Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LOT Gives Boeing Ultimatum About 787 Compensation  
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 33149 times:

Good God, I wonder what this ( and some other airline's managers who are making "noise" against the 787 this days ) would do in the "Comet Age" when the design flaws were discovered making forensic analysis to the remains of the aircraft....The 787 is a whole new desing with a lot of innovation and some problems should be expected. The attitude of some managers at the airline industry is really annoying...


http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1380186288.html

Rgds.
G.


80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
129 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1749 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 33138 times:

Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):
Good God, I wonder what this ( and some other airline's managers who are making "noise" against the 787 this days ) would do in the "Comet Age" when the design flaws were discovered making forensic analysis to the remains of the aircraft....The 787 is a whole new desing with a lot of innovation and some problems should be expected. The attitude of some managers at the airline industry is really annoying...

That is no excuse whatsoever. We all know it is new technology with a lot of innovation but that does not mean Boeing is absolved of responsibility here. They delivered a faulty product that has cost the airlines operating it millions of dollars and that should be righted.

Good on LOT for making noise about this...



Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-CPH (320-BA), VXO-BMA (S20-TF), ARN-CPH (738-SK), CPH-LHR (320-BA)
User currently offlineJimJupiter From Germany, joined Sep 2011, 252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 33052 times:

Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):
The attitude of some managers at the airline industry is really annoying...

Might it be just as annoying to see your whole medium to long term strategy go down the drain because of long delays and malfunctions that are not within your responsibility? Some smaller carriers are heavily affected by the problems of the 787 program, and those "some managers" have all reason to fear for their companies, employees etc. (Not saying that there aren't other serious problems e.g. LOT has to deal with...)

I hope they sort the issues out soon (same goes for DY), but I can understand managers going public about their troubles now.

[Edited 2013-09-26 03:56:09]


One is born, one runs up bills, one dies.
User currently offlineGonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 1992 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 33032 times:

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 1):
That is no excuse whatsoever. We all know it is new technology with a lot of innovation but that does not mean Boeing is absolved of responsibility here. They delivered a faulty product that has cost the airlines operating it millions of dollars and that should be righted.

Good on LOT for making noise about this...

Maybe you are right.... maybe not...

I will expect how the "quiet" strategy of other airlines also affected by the 787 grounding ( like LA to mention one ) pays in their future negotiations with Boeing...

Rgds. !!

G.



80 Knots...V1...Rotate...Gear Up...DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20 / B732 / B763
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4808 posts, RR: 40
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 32915 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 1):
That is no excuse whatsoever. We all know it is new technology with a lot of innovation but that does not mean Boeing is absolved of responsibility here. They delivered a faulty product that has cost the airlines operating it millions of dollars and that should be righted.

   It is all about contracts and guarantees. And both contracts or guarantees do not care if it is about a 300 year old painting, or a modern civil airliner. If one of the parties who have committed themselves to that contract does not hold up its side of the bargain, then compensations are in place. And are usually already part of the contract when signed.

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 3):
Maybe you are right.

Oh, I am sure he is.

So LOT is perfectly in her right to be angry with Boeing for not holding up their part of the bargain.

[Edited 2013-09-26 03:55:42]

User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7216 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 32848 times:

LO has no long term sustainable strategy in long haul flying except to diaspora cities in North America using a high Density low cost model with proper low costs.

this time I see Boeing being used as a scapegoat for continued losses and ordering too many aircraft. Yes the Boeing 787 rollout is a disaster, but not anyway as bad as LO's over order of aircraft.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1630 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 32837 times:

Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):
The 787 is a whole new desing with a lot of innovation and some problems should be expected.

It has been in service for two years now, these problems should not be expected...



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineJimJupiter From Germany, joined Sep 2011, 252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 32778 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):
LO has no long term sustainable strategy in long haul flying except to diaspora cities in North America using a high Density low cost model with proper low costs.

Not saying it was a good strategy. 

Their annoyance may have multiple sources.



One is born, one runs up bills, one dies.
User currently offlinekellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 693 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 32684 times:

Actually, the legal argument is normally on Boeings' side.

