THE END OF AN ERA

Now you see it, now you don't! 

This building sat next to our house.  The "black bungalow", as it was always known,was quite "up together" in it's day, having originally been constructed as WWI Officers Quarters.  After the war it was transported to this site where it happily housed two families for 60 + years.  Davy and I bought it several years ago with the intention of pulling it down and re-building.  The best laid plans huh?! 

Last year I did finally obtained planning permission to build a 4 bedroom house on the plot, but, quite frankly, I can't be bothered with the hassle of doing that so I decided to sell it. Over the years it had slowly become derelict and a target for vandals, hence the decision to have it demolished.  Another tick on my "done" list.  

The funny thing is that it had become a bit of a local landmark and a friend visiting me at the weekend nearly drove on because this was the subliminal trigger for braking and turning!  Mad how be become programmed isn't it?

Actually, I have let things slide a bit of late and now I'm on a bit of a mission to get to grips with life again.  This morning I attempted, yet again, to clear out the garage  and was quite pleased with progress because I finally made a dent in it!  But tell me, where does all the rubbish come from? I have so much that it prompted me to get a bunch of stuff together for a car boot sale. 

But where do I start?  Maybe with the 2 "surplus to requirements" hair driers, 2 pairs of curling tongues and 4 pairs of hair straighteners that I seem to have acquired over the years.  Puzzling that, considering I don't, and never, ever, ever have, used curling tongues or straighteners!  What's that all about?  And I can't even blame anyone else because I actually remember buying each damn pair myself! 

Add to that the 20+ vases and multitudes of pillow cases, table clothes etc, etc, and you see I have developed quite a problem over the years.

But, hell, it's lunch time now and I may have another bash at getting my life sorted out after I've had my power nap.  But I still have 9 unopened DVD's to view, so I may leave it for another day.

I HAVE A LIFE OUTSIDE OF EASYJET! YEY!!

I got over excited yesterday when I googled easyjet and found that two of my blogs came up on the 1st page. I thought that all the hours wasted complaining to a sponge had not been in vane. I then found out that the reason I rank on the easyJet 1st page on my own computer is because I write bloody the blogs. Doohhhh!

The easyJet Customer Service "team" have been quiet for a few days. Have I stunned them into a respectful silence or are they totally bored with me? What will I do without them? They have been my reason for living. I know, I'll transfer my intellectual argument to Luton Airport, although I suspect they might already have the propaganda machine primed and waiting for my first email.

Putting easyJet to one side for a while, I had a brilliant weekend in London. I met up with my friend Sandy, granson Morgan and his partner Gwen for lunch at Kettners in Soho. A place I can highly recommend. In the evening Sandy and I went to the theatre to see The Million Dollar Quartet.  Fab-u-lous.

EASYJET - I NEED M Y LIFE BACK AGAIN!

EMAIL FROM GRAEME MacLEOD Head of Customer Operations

18th August 2011

Dear Mrs Cordner,

Thank you for your email. As you have raised a number of points I will answer them in the order in which you have raised them.

1) I am unable to tell how many passengers use the fast track facility in the airport, so it is impossible to confirm whether or not the 22 passengers that checked in after you decided to use this facility. The fast track facility is advertised throughout the airport and the escalators going up to the security area.

2) I stated that you were checked in between 06:22 and 06:24, this is the length of time the transaction took on the system, with the first passenger (A.Clist) being checked in first at 06:22 and the last passenger (O.Parkin) at 06:24.

3) Gate closure time. This reservation was made on 30th March 2011 at 12:33 by a Mrs G Holyoak. At that time Mrs Holyoak accepted our terms and conditions of carriage as published on the website which includes the text I have previously quoted to you. It is these terms and conditions that both parties were operating under for the flight you missed. The confirmation page you are referring to was issued to you at the airport after you had missed your flight. I accept that there is a difference in timings on this and will amend the airport one accordingly.

4) Reimbursement - I apologise for mis-understanding this point.

5) The security area has recently been refurbished and new equipment installed to speed up and enhance the facility. I confirmed that the airport do not have a policy of selecting customers with pushchairs to put them through specific screening lanes, which was your concern previously raised on your email of 26th July. With regards to the whether the customers who had an infant who checked in after you made use of the fast track facility, I am unable to identify this as per my point 1 above.

6) I am sorry but it would be inappropriate for me to discuss with you another customer that may or may not be in contact with us.

7) I can confirm that there were 18 fare paying passengers, this excludes infants, who were unable to make the flight that morning.

