BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mike Borsetti et al., Third-party Complainant Docket DOT-OST-2014-0166 v. BritishAirways Pic

BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC SURREPLY

Communications withrespectto this document shouldbe sentto:

Richard Mendles General Counsel, Americas James B. Blaney Senior Counsel, Americas BritishAirways Pic 2 Park Avenue, Suite 1100 New York, NY 10016 richard.mendles@ba.com jim.blaney@ba.com
December 15,2014 DonH. Hainbach JasonE. Maddux Garofalo Goerlich Hainbach PC 1200NewHampshire Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036 Phone: 202-776-3970 dhainbach@ggh-airlaw.com jmaddux@ggh-airlaw.comMike Borsetti et al., BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON,D.C.
Third-party Complainant Docket DOT-OST-2014-0166 v. BritishAirways Pic

BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC SURREPLY
British Airways Pic (''British Airways") respectfully reiterates its positionthat there is no need for the Department to commence an investigation or formal enforcement proceeding in response to Mr. Borsetti's Complaint. As demonstrated in the British Airways October 21 Answer, and as further demonstrated below, Mr. Borsetti's Complaint results from his booking transportation from Los Angeles to London on an American Airlines ("American") flight that
was canceled, and his subsequent and ultimately successful efforts to obtain substitute transportation on a codeshare flight, operated by British Airways, scheduled to depart Los Angeles laterthat same day. AlthoughBritishAirways regrets the inconvenienceexperiencedby Mr. Borsetti and his family as a result of its inability to accommodate the party in Business Class, neither his treatment at Los Angeles, nor British Airways' response to his subsequent communications, merits an investigation orformal enforcementproceeding. Mr. Borsetti'sNovember 21 reply asserts that he is ''opento any ... 'reasonable' approach that BA or the Department might propose..." with respect to the appropriate compensation he should receive resulting from his downgrade (Reply**~12).** As itemized in the Answer BritishAirways filed on October 21, Mr. Borsetti has thus far received $1,560 in credit card refunds, and three $408 checks for a total of$2,784. Mr. Borsetti has acknowledged his receipt ofthose amounts. 1 Accordingly, there is no basis for his assertion (Reply ,3), that "BA'srefund still falls short by an astounding $1,002 (39%) when calculated using the methodology BA introduced in its Answer (footnote 7, p.6)."2 To the contrary, the uncontroverted record establishes that Mr. Borsetti has received $222.02 morethanthe amount resulting from that methodology. By contrast, after analyzing the deeply discounted Business Class fares paid by Mr. Borsetti and one of his family members, American, the carrier from whom Mr. Borsetti purchased his initial transportation, advised British Airways that Mr. Borsetti and that family member would not have been entitled to any compensation under the Department's rules had he been downgraded by American. More specifically, American advised British Airways that: "In order to calculate a refund AA would use the following methodology FARE PAID less FARE FLOWN and use a full Y. Using the Y fare results in amounts greater than what the passenger paid, there's no refund due onthis segment accordingto our calculations."3 There can be no question that Mr. Borsetti has already received "reasonable" compensation for his downgrade. Moreover, as stated in its October 21 Answer, "British Airways remains willingto provide, as a gesture ofgoodwill, a paymentofeither 300 GBP, $500

Mr. Borsetti's Reply**(~3)** acknowledges the credit card refund amounts, and his September 22 Complaint**(~30)** acknowledged receipt ofthe three $408 checks. As noted in the October 21 Answer, the methodology reflects a European Commission proposal that has not yet been adopted. American re-ticketed Mr. Borsetti on flight AA6179, a codeshare flight operated by British Airways. Pursuantto the standard DOT codeshare condition that "the carrier selling such transportation (i.e., the carrier shown on the ticket) accept responsibility for the entirety ofthe code-sharejourney for all obligations established in its contract ofcarriage with the passenger," American's conditions ofcarriage apply to Mr. Borsetti'sclaim.
2USD, or a $650 USD credit voucher to be applied against a future British Airways flight purchase for eachmember ofhis party." (Answerp.5.) Contrary to Mr. Borsetti's assertions (Reply ,-r1), British Airways never "mock[ed] the record as lengthy." British Airways simply cited its numerous responses to Mr. Borsetti's communications to rebut his incorrect assertion that it failed to comply with the complaint response requirements establishedby §259.7(c). With respect to Mr. Borsetti's assertions (Reply ,-rs) that American's flight information records indicate a 4:07pm cancellation time, and that British Airways confirmed his reservations "well before American Airlines canceled its flight AA136," it should be sufficient to note that Mr. Borsetti's Complaint (footnote 2) affirmatively stated that "AA staff at approximately 2:50pm on 14 February advised us to travel LAX-LHR on a British Airways-operated flight (this
was consistent with AA tariffrule 80 as to schedule irregularities)." Mr. Borsetti's Complaint demonstrates that AA staffwere aware that the flight would be canceled well before 4:07 and immediately began efforts to accommodate passengers. But for the cancellation ofAA136, Mr. Borsetti would have had no reason to be rebooked on AA6179/BA268; Mr. Borsetti's characterization ofthe cancellation ofAA136 as "notrelevant" has no basis in fact. British Airways disputes Mr. Borsetti's assertion (Reply ,-r7) regarding the lack of credibility of British Airways' statement that "all passengers holding confirmed reservations
were carried;" indeed, none of the paragraphs cited in the Reply support that assertion. Moreover, the Department has not advised British Airways that it received any denied boarding complaint from any passenger other than Mr. Borsetti regarding BA268 on February 14, and BritishAirways is not aware ofany such complaints.

3British Airways also disputes Mr. Borsetti's unsupported and inaccurate assertion (Reply ,-r9) that British Airways' ability to accommodate all passengers was inconsistent with the chaotic situation at the airport. British Airways respectfully submits that its ability to accommodate passengers ref1ects the professional response ofBritish Airways' LAX staffto the difficult operational conditions resulting from the uncontroverted factual circumstances noted in footnote 1ofthe October 21 Answer. To the extent Mr. Borsetti's Reply includes any factual statement or allegation that is not specifically admitted ordenied herein, it shouldbe deemedto have beendenied. WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, British Airways Plc respectfully requests thatthe Department dismiss the Complaintpursuantto 14 CFR §302.406(a)(2).

# ~~y~a**dA~e-~ Ao~~** **~a~nbach** Jason E. Maddux Garofalo Goerlich HainbachPC 1200 NewHampshire AvenueNW Washington, DC 20036 Attorneys for BritishAirwaysPic

4CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 15th day of December, 2014, a copy of the foregoing Surreply ofBritishAirways Plc was servedviaelectronic mail onthe parties namedbelow:

Mike Borsetti Blane Workie Clereece Kroha mike@borsetti.com blane.workie(mdot.gov clereece.kroha(lv,dot.gov VanessaKrasniewicz