When the customer and Boeing sign an agreement for acquisition of an aircraft, there is normally a clause which absolutely prohibits "consequential" damages. This means things like flight cancellations, etc. The warranty normally extends to repairing or replacing the aircraft, not those types of damages.

But, Boeing could have made an amended agreement to keep LOT as a customer once the delays of the 787 became a major factor. But without seeing the agreement, no one can really tell what the actual terms are.


User currently offlinemilan320 From Canada, joined Jan 2005, 869 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 32344 times:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't other airlines also seeking compensation? Wasn't JAL, ANA and now I heard Norwegian seeking compensation? If so, why shouldn't LOT be entitled to seek it.


I accept bribes ... :-)
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12640 posts, RR: 46
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 32330 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):
this time I see Boeing being used as a scapegoat for continued losses and ordering too many aircraft.

Eight is too many? According to the "experts" in the DY thread, they should have a few laying around "just in case".   



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2259 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 32118 times:

Quoting kellmark (Reply 8):
Actually, the legal argument is normally on Boeings' side.

When the customer and Boeing sign an agreement for acquisition of an aircraft, there is normally a clause which absolutely prohibits "consequential" damages. This means things like flight cancellations, etc. The warranty normally extends to repairing or replacing the aircraft, not those types of damages.

But, Boeing could have made an amended agreement to keep LOT as a customer once the delays of the 787 became a major factor. But without seeing the agreement, no one can really tell what the actual terms are.

100% true, but on the other hand LO might be jumping on DY wagon to seek compensation. I wonder how all this all pan out...(not that they will make it public BTW)

Quoting scbriml (Reply 10):
Eight is too many? According to the "experts" in the DY thread, they should have a few laying around "just in case".   

I dropped my laptop, thanks for the very funny comment! (great way to start the day)...

TRB



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlineraffik From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 1716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 32129 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 10):
Eight is too many? According to the "experts" in the DY thread, they should have a few laying around "just in case".

 

These is absolutely NO doubt that this aircraft launch has been a disaster for Boeing and have caused the airlines involved serious headaches.

LOT does have its problems but this has been made considerably worse by having to ground their 787 fleet for a lengthy period.

Same for DY. Some people are so protective of Boeing they try and argue that it's the airline's fault for not having a spare 787 or two sitting around incase another goes tech. We're talking about one of the most technologically advanced airliners in the world. These aircraft should have been fit for purpose on delivery, not plagued by a raft of potentially serious faults and oversights that force groundings.

It will obviously affect smaller airlines more who do not have the extra capacity to replace aircraft that go tech but Boeing should do the decent thing here and compensate the airlines who have had losses as a direct result of having 787 problems. If not, this could well affect how these airlines order in the future and Airbus is a very good competitor who would be more than happy to take on some more customers!

[Edited 2013-09-26 04:50:24]


Happy -go- lucky kinda guy!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12145 posts, RR: 34
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 32093 times:

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 11):
100% true, but on the other hand LO might be jumping on DY wagon to seek compensation. I wonder how all this all pan out...(not that they will make it public BTW)

LOT is seeking compensation since the grounding.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2259 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 32020 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 13):
LOT is seeking compensation since the grounding.

I know, but maybe they are following the old saying : "never kick a man unless he is on the floor", seeing that Boeing Execs are in Norway, maybe they are trying to make more pressure and get some "freebies".

Never hurts anyone to ask....LOL

TRB.



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 2095 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 31850 times:

News about compensation to national carriers are for domestic consumption, just to show tax payers carrier is hard at saving their money. In reality Boeing never pays much, only requirement is to call as many news outlets they can and tell how difficult the compensation negotiations were with the carrier. Local media runs with story, tax payers are happy, Boeing is happy and carrier is happy. Because of non-disclosure agreements no one knows the actual amount. It could be dollar.

User currently offlinejox From Sweden, joined Jan 2003, 124 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 31778 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

But Norwegian has nothing to do with the taxpayer's money... The flying public, yes - but DY is not state-owned.