I wish to assure you that you have not been given "white wash" I have personally spent many hours going through records and discussing your case with the airport team to establish the facts. It is clear in, our opinion, that you missed your flight because you were not at the gate on time and the gate was closed to protect the other 135 passengers onboard the aircraft. I can also confirm that your feedback in relation to the agent assisting you has been taken onboard and addressed with the individual directly.

I am genuinely sorry that you and your party missed your flight and that you had a difficult and long journey to your destination, however it is our belief that we acted in an appropriate manner in order that the passengers that made it to the flight on time were not inconvenienced.

Yours Sincerely

Graeme MacLeod
Head of Customer Operations

MY REPLY

Daer Mr MacLeod,

You have just lost several passengers and I guess many others that are reading this account in my blog.

Putting the “rules” to one side and I know that I’m repeating myself here, if we, along with the 18 other fare paying passengers + 2 infants, had been allowed to board that plane it would have taken less time than off loading our luggage and, I believe, the plane would not have been delayed. In this situation common sense should have prevailed.

While we stood there we could hear snippets of the lengthy, quietly spoken, telephone conversation between the gate agent and the dispatcher. Decisions were being made to dispatch the bus and leave us stranded. That was spiteful and this is why I wanted someone to listen to the call recording.

You said “your feedback in relation to the agent assisting you has been taken onboard and addressed with the individual directly”. I take it that you are referring to Amanda Nunan. I have already said she was cold, officious and completely unmoved at the sight of crying children. Let me give you an example of how unhelpful she was. When she took us to Gate 9 the lift wasn’t working. We had a double pushchair which is difficult to maneuver down stairs and I complained, hoping that she would offer assistance. She said she would call the engineer if we wanted but had no idea how long this would take and headed off down the stairs herself. In the meantime my grandson spotted another lift across the room that also led down to Gate 9 which she hadn’t told us about. In my opinion she is a militant “jobsworth” and a liability to any employer.

Now let me tell you something about that visit to Switzerland. My husband and I owned an apartment high in the Alps. Every summer the children would visit us but when my husband became ill we decided to sell it. Unfortunately he died two Christmases ago. This summer our grandchildren and great-grandchildren expressed a desire to revisit the place one more time because they had spent so many happy summers with him there. One party travelled by car and we elected to travel by easyJet. Big mistake! The children were absolutely traumatized by this experience and on top of that they had to wait over 9 hours at that horrendous airport to catch a plane to the wrong part of Switzerland, finally arriving at our destination exhausted after travelling from 4 in the morning to 10 that night.

I have travelled by easyJet many times and have always been extremely pleased. And I must say that even on that wretched morning, apart from the attitude of Amanda Nunan, the easyJet employees were all extremely courteous and kind. In fact staff at the Sales Desk were particularly sympathetic and helpful when you bear in mind that they were absolutely swamped, having to deal with the passengers both from our plane and the 9 denied boarding from the Dortmund flight.

To add insult to injury when I tried to point out some of the problems to your Customer Services the “blame” culture kicked in. Immediately, it was our fault. So pat yourselves on the back Customer Services, you passed the buck beautifully but in the long term lost passengers.

I did try to point out that perhaps your procedures and time scales needed looking at. For example how can you have a 40 minute cut off at check in and a 30 minute cut off at the gate when it takes more than 10 minutes to walk directly from check-in to gate never mind go through security too!

I would have felt so much better if someone had put their “intelligent” hat on and thought this through. In fact, if that had happened the bus would never have been dispatched without us in the first place thereby saving all the money wasted in your people, you and me writing 18 pages of blah, blah, blah.

Regards,

Ann Cordner

I'M AFRAID IT'S EASYJET AGAIN

EMAIL FROM GRAEME MacLEOD, HEAD OF CUSTOMER OPERATIONS

17th August 2011

Dear Mrs Cordner,

Thank you for your email. I am sorry that you remain dissatisfied with my response. I wish to assure you that I do not have a vested interest in this and have looked at your case with an impartial set of eyes.

The facts I have given you have been obtained from our reservation system which on Monday I personally looked through every single passengers booking and the associated audit logs to confirm the times that I have provided you. I can assure you that the figures I have provided you with, including the 22 passengers checking in after you and successfully boarding the flight, are accurate.

You and your party were refused travel in accordance with our carrier regulations (http://www.easyjet.com/EN/Book/regulations.html#checkin) which states :-

"8 Check-in

Check-in at the Airport

...
Please note: Whether checking in on line or at the Airport, passengers who present themselves at the boarding gate later than 30 minutes prior to scheduled time of departure will not be accepted for travel, and will forfeit their seats.Conditions of Carriage Articles 7.1 and 7.3
..."

