Somewhat related, here’s a story about a drunk whose belligerence forced a flight to turn around and return. He was ordered by a court to pay the airline over $21,000 in fuel costs, which was actually only about one-tenth of the airline’s actual losses over the incident.
If there are multiple flights to your destination & you elect the latest one then that’s on you. However if there’s only one per day & you go in a day early that adds significant extra cost in terms of hotel & meals.
For a cruise i might do that but for a 4 to 6-hour round-trip, no way.
This isn’t exactly the airline’s problem, though. The fact that a reasonable traveler would avoid significant extra cost and time required to fly out a day early doesn’t mean a disastrous missed connection is something the airline should compensate you for.
Even in the EU, compensation is fixed, so if you lose out on a $10,000 cruise, you get the same compensation as the guy who “lost out” on a few hours of dialing into work from his hotel room.
I figured this would be standard when the initial delay was the airlines fault, but was recently on one where they pretty much told everyone connecting they really need to bust ass to make it, yet let the whole plane off at the same time:confused:
How can you possibly equate that scenario with mine?
Because you believe the liability for intentional act should be the same for unforseeable accidents - specifically none. Your logic? Equating a delay because of an unruly passenger as with plane trouble. because both of them are delays therefore they should be treated the same.
The possibility of delays for unavoidable reasons (e.g. weather) is a given for airline travel, while falling trees are not a given of automobile travel and are indeed quite rare. If I were on a jury deciding such a case, I would certainly have expected the passenger to have used their own due diligence to allow a cushion of time for such common contingencies, when the outcome was so important to them. If the passenger was just trusting to luck that all departures and arrivals would be on time and that all connections would be made, then I would say they contributed their own negligence to the negative outcome.
IANAL, but I think foreseeability might be a problem for our hypothetical litigant. Because when the defendant misbehaved, I don’t think he could be expected to realize that “if I take this action, it might cause the lady sitting in 13C to miss her meeting”. It was not a foreseeable consequence of his action. And I believe there is a legal standard for foreseeability that is used when evaluating incidental damages. And I don’t think this case described in this hypothetical would rise to that standard. Again, IANAL.
I’ve seen similar cases on the small claims court TV programs. “Because my contractor didn’t finish my kitchen on the day he promised, my friend couldn’t visit me so I had to go visit her and I wrecked my car on the way. Therefore, the contractor should pay for my car.” Usually the judge laughs at the people bringing these cases.
And I think the general unreliability of air travel would also be a factor, as the plaintiff could’ve averted the situation by taking an earlier flight. I’m drawing a blank on how to phrase that one in legalese, though. At first I thought mitigation but I think that terms refers to actions taken after the injury occurs.
I for one want to hear more about this magical payout I am supposed to get for a delay in Europe. I have been delayed numerous times on European flights and had my luggage lost by incompetent airlines…cough…Alitalia…cough…and never been offered a dime (or Euro or Pound).
Once when attempting to fly to Venice, the flight from the U.S. reached Rome and the connection was cancelled. Alitalia shipped us off to a cheap motel to spend the night which was a truly scary place, then shipped us back to the airport the next morning to get a flight. No allowances were made for food, where we were on our own. Oddly enough, this was for a cruise, and I was on vacation, so no big deal. I left a day of buffer, and I needed it, but no harm no foul. Still, I saw no one offering or demanding money in Italian or otherwise. Or is the presumption that my cheap motel was 600 Euros a night?
It would seem that if you suddenly received notice that a loved one was on his deathbed and wanted to see you one last time, then died before you could get there because some a-hole caused the flight to be delayed, you might have some grounds for an emotional anguish suit. Probably weak, though.