User currently offlinepetera380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 353 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 31795 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This doesn't help:

B787: missing filters in Rolls-Royce engines at LOT Polish Airlines

blog.seattlepi.com/flyinglessons/2013/09/23/lot-dreamliners-spend-the-weekend-grounded/


User currently offlineLO231 From Belgium, joined Sep 2004, 2392 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 31713 times:

Not only LO suffered during grounding period, but also during wait period for I think 4 years of past original delivery date...

And now, according to Polish news, 2 dreamliners were grounded again as they discovered no fuel filters were even installed on two frames...

Thats why you see EuroAtlantic 772 and 763 on flight radar flying with LO flight nrs, I guess.. I think Poles are fed up with the dreamcrap, after it being all over news, they interviewed a pax coming in at WAW. He said situation was tence on board during whole flight, although it went uneventful... Its just scaring people off,

I know, all of us Anetters would fly on a burning flying carpet, if allowed and possible. And cheap. Imagine trip reports...



Got both LO 788 frames already, next LO E95 and 734 BRU-WAW-BRU
User currently offlineSpeedbored From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2013, 327 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 31298 times:

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 15):
News about compensation to national carriers are for domestic consumption, just to show tax payers carrier is hard at saving their money.

Care to provide some evidence to support such a crazy statement? Why would 'national carriers' be treated any differently from other airlines?

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 15):
In reality Boeing never pays much

No, in reality, it is a matter of public record that Boeing has already paid out many 100's of millions in compensation for the 787 debacle, and has made provisions for quite a lot more compensation yet to be paid. Boeing are legally obliged to account for such things in their published accounts and to warn the markets about possible future liabilities in their public financial statements.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 15):
Because of non-disclosure agreements no one knows the actual amount.

Any straight cash compensation payments cannot be hidden, regardless of the existence of a non-disclosure agreement, as they would have to be included in the published accounts of both Boeing and the airline. The only way for the parties to hide compensation payments would be when they are made in the form of discounts on future aircraft orders, spares, or other services.


User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1749 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 30953 times:

Quoting milan320 (Reply 9):
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't other airlines also seeking compensation? Wasn't JAL, ANA and now I heard Norwegian seeking compensation? If so, why shouldn't LOT be entitled to seek it.

For DY the matter of compensation was never discussed, the meeting with Boeing was how they would help to ensure that the planes can fly with minimal delays...

Anyway, I posted this in the other thread:

----------------------------

Norwegian CEO Bjørn Kjos has issued an apology on Facebook re. the problems (in Norwegian). I have translated it:

"I want to apologise to all our passengers that have been affected by the unacceptable delays on our long haul routes recently. I understand how frustrating it must be to wait for hours for your plane to depart.

Last night Norwegian had a meeting with Boeing where the company gave a clear message that the situation is unacceptable. Boeing said that they will put together a dedicated team that will continuously follow Norwegian to ensure that any technical challenges that occur going forward are dealt with immediately. In addition, they will make sure that the necessary spare parts are available at all airports we fly to and from with the Dreamliner so that our passengers won't be hit by large delays".



Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-CPH (320-BA), VXO-BMA (S20-TF), ARN-CPH (738-SK), CPH-LHR (320-BA)
User currently offlinemacc From Austria, joined Nov 2004, 1058 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 30897 times:

Quoting petera380 (Reply 17):
This doesn't help:

B787: missing filters in Rolls-Royce engines at LOT Polish Airlines

blog.seattlepi.com/flyinglessons/2013/09/23/lot-dreamliners-spend-the-weekend-grounded/

Whoah!
"A source tells me during testing at Boeing in Everett, Washington, mechanics at the plane maker removed the engine's fuel filters and failed to re install them. The planes were then delivered to the airline and began flying in passenger service - even though running the engines in this condition could lead to engine damage. "

Boeing really is working on its image!



I exchanged political frustration with sexual boredom. better spoil a girl than the world
User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 2095 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 30437 times:

Quoting Speedbored (Reply 19):
No, in reality, it is a matter of public record that Boeing has already paid out many 100's of millions in compensation for the 787 debacle, and has made provisions for quite a lot more compensation yet to be paid.

You are quoting another news article. At the time of B787 grounding there were only 6 carriers, two Japanese carriers doesn't need to paid because Japan is the source of the source of the problem. Very few of remaining 28 were in commercial service. Why would Boeing pay $100s of Millions.