Our airport team held the gate open as long as possible but for the sake of our other customers we do have to make a decision to close the gate in order that the aircraft can still depart in a timely manner and not inconvenience the other customers who did make it on time and the subsequent customers throughout the course of the day who will be inconvenienced by the aircraft running off-schedule.

I am sorry that this is not the outcome you are seeking, however I wish to advise that this is our final position in this matter and we will not be offering to reimburse your additional costs.

Yours Sincerely

Graeme MacLeod
Head of Customer Operations


MY REPLY

Regarding the 22 passengers that checked in after us who you claim boarded the plane:

How many of them paid extra to fast track through security? In the general melee of transporting young children through the airport I missed displayed signage (if any) that this was an option. We were told that it would take approximately 15/20 minutes to clear security due to high passenger levels, but no mention was made of the fast track facility.

If, as you said, we had checked in at 06.22 and 6.24 (incidentally, why 6.22 AND 6.24?) the 15/20 minutes to clear security would have rung alarm bells and at that point I would have alerted the staff to our predicament. I didn’t because we looked at our watches and had, in our judgment, ample time, not knowing that we would then be subjected to a line change and a random liquid test!

Regarding the gate closure time (which, incidentally, is going over old ground again)

You have quoted your carrier regulations, “Whether checking in on line or at the Airport, passengers who present themselves at the boarding gate later than 30 minutes prior to scheduled time of departure will not be accepted for travel, and will forfeit their seats. Conditions of Carriage Articles 7.1 and 7.3” whereas I have already pointed out in my email to Mary Maguire that the terms and conditions printed on the reverse of the Letter of Confirmation printed off at the airport that morning state “Passengers who present themselves at the boarding gate later than 25 minutes before the scheduled time of departure will not be accepted for travel”. You can’t have it both ways.

Regarding re-imbursement (going over old ground again)

I have repeatedly stated that I am not asking for re-imbursement, see my emails to Jennifer Hogan and Mary Maguire. This proves to me that you didn’t pay attention to any of my previous correspondence.

Regarding the pushchair issue (going over old ground again)

You also said that the “airport management team” are not aware that the airport has a policy to move passengers with pushchairs to a different security line although your Customer Service Supervisor, Carrie-Louise Hughes had already said that we were moved to another lane because of a “refit in the security check area”. You also cite the fact that two families with infants checked in after us. Again, did they “fast track”? Was this the reason they reached the gate before us?

I know FOR A FACT that the other family who checked in alongside us were moved to another lane because of their pushchair. This family, Alexandra Wright, her two children, mother-in-law, sister, brother-in-law and their infant child also arrived at the gate in time but were denied access. She tells me that she has written three letters to easyJet and, as yet, received no replies.

Regarding the number of passengers denied access

You have totally disregarded my query about the number denied boarding that morning which both Ms Wright and I know was 19 and yet you say was 18.

Why am I getting the feeling that this is a complete white wash?

THE SAGA CONTINUES

EASTYJET’S LATEST COMMENTS (you may note a trace of frustration in my reply!)

Dear Mrs Cordner

Thank you for your email to Carolyn McCall, Chief Executive Officer. I have been asked to look into this and respond on Ms McCall's behalf.

I am sorry that you have had a difficult time with us and as Ms McCall states we work hard to make travel easier for all our customers and are disappointed when this doesn't happen.

With regards to the issues you encountered I would like to assure you that I have conducted a thorough review of the circumstances concerning your complaint. In summary I can see from our records that you and your party were checked in between 06:22 and 06:24 on the 19th July. This was ahead of the check-in closure time and a further 22 passengers checked in after this time and successfully boarded the flight to Geneva.

After reviewing the boarding logs on our system it is apparent that boarding did not complete until after 06:56 and in total 29 passengers were accepted between 06:50 when you state you were at the gate and 06:56. This includes two families with infants that checked in after you.

Whilst there were 18 people that did not make the flight that morning we do have strict gate closure policies that ensure that once the gate is closed and the offload of baggage is commenced that we do not accept any further passengers onboard. This so that we do not inconvenience all of the other passengers that did make it within the correct time scales by delaying the aircraft.

I understand that you assert you were delayed whilst going through security and that the security personnel moved you to a different queue because you had a push chair. I have discussed this point with our airport management team who are not aware that the airport have such a policy to do this and indeed I can see that two other passengers who had infants and checked in after yourself successfully made it to the gate on time. As my colleagues have previously advised the provision of security is a matter for the airport and complaints concerning this should be made directly to them.

