Read the forum code of contact
By: - 11th February 2008 at 19:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If it's proved this incident occurred as a direct result of neglegence on BA's part, they have every right to sue. If it were completely 100% beyond their control, then I am absolutely, thoroughly disgusted and appalled people are sueing over this. Do these idiotic, brain dead and selfish idiots not realise they're lucky to be alive? Is the fact no-one died in what had a very real potential to be one of the most horriffic accidents in the history of commercial aviation in the UK not good enough for some people?
Paul
By: - 11th February 2008 at 19:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I agree on the latter.
It just goes to show that people will go to any extreme to get extra money for themselves. The fact they are all alive is a testiment to the aircraft the company Boeing and the pilots.
It's discusting if you ask me:mad:
By: - 11th February 2008 at 19:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I've E-plonked it in here as I don't know how to link to the other thread.
Copied from Pushjelly.blogspot.com Superb!
Following the crash landing of Flight 38 on January 17th, in which pilot John Coward averted a major disaster by steering the stricken Boeing to safety, one passenger has decided to sue BA for “****s, giggles and most importantly – cash.”
University Lecturer Paul Strafford told the press “Many might think that, after the pilot skilfully manoeuvred hundreds of tons of metal going a few hundred miles an hour to safety, I might show a modicum of gratitude. Well, they’re wrong. I’ve been mildly perturbed since the incident and I think my mild perturbation should be compensated with a cheque fat enough to burst a padded envelope.”
BA confirmed that Strafford, along with all other passengers on the flight, had been written to personally with an apology and an offer of counselling. “They can sodding well whistle if they think I’m settling for that” said Strafford “If some fat bint can get five grand for slipping on an office floor, like in that advert, this must be a goldmine.”
A relative of Strafford, who wished to remain nameless, confirmed his history of breathtaking ingratitude. “Paul’s always been the same” said the anonymous twin brother. “I remember when I saved him from drowning when he was twelve, he banged on for two months about the shoe he’d lost in the river. He reckoned I should have dived back in to retrieve it, rather than ‘taking a breather in my wheelchair’.”
Strafford, who lectures in Unappreciative ****bag Studies at Knutsford University, went on “I’ve hardly slept a wink since the accident. I manage six hours, maybe seven at most a night. That’s hardly fair, is it? And my coffee spilt over my trousers when the pilot was stopping us from turning into a hurtling metallic deathball. Well, they’re going to pay through the nose for it. How dare they?”
John Coward was unavailable for comment, but sources close to the pilot say his response to the news was “What? The cheeky f**king turd. I wish I’d used his ******** for air brakes. Next time I hit a bit of turbulence, I’m parachuting the f**k out. Let them deal with it.”
By: - 11th February 2008 at 20:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And my coffee spilt over my trousers when the pilot was stopping us from turning into a hurtling metallic deathball. Well, they’re going to pay through the nose for it. How dare they?”
The courts will throw that case out, when they realise that all tray tables should have been stowed for the landing, and the passenger shouldnt have been drinking his coffee on touchdown. :D :p
---
I can't believe that the accident lead to some passengers developing sall these serious psychological 'problems' - yes, I can see that some people may develop some problems but surely not as wide ranging as has been claimed. As has been pointed out before elsewhere -
According to statements, most of the passengers did not realise the aircraft was in trouble or anything was wrong until the evacuation command was given. They believed that they had landed and everything was normal. Therefore, they did not spend an horrendous x minutes in-flight, knowing that the aircraft was in trouble, and each and everyone of those passengers and crew having to deal with the possibility that they would die within minutes. Had it been the case that passengers did spend time dealing with that possibility, then surely they would have more ground to stand on.
PMN in what had a very real potential to be one of the most horriffic accidents in the history of commercial aviation in the UK
- A spinechilling sentence.
By: - 11th February 2008 at 20:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
old shape, thanks for posting that, made snigger like a goon for a quite a while....
-Dazza:D
By: - 11th February 2008 at 21:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Th worst injury was a broken leg - the passengers should be grateful there wasn't a far worse outcome.
By: - 11th February 2008 at 21:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
According to statements, most of the passengers did not realise the aircraft was in trouble or anything was wrong until the evacuation command was given. They believed that they had landed and everything was normal. Therefore, they did not spend an horrendous x minutes in-flight, knowing that the aircraft was in trouble, and each and everyone of those passengers and crew having to deal with the possibility that they would die within minutes. Had it been the case that passengers did spend time dealing with that possibility, then surely they would have more ground to stand on.
That's the bit I don't get...:confused:
By: - 11th February 2008 at 23:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I suppose it was just a matter of time before we find out a number of pax are gonna try and nail BA for some cash out of this. It was always on the cards. I may be a bit harsh in saying this, but i can imagin some pax would have doller signs spinning round in there eyes as they wait by the stricken plane for 20mins to be rescued...
Sure if BA are at fault then fair play,but im sure some will always "hype up" the drama of it all.
Kudos to the crew i say,well done
By: - 11th February 2008 at 23:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Th worst injury was a broken leg - the passengers should be grateful there wasn't a far worse outcome.
The leg.....was this caused when the pax fell off the chute? Imagine if they'd landed on head and died?? Not that I wish it. Survive an aircrash but killed during relatively orderly evac. Would that give all the other pax. survivor guilt?
