An airline agent’s attempt at a good deed went astray when it caused a 90-year-old traveler to miss his flight. Who should pay for his hotel and meals?

Dear Tripped Up,

I’m a 90-year-old Dutch American living by the beach in California since 1955. After a month visiting my home country last spring, I was set to fly Vueling Airlines from Amsterdam to Barcelona before continuing on to Los Angeles. At the Vueling check-in desk at Schiphol Airport, the agent — noting my age and how far away the gate was — offered transport assistance. I thought that was a very nice gesture and accepted. Two young women working for the airport soon appeared with an electric cart, asked for my boarding pass and took me to a very busy gate, where I managed to find a seat. But when I heard the announcement, “We are now boarding for Paris,” I nearly dropped dead. I went to the counter where an agent pointed me toward the right gate, but it was quite far away and I didn’t make it in time. A Vueling representative rebooked me on the next available flight, two days later, but would not provide a hotel voucher, instead giving me an email address to seek reimbursement. I stayed at the airport Sheraton for two nights and later filed receipts totaling $1,343 for the hotel and meals. Vueling rejected the request, writing that the airport’s transportation service was not its responsibility. But it was the agent’s suggestion, and without it, I would have made my flight. Can you help? William, Los Angeles

Dear William,

Who should pay the price for this good deed gone wrong? The airline? The airport? The company hired to run the assistance program? The person who apparently misread your boarding pass? Her optometrist? You?

Let’s start by ruling out the optometrist, and you, because you were in the hands of people you should have been able to trust.

I’d suggest there are two potential approaches here: the legal approach, where we look at applicable laws and precedents, and the common-sense approach, which might go something like, “Hey, Vueling, a 90-year-old man missed a flight because of a suggestion your own staff made. Just give the guy a hotel voucher, already.”

I got in touch with Vueling, a low-cost European airline, which opted for the legal route.

“We are very sorry the customer had this experience,” said Melanie Berry, Vueling’s chief customer officer, in a statement. “While we fully understand the inconvenience caused, it is important to clarify that the ground assistance and internal transport services at the airport fall outside the airline’s responsibility.”

“In this case,” her statement continued, “the customer arrived after the boarding process had been completed due to circumstances beyond Vueling’s control.” Even so, she noted, the airline did provide your replacement flight without charging you for it.

In other words, it’s the airport’s responsibility.

So I got in touch with Schiphol. Doron Sajet, a spokesman for the airport, sent a statement expressing regret for your difficulties and hinting that the airline should have resolved it. “Passengers who have questions or concerns about their trip, including assistance or any related arrangements, should contact their airline directly,” he wrote.

But he also noted that “if the assistance provided did not meet expectations, passengers may submit a complaint either to their airline or through Schiphol’s customer care center.”

I sent you instructions on how to do that and suggested you file a complaint with the airport. You did, and received a polite response asking for more details on what compensation you’re looking for.

There’s another twist, which is that Mr. Sajet wrote the airport had no record of anyone on your Vueling flight receiving assistance that day. Did this happen off the record? Or was it a bookkeeping error? Hard to say, but clearly, a lot went wrong.

What does the law say here? I told your story to someone who knows quite a bit about European rules governing airports and airlines, Martijn Witvliet, a legal adviser for the Netherlands office of the European Consumer Centers Network, a publicly funded independent agency with locations throughout the European Union that educates and assists consumers with travel and other issues.

He told me that though laws and treaties often hold airlines responsible for damages they are not directly responsible for — injuries due to turbulence, for example, or food poisoning caused by a caterer — a 2006 European law specifically holds airports responsible for providing services for passengers with mobility limitations.

With advance notice of 48 hours or more, the rules are even stricter. But even on shorter notice, as in your case, Schiphol was still required to make a “reasonable effort” to get you to your flight, Mr. Witvliet wrote in an email.

“Bringing him to the wrong gate is not a reasonable effort, particularly as I understand that it was not even close to the correct one,” he added.

But even he seemed to realize the issue shouldn’t have gotten to the point where you needed to file a complaint with Schiphol.

“Regardless of the legal obligations of the airport and the airline,” the email continued, “it is regrettable to note that the airline has not offered any solution. In situations like this, formal rules should not be necessary to treat customers with basic consideration and humanity.”

I passed along Mr. Witvliet’s conclusion to Vueling, which wrote back in a follow-up statement that offering you a new flight was, in fact, “a demonstration of treating customers with basic consideration and humanity.”

But when even a lawyer takes the common-sense approach, I think we can rest our case. Vueling didn’t have to pay for your hotel, but it should have.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857588&forum_id=2#49821453)

hard to ever side with an airline but fuck this geriatric for not being able to check his own gate wtf and this retard for not chastising him. he wasnt under anesthesia

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857588&forum_id=2#49821548)

this is a lcc besides. in cambodia they would just take out a pistol and put this guy out of his misery

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857588&forum_id=2#49821623)

by your logic he should have strolled up to air france and asked for a refund and af would be obliged to pay

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857588&forum_id=2#49821801)

if you accept a job, you have a duty of care.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5857588&forum_id=2#49821654)