Compensation for UC to PE flight

Just back from MCO and would like your comments and knowledge of what compensation should be offered as my husband's seat in UC was broken and he was seated in PE as no other UC was available.

This wasn't a great issue to us as we do this route regularly using UC or PE - which is available and cost effective at the time of booking. This would however be a let down for many people who make the effort of booking the Upper Class experience maybe once in a lifetime.

I will be posting a TR shortly - on the 'dreaded' GVAST!

Look forward to your views and comments

Suzy

Under normal circumstances under EU261 he would be entitled to a 75% refund (I'm assuming the flight distance is >3,500KM)

But in this case it would depend on if the seat broke on board causing the downgrade or if he was informed in advance.

Even if EU261 didn't apply (because it happened on board) I would expect VS to be making a generous offer. It shouldn't make any difference if you are regular flyers or not.

was it a reward flight?
might find different compensation if it was booked with miles.

Sounds like an involuntary downgrade so I would push for the EU261 compensation as tontybear has outlined above.

was it a reward flight?
might find different compensation if it was booked with miles.

Under EU261 it makes no difference that a flight may have been paid for in miles.

It probably depends on how 'broken' the seat was.
If it just didn't recline but was otherwise functioning - ie. is still useable as a seat - then I would be satisfied with some miles (15-20k seems about right) as long as I still et to enjoy the UC service.
Broken TV - not a big deal so maybe 5k.
If not allowed to use the seat at all then I would be happy to get the difference between what I paid and what I got.
I am not a big fan of the compensation culture.

It might be semantics but it might also be for proper legal reasons but Article 10 of EU261 which relates to downgrades refers to 'reimburse[ment]' and not compensation.

The other sections on cancellation and denied boarding do refer to compensation.

Broken TV - not a big deal so maybe 5k.

That would be a big deal to many, myself included.

was it a reward flight?
might find different compensation if it was booked with miles.

Under EU261 it makes no difference that a flight may have been paid for in miles.

how would you determine 75% refund on a reward flight?

was it a reward flight?
might find different compensation if it was booked with miles.

Under EU261 it makes no difference that a flight may have been paid for in miles.

how would you determine 75% refund on a reward flight?

Quite simple - 75% of the miles and 75% of the cash element for the surcharges.

Tontybear, VA called my husband prior to us boarding, whilst we waited in the Delta Sky room, explaining the seat would not convert to a bed (and once we boarded the seat was totally unusable even though the crew were trying their best fix it after the US ground techs condemned it).

This was not a reward flight. The compensation given is an Economy round trip voucher and states the flight being compensated was J.

Would you consider this a fair offer?

[honey lamb]

Tontybear, VA called my husband prior to us boarding, whilst we waited in the Delta Sky room, explaining the seat would not convert to a bed (and once we boarded the seat was totally unusable even though the crew were trying their best fix it after the US ground techs condemned it).

This was not a reward flight. The compensation given is an Economy round trip voucher and states the flight being compensated was J.

Would you consider this a fair offer?

Even though you accepted the voucher that does not exonerate VS from fulfilling its obligations under EU261. VS are probably hoping that you do not know your rights under that ruling and that you will go away pleased with a free flight. However you are still entitled to make a claim.

Tontybear, VA called my husband prior to us boarding, whilst we waited in the Delta Sky room, explaining the seat would not convert to a bed (and once we boarded the seat was totally unusable even though the crew were trying their best fix it after the US ground techs condemned it).

This was not a reward flight. The compensation given is an Economy round trip voucher and states the flight being compensated was J.

Would you consider this a fair offer?

No, in my opinion, it is not a fair offer.

Your hubby is entitled to 75% of the ticket price as per Article 10 of EU261. The language is quite clear.

Press them for it and if necessary go down the Money Claim On Line route.


Did they make your hubby sign any paper work and if so did it mention EU261 rights?

My hubby has signed the voucher. I have just read the small print!! Quote:" I accept and hereby release release VAA, it's directors etc etc ... from any and all existing and future claims, liabilities, costs that I may have or arise etc etc ..."

It however does not mention anything about the EU261, only that their actions meet the requirements of the EU261

Your comments?

Hmmm unless you were specifically informed that your EU261 rights were to 75% then I believe they were in breach of the regulations as it could be seen as a restrictive clause as per Article 15.


There is a link to the PDF EU261 in the wiki page it is the first link.

For what is essentially the law it is very clearly written so you can soon write a letter to VS outlining Article 10 and that you believe you weren't made aware of your full rights before agreeing to the economy voucher so Article 15 also applies.

If they refuse then you have a clear case to take to MCOL and 15.2 gives you that right no matter what you signed as the Y voucher is clearly inferior to a 75% refund.

I'm sure I read somewhere before that you can not sign away your EU261 rights? So evwn if you did sign saying you wouldnt seek anything else, you can as it has no legal standing? Did I imagine that?

I'm sure I read somewhere before that you can not sign away your EU261 rights? So evwn if you did sign saying you wouldnt seek anything else, you can as it has no legal standing? Did I imagine that?

No see my post re article 15

Thank you all for your comments. We will be talking to VS shortly.