We can laugh because there were no deaths here. We're not totally sick.
By: - 11th February 2008 at 23:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I bet Mr Strafford will have a hard time working out who said this. Maybe its his twin brother?A relative of Strafford, who wished to remain nameless, confirmed his history of breathtaking ingratitude. “Paul’s always been the same” said the anonymous twin brother.
By: - 12th February 2008 at 00:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I bet Mr Strafford will have a hard time working out who said this. Maybe its his twin brother?
The whole article was a parody, hence it was supposed to be obvious :p
It wouldn't surprise me if the people taking 'legal action' are still flying BA until the court case or whatever happens :rolleyes:
By: - 12th February 2008 at 15:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don´t feel the same. We still don´t know if BA had a direct implication in the crash. No definite conclusions, no idea if the crew contributed to this or not. I am sure they have been heroes, but too soon to say it for sure.
So I feel that someone that has suffered such a traumatic event, should have the right to sue whoever they feel, without being insulted. We simply don´t know how we would react if we had been onboard. My support for them. As far as I am concerned, I would probably wait for the official investigation to finnish, but I surely understand them.
I don´t want to put the blame on anyone, but not clear anyone yet. In democracy everyone should have the right to this, and BA defend themselves if they don´t have anything to it with it.
Sorry folks. That´s how I feel.
By: - 12th February 2008 at 18:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lets say, there was no such thing as "suing" someone. There was no system in place to seek financial reimbursement for an event that happened out with your control - however counselling was still offered. Would these folk be able to continue with their lives without receiving money from going to court? Damn right they would!
By: - 12th February 2008 at 18:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I personally wouldn´t feel compensated with any sum. The question is "are they having a good use of their time to become richer?. Or some money would help or compensate them?.
Good question. I don´t have know what´s in their mind, but if money makes them feel a bit better, why not?.
By: - 13th February 2008 at 05:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don´t feel the same. We still don´t know if BA had a direct implication in the crash. No definite conclusions, no idea if the crew contributed to this or not. I am sure they have been heroes, but too soon to say it for sure.So I feel that someone that has suffered such a traumatic event, should have the right to sue whoever they feel, without being insulted. We simply don´t know how we would react if we had been onboard. My support for them. As far as I am concerned, I would probably wait for the official investigation to finnish, but I surely understand them.
I don´t want to put the blame on anyone, but not clear anyone yet. In democracy everyone should have the right to this, and BA defend themselves if they don´t have anything to it with it.
Sorry folks. That´s how I feel.
The point that needs to be taken into consideration is the bit that was quoted by many on the flight, that they
'didn't realise the aircraft crashed until they were evacuated out'
The broken leg was sustained on the jump out the aircraft, not when it "crashed".......
I think people only started to have the flashing $$$$$ in their eye's after they had 20 minutes or so stood by the aircraft which gave them time to think of a reason to prosicute.
Sorry folks, but thats how I feel!!
By: - 13th February 2008 at 08:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
i agree, that maybe they should be some sort of compensation! but for me being alive would be that!!
as far as flying goes, when they get there huge cheques, i bet they'll be ok to fly to the bahamas!!!:diablo:
By: - 13th February 2008 at 11:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We now live in a litigious society and most are looking for the opportunity for a quick buck (quid). We don't have to be responsible for our own actions anymore. The 17th was my birthday and I was happy that no one was killed on that aeroplane that day. My hat's off to the pilot and first.
Posts: 674
By: robmac - 11th February 2008 at 19:18
British Airways faces a multimillion-pound legal action from passengers traumatised by the Heathrow crash landing.
Some of those on board claim they now have a fear of flying and hearing problems. They are also angry that they were left beside the plane for up to 20 minutes despite fears it could explode.
An investigation by the Standard shows how British Airways has begun a huge damage limitation exercise in the wake of the incident on flight 038 from Beijing on 17 January.
The airline's chief executive Willie Walsh has phoned passengers directly offering support and many have been offered a free 45-minute flight above London to help them overcome any future fear of flying.
They have also been phoned every two or three days by BA staff asking if they want free counselling.
Sally Moore, a personal injury lawyer at Leigh Day & Co, said she had already received inquiries from passengers and expected more in the coming weeks. "These passengers have suffered a near-death experience and could be suffering from post traumatic stress disorder," Ms Moore said. Passengers are limited to £85,000 each for mental trauma, but sums will be much higher if BA is found to be at fault. There were 136 passengers on flight 038.
The Boeing 777's engines did not produce the necessary thrust to reach the front of the runway as it came into land. The plane struck the ground and came to a halt a few hundred yards later. One passenger was injured and eight received minor injuries as they got off the plane on emergency slides. Sales manager Lukasz Pilarczyk, 26, said: "I fear I will never fly again. I can't imagine a time when I can get back in a plane. After we evacuated, we were around 50 metres
from the plane for about 15 minutes. I thought that if the plane exploded we would all die."
Dr Jeroen Ensink, 33, a researcher at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Disease, said he has been bombarded with calls from BA, including one from Mr Walsh. Dr Ensink is not considering legal action and supports BA's handling of the aftermath of the landing.
The Civil Aviation Authority said there were no specific guidelines about how far and how quickly passengers should be moved away from an aircraft.
A BA spokeswoman said today: "We are in touch with each passenger individually and we are discussing their needs on a one-to-one basis."
:confused: