it. They could do
it, but who wants a passenger like this? Don't you think he would
just be encouraged to do the same and try to continue to take
advantage of BA's placating him in the future?

>
>*shrugs*
>
>As a small business owner, I am very much in the second group. I even
>take returns on products sold AS-IS if a defect is discovered that I was
>unaware of, or failed to inform the customer about, the cost of the
>product is rarely worth the cost of the ill-will, and more then once
>I've had a satisfied customer come back and spend far far more then the
>original transaction and comment that it was because of how willing I
>was to work with them on the original deal.

That's fairly normal in the retail business, but airline passengers,
like this one, have gotten it into their heads (generally the ones
with the cheapest tickets entitling them to the least) that an airline
is responsible for whatever they dream up irrespective of what their
contract says. Just like this guy. You take care of your best
customers not anyone who comes over the transom or you will soon be
out of business. And, as you point out, it is a cost decision. Retal
products generally don't get anywhere near as expensive as this guy
ran up and is moaning about. There are certainly cases where an
airline is at fault and should be held responsible, but not this one.

>
>Conversely, some customers can't be pleased, and it's not worth the
>hassle trying. They're usually easy to pick out.

Yep. Just like this guy.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:29:14 -0500, "Rog'"
<rcblinnNoSpam.RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>"John Kulp" <john_kulp.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Mr. Travel" <mtravel.RemoveThis@a.a> wrote:
>>>It's a shame that some people believe any problem deserve
>>>compensation, even when the business is not at fault.
>
>> To put it mildly.
>
>To me, its not an issue of "deserving" but, in some cases, a
>smart business practice. At a hotel, if facilities are under
>construction and it impairs use of a room, or at a restaurant,
>if the food is late to the table or cold, the customer may not
>be entitled to compensation, but a good-will gesture means
>return business and favorable word-of-mouth.
>
>I belong to a group of 16 people who dine out once a week.
>Once, at an Olive Garden, half the table was served well, but
>the other half had to wait on their food until the first half was
>almost done. They comped the 2nd half, and that has meant
>our return at least 10 more times since, and likely other visits
>as well.

I understand what you're saying. I was just pointing out that there
are large differences between businesses when considering this as well
as circumstances. In the case in point, the amount is considerably
higher than a few dollars, involved someone who admittedly just
ignored the contractual procedures he was bound by, ran up a large
bill that could have been avoided or minimized at least, and now
thinks he is entitled to compensation for all that. I don't think so.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

"John Kulp" <john_kulp.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Rog'" <rcblinnNoSpam.TakeThisOut@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>To me, its not an issue of "deserving" but, in some cases, a
>>smart business practice. At a hotel, if facilities are under
>>construction and it impairs use of a room, or at a restaurant,
>>if the food is late to the table or cold, the customer may not
>>be entitled to compensation, but a good-will gesture means
>>return business and favorable word-of-mouth. <snip>

> I understand what you're saying. I was just pointing out that there
> are large differences between businesses when considering this as
> well as circumstances. In the case in point, the amount is considerably
> higher than a few dollars, involved someone who admittedly just
> ignored the contractual procedures he was bound by, ran up a large
> bill that could have been avoided or minimized at least, and now
> thinks he is entitled to compensation for all that. I don't think so.

I concur. You got to go by the rules and give 'em a chance to fix it.
Let 'em help you and you're likely to get helped. I'm reminded a
trip to Rome, IT. Delta cancelled the first leg of a two stop itinerary.
Instead of flying us to Orlando+NYC, at the last-minute, they put us
on a plane to Atlanta. In Atlanta, their CSR sent us to Munich and
thence Rome on Lufthansa. We arrived only 3 hours late.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

Rog' wrote:

> "John Kulp" <john_kulp.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"Mr. Travel" <mtravel.TakeThisOut@a.a> wrote:
>>
>>>It's a shame that some people believe any problem deserve
>>>compensation, even when the business is not at fault.
>
>
>>To put it mildly.
>
>
> To me, its not an issue of "deserving" but, in some cases, a
> smart business practice. At a hotel, if facilities are under
> construction and it impairs use of a room, or at a restaurant,
> if the food is late to the table or cold, the customer may not
> be entitled to compensation, but a good-will gesture means
> return business and favorable word-of-mouth.
>
> I belong to a group of 16 people who dine out once a week.
> Once, at an Olive Garden, half the table was served well, but
> the other half had to wait on their food until the first half was
> almost done. They comped the 2nd half, and that has meant
> our return at least 10 more times since, and likely other visits
> as well.
>
>

That is not a valid comparison to the guy who expected something due to
a weather issue.
A valid comparison would be you insisting on compensation because a
storm knocked out the power. In your example, where 1/2 of the table
had poor service, you didn't mention anything to indicate something the
hotel did not have control over.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

Traveller wrote:
> "gA" <realty.TakeThisOut@ualberta.net> wrote in message
> news:xBdtj.40733$Ly.6879@pd7urf1no...
>> Four months ago BA left me stranded in Rome after canceling all their
>> flights. I had to find my way back to Canada without any assistance
>> and this cost me a lot of money in purchasing other air tickets,
>> hotels, taxis, etc.

Hi,

isn't the real story there was a strike action, you abandoned your
flights/tickets because you didn't want to wait in line, and now, after
choosing to abandon your flights/tickets want them to pay for your
impatience?

