Flight 1549 Passengers Get $5K Checks For Drowned Baggage
Turns out they won't have to file written requests after all, each passenger of US Airways Flight 1549 that downed in the Hudson River last week got a $5k check from the airline to compensate them for lost baggage.
In a letter sent to passengers with the checks this weekend, investigators say they have to weight "all items in their current state, dry them for eight weeks and then weigh them again," which could take up to 8 months. "Valerie Wunder, an airline spokeswoman, said the $5,000 checks were not intended to “shut down” any other claims, like lawsuits, that passengers might file," reports NYT.
That was nice of them. They could probably easily pay for the PR boost with the slush fund of fees for every luggage bag and bag of peanuts.
$5,000 to Each Passenger on Crashed Jet for Lost Bags [NYT] (Thanks to Andrew!) (Photo: bmunch was bunglemunch)
Post a comment
Comments:
Better check the endorsement line for any microprinted waivers, just to be safe.
WOW, 5k? Thats a good amount of money for lost and damaged luggage even if you had a laptop in your luggage. Granted I guess crash landing in an icy cold river is factored in there also, lol.
Damn, with times like these, I'd go through that ordeal for $5k. I'm sure I wouldn't be travelling with stuff near that expensive.
That sounds surprisingly reasonable.
How many frequent flier miles do you think they got? Like 12?
That's actually a pretty classy thing for US Airways to do considering they haven't exactly been the ideal airline to fly since the merger.
Considering who stupid airlines have been acting lately this is quite the good move on their part. It was prompt, and (in most cases) more than fair compensation for the lost luggage.
This is a lot better than the airline saying "Not our fault, it was the geese. You get nothing."
U.S Airways probably has hundreds of thousands saved up from charging everyone for every bag and beverage anyway. If it weren't for publicity, they would have been the airline I expected to charge everyone for the use of flotation devices and a special bird usage fee just for the hell of it.
US Airways is milking all the publicity out of this incident they can. With all the coverage, let's make a grand gesture that will sure hit major media outlets. How about thousands of other customers who lost baggage and got the shaft from an angry clerk in a dark room.
@Ash78: *Cashing or depositing this check will incur a $4990 cashing/depositing fee. Blackout dates apply.
Seems like a nice thing to do. The passengers still can file suit if they would like. For 99.9% of the people $5,000 is 10x more then what they had in their baggage.
If they had more, go file for more.
This site falls on my tits more and more every day.
US Airways is basically saying "Look, you need the money now, here it is, let's sweat the small stuff later"
But no, "The Consumerist" has to slip in its snide comments.
Don't you guys EVER give credit where credit's due?
"The Consumerist" gets on my tits more and more by the day;
US Airways said " Look, you need money right now, let's sweat the small stuff later"
But no, you guys have to slip in your snide remarks.
Don't you EVER give credit where credit's due?
@Bruce Bayliss: I think the idea behind the comments is basically that one good deed does not negate or reverse the dozens of crappy deeds one airline commits against its passengers. Sure, they're giving $5k a passenger, but U.S. Airways could probably do better overall in treating its customers better.
Does this include children who probably have like $30 in possessions?
@philmin: That was shamelessly jacked from Leno.
So is this: Air traffic control gave the pilot the option to land at Newark, to which he replied, nah, I think I would rather just land in the Hudson.
@George Carrick: Seriously! I don't think I've *ever* flown with $5k worth of luggage, except maybe once when I flew with a musical instrument.
And to think, people pay that much to jump out of planes and off of canyons and stuff.
Question: Since the plane is technically intact, will they fix it and reuse it? boy that would save a buck!
A quote from one of my favorite movies comes to mind:
"I'll buy that for a dollar!"
I still have not seen anything written about whether or not there were pets in the baggage compartment. I hope there weren't.
@George Carrick: But you see I had a strain of the T-Virus in my suitcase, so lets pray that doesn't pop open during the "drying" stage.
God help us all if it does.
IMO, $750K is a bargain and the PR benefit is worth a lot more. My guess is that US Airways will probably end up offering some sort of blanket compensation to each passenger - $25-50K seems reasonable - and try to put this behind them. Not that there wasn't a lot of mental pain and suffering on the part of the passengers, but the accident had nothing to do with negligence on the part of the airline. Total cost under $10M and everyone walks away happy.
This just in:
"In order to claim $5K Checks, passengers will have to send $200 to a Nigerian account where their claim is processed, $300 for Shipping the check plus $200 for insurance."
Once check has been sent, passengers will have to fork over $500 for a special liquid that will make the check "legal tender".
@homerjay wants Boston Legal back!: It wasn't surprising to me. They are in the spotlight now and they are getting good press. If a story came out about them being inflexible on the luggage claims it would get more attention than usual. If they pay more than their contract of carriage and pay it quickly, then they get good PR for being concerned. It also encourages passengers not to sue them. As for the money, I'm sure that they have insurance for the loss of an airplane.