With regards to the recording of telephone calls between staff members I can confirm that calls at Luton Airport are not recorded or retained, therefore it is not possible to obtain this information.

In summary whilst I am sorry that you missed your flight and had an arduous journey to your final destination, I can confirm we will not be offering to compensate you for the additional expense you incurred as we believe we acted in accordance with our terms and conditions of carriage.

I appreciate that this is not the answer you are looking for, however we try to be fair, transparent and consistent with all our customers and making an exception in your case would not be fair on other customers who may find themselves in a similar situation.

Yours Sincerely Graeme MacLeod Head of Customer Operations

MY REPLY TO MR MacLEOD

Thank you for investigating this incident but unfortunately you seem to have left this issue more confusing than when you found it.

My first point is that one family of 4 adults, 2 children and 1 infant and a pushchair checked in simultaneously with us in the adjacent lane. They were also denied boarding, so your statement that “22 passengers checked in after this time and successfully boarded the flight to Geneva” was not accurate.

I can accept that maybe there were passengers who checked in after us, but when you are travelling with young children it is a slower process. Once through check-in we used the toilet and then went straight to security and from there straight to the gate. We did not stop to buy a newspaper, coffee or anything else.

Where do you take the stats from that “29 passengers were accepted between 06.50 when you state you were at the gate and 06.56”? Were these passengers already downstairs being loaded onto the bus? They certainly weren’t our side of the gate. This would bear out my suspicion that they were loading the bus downstairs while we stood upstairs.

You then go on to say that “18 people did not make the flight that morning”. Wrong, that should be 19 people including 2 infants. Unless you count that as 17 people, i.e. 17 seats because the 2 infants are not allocated seats and there was another person that I am not aware of who arrived at the gate after we had been escorted away.

Regarding security, because of the pushchair we were moved to another queue as was the other family mentioned above. Your own Customer Service Supervisor, Carrie-Louise Hughes writes “The situation you experienced at security was due to a refit in the security check area. It was for this reason you where asked to join a second security queue. I have been given confirmation from the airport that the lane you where moved to, lane 10, should not have taken any longer to process passengers than any other lane. They have measures in place to ensure passengers are processed as quickly as possible and the lane is monitored closely”. To which I would reply, how is it monitored closely? We weren’t even directed to lane 10 we were told to go to “a lane higher than 6”. I believe we went through lane 8!

I was annoyed that this had caused a further delay, but it had not resulted in us arriving at the gate late. This is why I did not raise this issue with the airport. Again I ask you, don’t you think that I would have gone this route if that was the case?

Please note: my replication of Ms Hughes email includes one of her 12 grammatical or spelling mistakes. It is not a typo on my part.


You say that telephone calls at Luton Airport are not recorded or retained. I don’t understand. How can anything be “retained” that that hasn’t been recorded in the first place?

I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that because of your vested interest this matter is not being impartially investigated.


I have now written to Watchdog.

I am a 71 year old widow who, along with my two grandchildren and 4 great-grandchildren was denied boarding on this easyJet flight.

Attached is email correspondence between easyJet and myself which, due to conflicting statements and, quite frankly, what seem to be a cover up, I have concluded will never be investigated with any degree of impartiality.

I was tempted to complete an Air Passenger Rights EU Complaint form but feel that this would only add another level of bureaucratic complexity.

I would value your opinion on this.

Regards,

Ann Cordner

EASYJET LOOKS INTO THINGS

MS MCCALL ANSWERS MY COMPLAINT.

Dear Mrs Cordner
I understand how frustrating this situation has been for you and your family. We strive to make travel easy and affordable and clearly your experience was not easy.
I have asked our Head of Customer, Graeme Macleod, to look into this as a matter of urgency and he will come back to you as soon as he can.

I want to assure you this will be taken very seriously. It is never our intention to give our passengers anything other than good customer service.

Regards
Carolyn McCall

MY REPLY

Dear Ms McCall,

Thank you so much. Frustrating comes no-where near describing the devastation this event cause to both my family and the other 12 passengers denied boarding on that morning. One thing that I should have pointed out is that there are 11 grammatical and spelling mistakes in your Customer Service Supervisor’s letter. That’s not good is it?

Regards,
Ann Cordner.

MORE EASYJET - SORRY TO BE BORING!

