Man sues Etihad in Queensland over obese passenger

[whatmeworry]

This will be interesting if this guy wins the lawsuit, might have repercussions worldwide.

Mr Bassos is claiming damages for personal injuries, saying that being forced to twist his body for such a long time to avoid contact with the other passenger gave him a back injury and exacerbated an existing back condition.

Man sues Etihad in Queensland over obese passenger

 

[moa999]

Flight in 2011. Long time to get to court.

 

[TomVexille]

Interesting indeed. I wonder if this could force airlines to actually have policies in place for pax of size in Y.

 

[farstar]

Interesting indeed. I wonder if this could force airlines to actually have policies in place for pax of size in Y.

Given that Airlines are businesses if they are forced do anything about pax size it can only end up costing some or all passengers more. I can't see them making seats wider, probably they will start measuring passenger width before flights and if too wide you will have to pay for two seats .

 

[whatmeworry]

Given that Airlines are businesses if they are forced do anything about pax size it can only end up costing some or all passengers more. I can't see them making seats wider, probably they will start measuring passenger width before flights and if too wide you will have to pay for two seats .

Some airlines already force some pax to buy a "comfort" seat in addition to their original seat.

 

[JohnK]

There's obese and there's obese.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Interesting indeed. I wonder if this could force airlines to actually have policies in place for pax of size in Y.

They already have policies, they just don't enforce them. Most airlines are perfectly happy with allowing their clients to suffer, provided it's an easy out for them however it's very clear to all that if they sell a seat to a guest then that guest has the right to expect they supply that product in full....not 50% of it. Airlines already make bigger seats, it's called business/first class. If a person cannot afford to, or does not want to pay for J/F, than they also have comfort seats for sale. If a guest who does not fit in a single seat still does not want to pay for the extra, then they should be refused carriage as quite simply put, their size (be it due to medical or lifestyle reasons) should not be permitted to impact on any other passengers right to occupy, in full, the product they purchased.

Of course if an airline still wants to carry said oversized guest, fine, but let them wear the cost of providing a spare seat beside the oversized pax. They should not just expect other pax to pay the cost (in misery) of the decision the airline makes.

 

[Dr Ralph]

I'd like to know the name of the lawyer/firm representing him and see if they are acting pro bono.

If he looses, there will be some significant fees involved.

 

[Dr Ralph]

This will be interesting if this guy wins the lawsuit, might have repercussions worldwide.

Indeed!

How is it that no American has ever sued for the same complaint?

 

[SeatBackForward]

Indeed!

How is it that no American has ever sued for the same complaint?

The whole bell curve is to the right over there. Maybe they're just blissfully ignorant?

 

[Dr Ralph]

Flight in 2011. Long time to get to court.

No, not at all.

There often significant delays in bringing court action.

These can be for a variety of reasons, such as the injury you are suing for not emerging for a long period of time. As long as the claim is brought within the prescribed statutory time frame, there's no problem.

Other reasons include actually getting a court date. Remember, even serious cases such as murder often take years to come before the court, even after a person has been charged.

 

[clazman]

Dangerous ground.... if they start banning people on size, what is next non drinkers saying they object as a portion of their fare contributes to the cost of alcohol?

 

[juddles]

Easy fix - just make aircraft doors smaller.

 

[Dr Ralph]

There's obese and there's obese.

Well morbidly obese anyway.

 

[clazman]

Easy fix - just make aircraft doors smaller.

I suppose smaller seats didnt work

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Dangerous ground.... if they start banning people on size,

I think you've missed the gist of the thread. No one is suggesting banning people because of their size (unless of course their size is a serious concern that would prevent them from flying because of medical reasons).

The thread is about peoples right to enjoy the product they purchased. If a huge person is beside them and a fair portion of their excess weight is taking up the neighbours space, it is just common sense that the neighbour is being denied the product they bought and in the case of the person taking the legal action, it seems that negligence on the part of the airline caused and/or compounded his own back problems. To take your example, a heavily intoxicated person is not permitted to cause other flyers discomfort, so why should a heavily overweight person expect to do same?

It's also important to note, there are lots of "over weight" people who do manage to confine themselves to a single airline seat, but in the case of those who cannot, there are other options which do not include "banning" them.

 

[Dr Ralph]

Dangerous ground.... if they start banning people on size,

Who suggested banning them?

Maybe making them buy an extra seat or even better increasing the size of the seats (See for example this story http://www.traveller.com.au/airbus-offers-planes-with-wider-seats-for-obese-1z8t8), but not banning them.

 

[Dr Ralph]

Worth checking out this earlier thread as well:

http://www.australianfrequentflyer....sion/overweight-man-sues-air-france-8629.html

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Worth checking out this earlier thread as well:

Or this one, which is my own experience of this kind!

http://www.australianfrequentflyer....cussion/proof-the-yowie-does-exist-67118.html

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I think you've missed the gist of the thread. No one is suggesting banning people because of their size (unless of course their size is a serious concern that would prevent them from flying because of medical reasons).

The thread is about peoples right to enjoy the product they purchased. If a huge person is beside them and a fair portion of their excess weight is taking up the neighbours space, it is just common sense that the neighbour is being denied the product they bought and in the case of the person taking the legal action, it seems that negligence on the part of the airline caused and/or compounded his own back problems. To take your example, a heavily intoxicated person is not permitted to cause other flyers discomfort, so why should a heavily overweight person expect to do same?

It's also important to note, there are lots of "over weight" people who do manage to confine themselves to a single airline seat, but in the case of those who cannot, there are other options which do not include "banning" them.

More specifically, this thread is about the right to be safe from injury during a flight. Etihad is probably correct to a certain extent that your 'right to enjoyment' is subject to the same limitations on an aircraft as it is elsewhere in public... some people are large, some cough and sneeze. Babies will cry.

But this potentially goes a step beyond that, where the airline has failed in its duty of care.

The issue of not getting the seat you paid for (if another passenger fills half the space) is a related, but separate issue.