Quoting Speedbored (Reply 19):
Why would 'national carriers' be treated any differently from other airlines?

Because for national carriers news is more valuable than cash.

Quoting Speedbored (Reply 19):
Any straight cash compensation payments cannot be hidden, regardless of the existence of a non-disclosure agreement, as they would have to be included in the published accounts of both Boeing and the airline.

I rest my case. BTW how much BA paid for each B788.

[Edited 2013-09-26 06:11:13]

User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 30186 times:

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 22):
At the time of B787 grounding there were only 6 carriers, two Japanese carriers doesn't need to paid because Japan is the source of the source of the problem.

Huh? You are kidding – right?  Wow!



Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13271 posts, RR: 100
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 30189 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From the OP link:Polish national airline LOT has given Boeing until the end of the year to settle on compensation over faults with its 787 Dreamliners or face court action, the company's chairman was reported as telling a newspaper on Thursday.

How are we all getting so excited about that? LOT says they're owed money (which they direly need) and they'll go to court if not paid.   

We all know there have been issues with the 787.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
25 avek00 : Because while the 787s were inoperable, lease/financing payments still had to be made, crews sat idle, and schedules had to be reworked at great expe
26 TheRedBaron : Signature material. I am glad this very ominous thread, has had a couple of very good jokes. Back on topic, I wonder if Boeing is doing some damage c
27 EPA001 : He must be. Because Japanese airlines have nothing to do with Japanese manufacturing firms. Even if they were the cause of the B787 problems. But by
28 DTW2HYD : All valid points and Boeing need to compensate. But throwing a number $100s of Millions!!! Boeing's liability is not unlimited.
29 EPA001 : It is limited to the extend of what has been written down in the purchase contracts the airlines and Boeing have signed together when they formalised
30 DTW2HYD : So lets assume the purchase price $100 Million a pop, Do you think the compensation clause for a single plane exceeds $100 Million. There were only 2
31 Speedbored : In the big business world, what is written in the contract actually tends to be more of a start point for negotiations. If Boeing cares about their o
32 EPA001 : No, I don't think so. And nowhere have I said that a compensation could be worth $ 100 million for a single plane. But if in the contracts would have
33 Post contains images EPA001 : Very well written. And I totally agree with your post.
34 roswell41 : If the compensation Boeing had to pay out exceeded the value of the airframe, I am sure Boeing would offer to take back the airframe or the customer w
35 Speedbored : I doubt anyone thinks that. And I'm not aware that anyone has tried to claim such a thing. Fortunately for the shareholders (many of which are not Ja
36 JHwk : The blame is really shared between suppliers and Boeing. Boeing for asking the impossible of their suppliers (shared risk), and the suppliers for acc
37 UALWN : Interesting. Then I guess that, by the same logic, UA won't be compensated either, because Boeing for sure shares some blame, and both Boeing and Uni
38 DTW2HYD : You are the one who dragged me in to off topic discussion by claiming Boeing paid 100s of Millions of dollars and you have receipts for that. Can you
39 dynamo12 : Boeing is more likely to respond I think with an engineering solution in these cases (increased customer engineering support). This is a win-win. The
40 PresRDC : BAck when I was drafting and negotiating jet engine contracts with airlines, every contract we executed had such a clause. This was a walk-away provi
41 holzmann : Question: when the 777 was initially being built, was it being built by experienced pros at the end of their Boeing career? What happened in the meant
42 PresRDC : It is a basic tenant of contract law that sellers are responsible for the performance of their subcontractors. If a part or service obtained from a s
43 PresRDC : Which is how compensation is provided 90% of the time. That said, I am not sure that discounts are treated differently than cash compensation from an
44 kanban : While everybody is assessing blame, where are these low pressure filters located, and how often are the changed? Also one report said hydraulic filte
