I only ask this because I'm being urged to do so by a firm of London lawyers - "the UK's leading aviation claimant law firm" apparently. They understand that I was a passenger on BA038, which you'll recall crashed short of the runway at Heathrow probably due to fuel icing, and they believe I "may have suffered a physical or psychological injury as a result".God it's tempting! But I don't think I'm going to take up their offer, partly because I'm the sort of tedious individual who tends to think that, in life, stuff happens and you shouldn't really go around sueing hard-working, talented people who were doing their best but may have got something complex wrong. (A bit like BA038 passenger Francis Charig.) Oh, and partly because I wasn't actually on BA038.
If "the UK's leading aviation claimant law firm" had done their research they'd have known this of course, since I blogged about it.
And if they'd spelled my name correctly then the email version of their
letter would have reached me and I could have posted it online for you
to see. But I guess they're busy people, you know, what with all the
aeroplanes crashing and that.
I thought you'd like to hear their arguments for why I should sue though, and how I'd do it.
First it wouldn't cost me anything as they'd fund it on a contingency basis and take about one-third of the winnings, sorry, "damages".
Here's what they say: "Even if you have not suffered physical injuries as a result of this incident, but you were understandably shaken at the time and continue to fear flying, you are entitled to claim damages from Boeing in the US. The benefit of bringing a claim in the US is that the levels of damages awarded are much higher than in other jurisdictions, such as the UK. Further, in the UK in the absence of a physical injury, damages for psychological injury will not be available in an action against British Airways under the provisions of the Montreal Convention."
They think they'll win because: "Our research indicates that Boeing will be held liable by the US Court because of design defects within the aircraft, in particular, the fuel delivery system which appears to have become impacted with ice."
So there you have it. Any advice?
I thought you'd like to hear their arguments for why I should sue though, and how I'd do it.
First it wouldn't cost me anything as they'd fund it on a contingency basis and take about one-third of the winnings, sorry, "damages".
Here's what they say: "Even if you have not suffered physical injuries as a result of this incident, but you were understandably shaken at the time and continue to fear flying, you are entitled to claim damages from Boeing in the US. The benefit of bringing a claim in the US is that the levels of damages awarded are much higher than in other jurisdictions, such as the UK. Further, in the UK in the absence of a physical injury, damages for psychological injury will not be available in an action against British Airways under the provisions of the Montreal Convention."
They think they'll win because: "Our research indicates that Boeing will be held liable by the US Court because of design defects within the aircraft, in particular, the fuel delivery system which appears to have become impacted with ice."
So there you have it. Any advice?
on October 28, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply
There's the old line from a song - |let's kill all the lawyers, kill them tonight"
Sage advice me thinks. This goes to show how horribly messed up our morals have become. Then again it's easy money ahhh what the heck GO FOR IT !
on October 30, 2009 5:16 PM | Reply
Surely, if you're suing anyone - shouldnât it be roller? Funny story though.