@tkozikow: I don't understand why the passengers deserve any compensation whatsoever. Like you mentioned, it was an accident having nothing do with negligence on anyone's part. If anything, it was the pilot's skills that saved everyone. I can see it though, some douchy passenger is going to come out saying the pilot could have landed somewhere else.
Can you really put a price on the guys from the Spirit story yesterday's "Lucky" clubs?
According to CNN, they also reimbursed the cost of everyone's airline ticket.
@Bladefist: Of course, their contract of carriage provides a maximum compensation of $3,300 for "provable direct or consequential damages resulting from the loss, delay, or damage to baggage in US Airways' custody."
So if they have more losses and did not pay for insurance or make special arrangements with US Air they don't have much of a case. Especially when US Air volunteered $1,700 more than they needed to, with no proof required.
@DeltaTee: First, the NTSB will have custody of it for about a year. Some of their tests may be destructive. And I'm certain that if it is salvaged, US Air will not be flying it. They'll probably sell it to a foreign airline with a less oversight.
A nice move on their part since I would imagine most people didn't have even $1000 of luggage on board.
@Bruce Bayliss: I think most people are, actually. And there's no post that isn't going to have a few naysayers.
$5K is generous for baggage. I'm guessing US Airways is trying to keep its good press streak going. This successful ditching is such a great bit of unintended positive attention, they don't want to let one bit of it slip away.
Why do they need to weigh the items, etc. Do they really need to waste all this time investigating what happened? In 8 months I'm expecting a headline that reads "January Splash Landing Caused By Geese In Engine".
Just pull out the wet luggage and carry-ons, line it up on the dock, and let the passengers get their wet sopping undried stuff. Oh and still give them the $5000 to replace all that stuff which is ruined, but at least they can destroy their own laptops and not wonder whose hands it is in.
@George Carrick: I dunno. If i had my Canon 5D Mark II, a laptop and a couple lenses that would be WAAY more than $5k.
@JPMarat: US Airways doesn't allow cargo pets on their non-shuttle flights. This was a non-shuttle flight.
@DeanOfAllTrades: That's why it's good to get a personal items line written into your homeowners policy, especially when you travel. You can change it when you get back from your trip.
@Alexander: I can't see how legally they would be entitled to it (it's definitely not negligent infliction of emotional distress) but a lot of these people ARE likely to experience some anguish in the future. While they may not have a court, and that's definitely debatable, there is nothing wrong with expressing some goodwill by compensating the passengers. Moreover, if potential customers find that the customers who went through this ordeal were hung out to dry (ha, get it?), they'd probably be at least somewhat hesitant to get onto a US Airways plane.
They only did this after realising that it can be a boon for PR. It's a good thing too, it's what a lot of airlines need right now.
$5k? Pffft... What about drug mules? That won't cover 1 kg of cocaine!
@Alexander: They certainly deserve some sort of compensation-
1. they did not get to where they were going. Minimum tickets should be refunded.
2. they did not get to where they were going, so they should have paid to get people to where they were going through other airlines, or via rental car, etc.
3. They also should have paid any fees incurred from people not getting to where they were going- no refundable deposits on hotels or whatever for "canceling" (ie, not getting there).
4. They should pay for damaged luggage. Which they are, quite nicely.
5. They should be paying for any medical bills associated with the crash, such as the poor bugger who had both legs broken.
6. They hopefully provided people with adequate, dry and warm clothing soon after dragging them from the river to prevent hypothermia, never mind that walking around sopping wet even in summer tends to just stink. (IF they indeed got wet. It seems like some people might have and most didn't.)
None of these are huge things, and even though the geese salad ala engine wasn't the airline's fault, they should be covering said things to cover their asses and make what would have been a horrible experience better. I'm sure they must have insurance just for these sorts of things, after all. So far they seem to be on the right track towards helping the passengers. No, people don't need $100k in "pain and suffering", but I can see a few grand or something being a reasonable payout for all the trouble caused.
For 5k, you can dump my arse in the hudson river any day of the year, provided you're going to pull me out soon. I don't swim so well.
@Yurei: Yes, I agree with you. I should have read my message before posting. Any chargers that the passengers had to pony up for, medical or otherwise, should be fully reimbursed. Just no free $50k so you don't sue.
That's not bad, I mean if you had something really expensive on there then you might have to weigh your options.
Not everyone on board had over $5k of stuff on there.
Plus you have to kind of look at it from their point of view. It's not like they can just "undrown" or "unsoak" the plane at this time.
Still all in all, if you can walk away from the crash and you are just wet,have $5k to spend, I don't think in good conscience, could really blame the airline.
The airline is going to have a tough time of it's own.
Well... I guess that will help out with that $90 rebooking fee from Spirit.