45 OA412 : The Comet was a much bigger leap in technology in its day than the 787 is today. The Comet was the very first passenger jet in a world of props, flyi
46 exFWAOONW : I've heard Alan Mulally had a lot to do with how well the 777 entered service. Ford stole him from Boeing. I'm sure he was far from the only reason.
47 max999 : I completely agree here. I can think of two caveats to this though. One is how Boeing defines the criticality of the client relationship. For Boeing,
48 LTC8K6 : Depending on which story you read, the engines were missing oil, fuel, or hydraulic filters.... Most of the accounts seem to have it as low pressure f
49 max550 : According to the article in Seattlepi the filters were removed in Everett and Boeing failed to reinstall them, so you're correct. Why would you hope
50 chiad : Not only has it been in service for two years, the B787 had 3.5 years before that (during the delay) to work out hick-ups.
51 TheRedBaron : The post was removed since its clearly flame bait. Since we wont know how the compensation pans out, and all $$$ related is pure speculation, I wonde
52 airmagnac : So you're suggesting that airlines should consider themselves lucky and not complain, simply because their aircraft don't crash ? Boeing presented a
53 Post contains images EGPH : I think LOT, and indeed any other airline which finds itself out of pocket due to faults by Boeing or any of Boeing's suppliers should sue Boeing if t
54 motorhussy : Yes, NZ has remained fairly quiet publicly about the massive impact of 789 delays on their short to medium timeframe longhaul strategy, yet their 77W
55 peterinlisbon : I wonder if their lawyers could argue they should get compensation on the grounds that Boeing didn't actually deliver the whole aircraft, as their wer
56 wroord : On what basis you keep writing about Lo over order of aircraft. They need 5 for their current and they have plans to expand their network so they bou
57 Post contains images RyanairGuru : And here-in lies a lawyer's dream Various Consumer Protection and Sales of Goods laws prevent the seller from limiting their liability, even if expre
58 RickNRoll : In my mind it's a change of corporate culture. Executive salaries have risen far more than salaries for the rest of the workforce. They justify this
59 747megatop : If you or me were one of the first few customers to buy a "chevy volt" or a "toyota prius" when they started coming off the assembly line and had to
60 BestWestern : The problem is that the current network isn't profitable. Increasing the size of the long haul fleet by 60% is commercial suicide when your current f
61 BestWestern : Another example of LOT yield issue was Hanoi. Load Factor was 90%, yet 75% of LOT's Hanoi pax were sold in Europe excluding Poland. Even though full i
62 checksixx : As far as the fuel filters go, they did a pre-delivery inspection. The fuel filters not being there now should be an internal issue at LOT...not a Boe
63 CrossChecked : Imagine YOU had bought a Prius when this technology was first released. The car broke down and was unuseable for some time. Would you go after Toyota
64 IndianicWorld : Boeing went to market making PROMISES about performance. It gave airlines what is currently a lemon in many peoples eyes. Can you not expect those cus
65 DTW2HYD : Good analogy, wrong example. First of all unlike Boeing, Toyota or its Dealers never going to acknowledge there is a problem with their car. Its alwa
66 Unflug : Even less if one of the promises was to decrease maintenance cost with the innovation.
67 SKAirbus : I just posted in the DY thread that one of Norwegian's 787s has suffered a hydraulic failure in BKK and is currently grounded. It should have flown to
68 flyglobal : Yes they did, but they may have not expected to check for Parts missing which are not supposed to be removed? So to give you an example: When you bri
69 Post contains links Speedbored : Really? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24294019
70 DTW2HYD : So you are saying issuing a recall for a 2004 model in 2013 is proactive. Regarding recall process, when National Highway Traffic Safety Administrati
71 Speedbored : No, I'm simply saying that the fact that they have issued a recall today disproves your statement that they are as quite clearly, they have just done
72 DTW2HYD : When LOT complains about B787, Boeing responds. When a Toyota owner complaints to a Toyota dealer, they ignore. Issuing a recall after NHSTA gets inv
73 Speedbored : I do. But that doesn't make either of your statements true.
74 DTW2HYD : There is no way I can prove a off topic issue here. Start a new thread in non-aviation or stop complaining.
75 Unflug : You started that "off topic issue", by the way...