--

Hackamore
http://www.hackamore.com
http://hackamoretravel.blogspot.com
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:34:19 -0600, Anonymouse <nobody RemoveThis @nowhere.org>
wrote:

>Traveller wrote:
>> "gA" <realty RemoveThis @ualberta.net> wrote in message
>> news:xBdtj.40733$Ly.6879@pd7urf1no...
>>> Four months ago BA left me stranded in Rome after canceling all their
>>> flights. I had to find my way back to Canada without any assistance
>>> and this cost me a lot of money in purchasing other air tickets,
>>> hotels, taxis, etc.
>
>Hi,
>
>isn't the real story there was a strike action, you abandoned your
>flights/tickets because you didn't want to wait in line, and now, after
>choosing to abandon your flights/tickets want them to pay for your
>impatience?

Yes.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 15:20:57 GMT, "C. Nicholson"
<noshohcin1.TakeThisOut@verizon.net> wrote:

>
>"William Black" <> wrote in message
>>
>> In simple terms they have to offer you another flight or your money back.
>>
>> They don't have to give you the choice.
>>
>> When it happened to me I found myself on another flight on the same date
>> but a bit later.
>
>I have a question. I bought tickets to fly to the UK from US. I bought
>travel insurance from travelite. http://tinyurl.com/2avs5f
>Would this insurance have covered something like what happened to the
>gentleman left in Rome? If not, is there something else I could or should be
>aware of incase something simular occured. I still have 9 days to change the
>insurance.

Your answer will depend on what your particular policy says. Without
seeing that, I would doubt it because I wouldn't think any insurance
company is going to pay someone for things they did within their
control. This chap's whole situation most likely would have been
solved if he simply hung around and let BA take care of his situation
when his turn came. In that case, there is nothing for the insurance
to pay. Instead, by taking off on his own, he assumed responsibility
for himself which is what the insurance company would say;e.g. you
can't make us pay for things you do to yourself. Travel insurance is
for uncontrollable events not those you control.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 03:21:34 GMT john_kulp.DeleteThis@hotmail.com (John Kulp) wrote:

:>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 15:20:57 GMT, "C. Nicholson"
:><noshohcin1.DeleteThis@verizon.net> wrote:

:>>"William Black" <> wrote in message

:>>> In simple terms they have to offer you another flight or your money back.

:>>> They don't have to give you the choice.

:>>> When it happened to me I found myself on another flight on the same date
:>>> but a bit later.

:>>I have a question. I bought tickets to fly to the UK from US. I bought
:>>travel insurance from travelite. http://tinyurl.com/2avs5f
:>>Would this insurance have covered something like what happened to the
:>>gentleman left in Rome? If not, is there something else I could or should be
:>>aware of incase something simular occured. I still have 9 days to change the
:>>insurance.

:>Your answer will depend on what your particular policy says. Without
:>seeing that, I would doubt it because I wouldn't think any insurance
:>company is going to pay someone for things they did within their
:>control. This chap's whole situation most likely would have been
:>solved if he simply hung around and let BA take care of his situation
:>when his turn came. In that case, there is nothing for the insurance
:>to pay. Instead, by taking off on his own, he assumed responsibility
:>for himself which is what the insurance company would say;e.g. you
:>can't make us pay for things you do to yourself. Travel insurance is
:>for uncontrollable events not those you control.

More cluelessness.

The insured has the obligation to attempt to mitigate damages.

While Mr. Kulp would have the passenger sleep in the terminal and eat food
from the garbage cans until the folk from BA would get around to giving him
service, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE, the passenger, measuring the costs
of hotels and meals in Rome and lost wages versus the cost of a replacement
ticket, made the decision that would mitigate damages.

--
Binyamin Dissen <bdissen.DeleteThis@dissensoftware.com>
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

Binyamin Dissen wrote:

>
> The insured has the obligation to attempt to mitigate damages.
>
> While Mr. Kulp would have the passenger sleep in the terminal and eat food
> from the garbage cans until the folk from BA would get around to giving him
> service, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE, the passenger, measuring the costs
> of hotels and meals in Rome and lost wages versus the cost of a replacement
> ticket, made the decision that would mitigate damages.
>

No, he didn't attempt to mitigate damages. Rather than wait in line for
assistance or have any further contact with BA, he simply made purchases
without approval.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court? 

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 09:39:28 +0200, Binyamin Dissen
<postingid.DeleteThis@dissensoftware.com> wrote:


>:>>I have a question. I bought tickets to fly to the UK from US. I bought
>:>>travel insurance from travelite. http://tinyurl.com/2avs5f
>:>>Would this insurance have covered something like what happened to the
>:>>gentleman left in Rome? If not, is there something else I could or should be
>:>>aware of incase something simular occured. I still have 9 days to change the
>:>>insurance.
>
>:>Your answer will depend on what your particular policy says. Without
>:>seeing that, I would doubt it because I wouldn't think any insurance
>:>company is going to pay someone for things they did within their
>:>control. This chap's whole situation most likely would have been
>:>solved if he simply hung around and let BA take care of his situation
>:>when his turn came. In that case, there is nothing for the insurance
>:>to pay. Instead, by taking off on his own, he assumed responsibility
>:>for himself which is what the insurance company would say;e.g. you
>:>can't make us pay for things you do to yourself. Travel insurance is
>:>for uncontrollable events not those you control.
>
>More cluelessness.

Your posts sure are. Your knowledge of the law is, well, completely
non-existent.

>
>The insured has the obligation to attempt to mitigate damages.

You don't mitigate losses by running them up genius.

>
>While Mr. Kulp would have the passenger sleep in the terminal and eat food
>from the garbage cans until the folk from BA would get around to giving him
>service, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE, the passenger, measuring the costs
>of hotels and meals in Rome and lost wages versus the cost of a replacement
>ticket, made the decision that would mitigate damages.

Which I never said and this cretin just makes up. A moron like you
just can't understand he never gave BA a chance since he took off can
you? Well, he'll find out soon enough if he takes them to court.
 >> Stay informed about: can I take BA to court?