Name: Ann Cordner
Title: EasyJet Query
Date: 26/07/2011
Our Reference: 110726-001018
Booking Reference: EHPNQXZ

12th August 2011

Dear Mrs Cordner,

Thank you for your correspondence.

I would like to advise you that your case has been passed to me so we may achieve a resolution in this matter.

Firstly let me address each of the questions to which you feel you have not been given a satisfactory answer thus far. We do not have an ongoing problem at Luton airport in regards to passengers missing check in. The situation you experienced at security was due to a refit in the security check area. It was for this reason you where asked to join a second security queue. I have been given confirmation from the airport that the lane you where moved to, lane 10, should not have taken any longer to process passengers than any other lane. They have measures in place to ensure passengers are processed as quickly as possible and the lane is monitored closely.

As previously stated by my colleague, the information we have been provided with by the airport state that the boarding gate was not closed at 06:50. The last passenger who boarded did so at 06:56. Therefore the gate could not have been closed at 06:50 as you have stated.

I understand that you where travelling with an infant and small children and that this situation was inconvenient to say the least. I would kindly like to point out that the this was not overlooked by the airport staff. The reason they where unable to make an exception in your case was due to the fact that the passengers on your flight where bussed to the plane as it was too far to walk. When you arrived at the boarding gate the bus had already left. If the staff at the airport had allowed you to board the flight the bus would have had to return for you and the other passengers in your booking. This would have potentially caused a delay in you flight and may have had a knock on affect on other flights that day. easyJet strive to have as little disruption as possible for our passengers and for this reason we were unable to allow you to board the flight. We would not refuse passengers if it is not necessary.

With regards to the comment you have made about Amanda Nunan, I can only say that this issue has already been addressed by Mary and it is unfortunate you chose to disagree with the information provided.

In relation to your request for the details of the phone call I again must reiterate what was stated in previous emails. easyJet do no have access to any phone calls made at the airport and I am therefore unable to provide you with the requested information.

I would like to advise you that we have taken your complaint very seriously every step of the way. Our customers satisfaction is our number one priority.

Again I would like to advise you that if you would like to pursue this complaint further you should do so with the airport itself as the issues you have raised are out of the control of easyJet and should be addressed with the airport.

I am sorry I am unable to help you further. If you would like to contact the airport in relation to this complaint pleas contact them at:

London Luton Airport
Navigation House
Airport Way
Luton, Bedfordshire
LU2 9LY

Yours sincerely

Carrie-Louise Hughes
Customer Service Supervisor

MY REPLY:

We are just going around in circles with this one. In dispute is our gate arrival time with me saying we arrived a 06.50 which I admit I cannot prove and you saying, without proof of your statement, that the gate closed at 06.56. I can only say that when we were held up at the gate we instinctively looked at our watches and this is how I am sure of the time. Also, the information board in the corridor still had a “last call” status.

To say that you don’t have access to the call recording of the conversation between your gate agent and the dispatcher that was taking place as we stood at the gate is utter nonsense. YOU may not have access, but SOMEONE does. I repeat, it is my believe that this recording would shed light on what really happened at that gate that morning. It is interesting that I am pushing for this and you are resisting. I wonder why?

Your comment that the bus had been dispatched to avoid delaying the flight is utter nonsense. That bus had not been dispatched when we stood there listening to the gate agent talking to the dispatcher on the ‘phone.

Tell me this, apart from the dispute regarding our gate arrival time, didn’t the gate agent, dispatcher and flight crew wonder why 19 people including 2 infants and several children were “late” at the gate? Any fool can work out that the correct course of action would have been to hold the bus until the 19 passengers had managed to battle their way to the gate albeit that you say we were late and I say we were not.

Referring to your insistence that I take up my complaint with the airport, don’t you think that it would have been easier for me to blame them and claim reimbursement? The answer is simple. I have told the truth, there were problems at the airport that morning, but we arrived at the gate in time and so did 19 other people.

Regarding Amanda Nunan, I can only say that she was cold, officious and completely unmoved at the sight of crying children. She did not offer us any assistance whatsoever. And let’s not forget that the Amanda Nunan had also been involved in 9 people being denied boarding on the Dortmund flight that morning. Come on now, ask yourself the questions.

Yours sincerely,

Ann Cordner


MY LETTER TO EASYJET CEO

Dear Ms McCall,

I am attaching correspondence regarding this incident which is self explanatory. I would value your comments before I refer this incident to Air Passenger Rights on EU Complaint Form, Tradingstandards@luton.gov.uk, Watchdog@bbc.co.uk, sthhollanddeepings@btopenworld.com (my local MP).

Yours sincerely,