76 DTW2HYD : No, I was responding to a Toyota Prius analogy in post 63.
77 PresRDC : Sure. That would be breach of contract. IME with the industry, these issues are typically settled by the business people, not the lawyers. We get cal
78 Unflug : That analogy was not off topic, it was used to explain an on topic opinion. I rather think it gets off topic with this claim: But never mind, better
79 delta777jet : LOT can complain as much as they want, if their agreement says that compensation is due they will probably get it. If not, that's their bad luck. I al
80 Unflug : Not necessarily. If the product is far off the mark they may be in a legal position to return it and get the money back. If that is the case Boeing w
81 DTW2HYD : Is there any precedence to this argument? Only hypothetical scenario I can only think of a is when most CAAs revoke airworthiness certificate.
82 Post contains links 747megatop : Seattletimes has a detailed article on this story - http://seattletimes.com/html/busines...gy/2021897491_787norwegianxml.html
83 wroord : The airline usually does not touch the engine, especially on a new just delivered frame. Part of the problem was outdated fleet of long distance flee
84 JoeCanuck : The ramifications go beyond LOT. Boeing wants to be selling these things for 20+ years. If it looks like they are dumping problems on customers, (esp
85 BestWestern : The 767 isn't outdated - many other airlines continue to make money with what is a reliable workhorse of the sky. Poland doesn't have the traffic bas
86 RyanairGuru : But that doesn't mean that the validity of the term couldn't be challenged. Whether they would be successful or not I cannot say, but it is an intere
87 angmoh : This is totally and utterly incorrect. I have worked for an american supplier and we (I was part of the design team) supplied a component which could
88 IPFreely : Boeing would be very short sighted if they follow your advice. Which is why it won't happen. If Boeing produces a product that does not meet promises
89 ThomasCook : That is uniformed rubbish. Are you seriously saying that Boeing couldn't give a damn about a customer operating it's flagship aircraft with orders fo
90 mjoelnir : In a lot of countries it does not matter if you write a waiver for implied warranties into the contract, the implied warranties apply, you can not wa
91 DTW2HYD : Probably true but not applicable here. Customer has to file a lawsuit in US, most likely in Cook County, Illinois (I am guessing based on Boeing HQ).
92 mjoelnir : I do not want to go in a long discussion of laws, but when you export often the rules of the importing countries apply, all the same what you write i
93 ltbewr : I suspect that the sales and service contracts between the airline makers and airlines - both based in the USA and elsewhere - have strong financial l
94 Speedbored : No probably about it. There are very many countries where it is not possible to waive legal rights, or for contract terms to alter the application of
95 PresRDC : They could, but, in my (quasi) educated opinion, they would likely be unsuccessful, largely because of the army of lawyers you mention will work agai
96 mjoelnir : But Boeing for example is still the OEM and could be still liable according to certain rules in the importing country. It does not always matter who
97 DTW2HYD : Thanks for clarifying. Most international contracts I was involved had one (in rare cases two) agreed upon jurisdictions. For some reason few here th
98 BestWestern : . Usually the dominant partner in the relationship has a say as to where the legal home of the contract Each side prefers home advantage. A contract
99 ltbewr : For USA based contracts, it will usually be the Federal District courts in NY City or (Southern and Eastern Districts), Delaware or State Courts, espe
100 DTW2HYD : Thank you both for your insights. My experience is with IT industry and ability to sue anywhere in the world for any amount is unheard of, at least I
101 PresRDC : In a commercial transaction, the parties are free to set the governing law and dispute resolution procedures as they see fit. The only possible excep
102 PresRDC : You wouldn't want to contract using UK Law, as that would include Scottish law, which is more like a continental law system (France, Germany, etc.) t
103 mjoelnir : You are still in black and white, like international law would be simple. Lets say the contract brakes the rules of a country the goods are exported t
104 Speedbored : I agree that international law is not simple but I think you're getting a bit mixed up between commercial law and consumer protection law. The sort o
