This one is almost as good as the too hot McDonald's coffee lawsuit...
"A couple who say that an American Airlines flight attendant spit in their orange juice and refused to serve them pancakes while they sat in first class is suing the airline."
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/276/metro/N_H_couple_sue_airline_complain_of_poor_service+.s htmlOriginally posted by BeantownFlyer:
So let me get this straight. A couple has a temper tantrum because their meal choice is not available and they SUE?
BF, it wasn't avalable b/c the FA thought (incorrectly) that they were nonrevs and thus reserved the "choices" for other pax.
The whole thing sounds frivolous to me, too, but let's at least keep the facts straight.
More troubling to me, as swag noted above, is AA's claim that they can't afford to pay the 5 grand because of the events of 9/11. Sounds like AA's shamelessly taking yet another opportunity to blame all their problems on the events of the day. Not like that should surprise us anymore...I dunno. To me, this seems more reasonable than suing for spilling on yourself. If this all happened as alleged, that is. Not getting the hot breakfast for being mis-identified as non-revs is an honest mistake. Spitting in juice is inexcusable.
Most interesting:
"American originally offered $5,000 in flight vouchers to settle. The Paines were initially receptive, then changed their mind and demanded money... Slavitt said the Paines would be willing to settle for $5,000 cash - a figure the airline said it could not afford because of its precarious financial situation after the Sept. 11 terrorist hijackings."
It's not _that_ precarious, is it?This is a far cry from the McDonalds coffee suit. If the facts in the article are accurate, and they did pay $3,000 for the tickets, then their willingness to settle for $5,000 does not seem that outlandish to me. They clearly had a very unpleasant flight because of an error (or series of errors) on AA's part and thus deserve, at the least, a full refund. Asking for $2,000 on top of that seems pretty reasonable to me.
The couple does not seem to be trying to get rich off AA's back since anyone who pays $3,000 for a flight is probably not going to consider $5,000 to be a huge windfall.Thanks for posting that, I found it very interesting. I still think the Mcdonalds Hot Coffee Lawsuit ranks #1. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gifhaha.. this is funny... I actually know the judge presiding over this case... lemme ask her about it the next time I see her...I agree as well. The fact that AA said to take 5k in vouchers was to make it go away. They did not want to deal with it. Maybe something happened, but as others said, what is the pain,suffering or loss?
Get a life folks.If everything is as alleged, then the couple is due compensation. Since the couple is only asking for $5,000 and AA was willing to provide $5,000 in voucher, it appears that AA is conceding it is at fault and the couple's request is not unreasonable. $5,000 is really a very "cheap" settlement compared to the bad PR that AA is getting.
I hope someday to travel in First Class and I certainly don't want to run into any FA like that whether my ticket is paid with cash or miles.Plato - I couldn't have said it better.On one hand, I liked the fact that the FA's are sticking to the rule of first choice to paying customers [vs. non-revs].
However, I find it unlikely that the FA would actually spit in the orange juice. The fact that AA offered to settle may have nothing to do with the merits of the case. Simply getting a lawyer out there to deal with this lawsuit can easily cost AA more than $5k, so it's cheaper to settle.So let me get this straight. A couple has a temper tantrum because their meal choice is not available and they SUE? Hey, I've been missing out - let me call my lawyer. Oh wait, they "clearly had a very unpleasant flight because of an error (or series of errors) on AA's part and thus deserve, at the least, a full refund" - man, I'm dialing my lawyer now, because I am owed a lot of refunds! I know, its the spitting nonsense. Well even if you believe it (and I express no opinion on that one) - how were they actually hurt? Where's the actual pain and suffering? There's no physical injury. There's no permanent mental injury with years of counseling. The bottom line is they had an unpleasant flight (much of which was probably as a result of their own little tantrum). SO WHAT - WE ALL HAVE! The $5,000 in travel vouchers was a generous offer. These people (and their lawyer) are just milking the system and trying to exact a nuisance settlement from AA. I certainly wouldn't give them anything more than a refund of what they paid, if I were on the jury, - and I might be inclined to give them $1 to make a point.#If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.# |
|
January 9, 2009 | kpbk.com | edit