105 mjoelnir : I do not get mixed up!!!!!!!! I am talking about industrial equipment. I do not produce consumer equipment. Some countries, the USA included, do not
106 Speedbored : We're not talking here about waiving rules, we're talking about what laws end up applying to a particular aircraft sale. And you'd be quite right to
107 mjoelnir : If you fly an USA produced airplane on a USA registration to another country than it is not an export, but when you register an USA made aircraft in
108 cmf : Always (at least) two sides to the story. Sounds as the buyer would like continental law.
109 Gonzalo : Can the Certification entities be a target for compensation ?? I'm asking because (I guess) the airlines put some degree of their trust in a new airf
110 PresRDC : Iceland may well take that stance, but is that judgment going to be enforceable outside of Iceland? A judgment is only as good as the winning party's
111 PresRDC : In my experience, airlines did not push to have continental law govern the contract. If an airline insisted on it, we would probably have walked away
112 cmf : Why? What in continental law is so dangerous to you that you rather walk away? You have me intrigued as there is no shortage of companies operating s
113 BestWestern : What happened to the 787 that diverted to KEF last night? Still there, or back in WAW?
114 goosebayguy : Think its about an air pressure indication.
115 mjoelnir : In my case it was a USA court that told me that regarding the case it did not matter what was written in my contract with the first buyer of the equi
116 konrad : It was a transponder issue. The passengers were picked by a 734 and E95 sent from Warsaw. The issue must have been promptly fixed as the 788 is quest
117 ThomasCook : You seem to be misinformed regarding LOTs 787 EIS. Their first 787 was delivered in November and commenced a 'Dream Tour' on the 14th December for 1
118 RussianJet : It's truly bizarre to suggest that simply because the product is new and contains many novel technologies, the airlines shouldn't complain about it no
119 BestWestern : Konrad, that's how a long haul airline works and is not lunacy. If their twenty year old 767s can operate such a schedule, so should their 787s. Winte
120 LO231 : Polish news reported a loss of around 100 million PLN which is nothing near millions of dollars, but dont forget LO waited years after first planned
121 delta777jet : Thomas Cook I wonder if you work for LOT ? In general about performance of country you are right Warsaw and Poland were economically growing the last
122 LO231 : delta777jet, you are right... LO is losing customers, like me, to the likes of LH and KL... Axing profitabele routes to get help from the government i
123 wroord : I agree that LO should have gotten a lease for a newer 767 or A330 knowing 787 deliveries will be delayed. Using the outdated 767s for extra 5 years
124 LO231 : But LOT and Polish government are in love with Boeing with longhaul frames..., embraers were just a small deal, while 787 and F16's were to guarantee
125 LO231 : You are so right... BestWestern, been to Warsaw lately? I visit every 4 months or so... Every corner in Warsaw has a Vietnamese or Chinese restaurant
126 LO231 : 767 not outdated? Maybe the likes of Delta with sharklets or whatever you call them. Flew with cpt. Wrona EWR-WAW on SP-LPE , ex Varig in STar Allian
127 LO231 : wroord, 787 will work but I'm a believer that they should get some compensation from Everett... Flew on -LRA and-LRB in January on BRU promotional fl
128 ThomasCook : I work for neither LOT nor my (user)namesake. LOT have to cut their cost base. Painful decisions have to be made to compete with both the likes of Wi
129 LO231 : You have some connections with Poland I believe... I was born there but partial in my opinions... I love LO, they brought me to BRU with TU3 in 1990
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing Not Concerned About 787 Problems posted Thu Jul 20 2006 15:21:49 by EI321
Boeing's Bair: Talks With QR Continue About 787 posted Mon May 29 2006 08:15:20 by Leelaw
Media Reporting About 787 posted Mon Aug 12 2013 07:41:57 by AA777
Boeing Launches The 787-10 Dreamliner posted Tue Jun 18 2013 02:07:14 by moderators
Should Boeing Compensate The 787 Customers? posted Fri Feb 1 2013 19:26:58 by Gonzalo
AI Gets Boeing Loan For (1) 787 posted Thu Oct 4 2012 08:46:17 by rotating14
When Will Boeing Know If 787 Design Details Worked posted Sun Jul 22 2012 08:14:19 by 2175301
ANA Wants Boeing To Make 787 Windows Darker posted Wed Jun 20 2012 02:46:25 by sankaps
Delamination Prompts Boeing To Inspect 787 Fleet posted Sat Feb 4 2012 19:03:00 by RNOcommctr
Boeing To Deliver 787 To ANA Sept 26th posted Fri Aug 26 2011 09:31:33 by DFWHeavy