Am I wrong to be angry with virgin?

[Minnie18]

Originally Posted by MrsBC

Although I fully support equality for any disability - this wasn't equality, this was positive discrimination against able bodied passengers.
Sadly we see, and are expected to just go along with, a lot of positive discrimination now - with disability, race, gender etc.
The people who say - 'hold on I also want to be treated equal to this disabled, person of colour, gay person' are just seen as selfish, discriminatory, homophobic or racist. Sad world.

See more...

Well said MrsBC

Something that I don't like in this social media world is when someone says how they feel or express their opinions they get called a troll 😪 or get called jealous 😪

[I love walmart]

The Daily Mail website would love this story I think.
I would give it a go. Bad publicity for Virgin, hit them where it hurts!

[mooray27]

Originally Posted by pav438

Well I have replied to them with examples off the thread and thank everyone for there support

See more...

Flipping Nora, I’d be fuming if I got that “answer”! I’m glad you’ve replied to them Pav. The fact that they are dealing with this by using a coding based system sounds to me as though none of the specifics of your situation will be passed on to the relevant department and for me that is the key thing. Virgin need to learn from your experience to avoid repetition for other customers in the future because (as you can see from the comments) a lot of people would’ve not been as compliant and patient as you in a similar situation.

[parkgirl]

Originally Posted by Mr Tom Morrow

Interesting to see the use of the expression 'reach out' Not very much used over here. Wonder who wrote it?

.

See more...

Probably someone in the Swansea office!

[Thorpy]

Originally Posted by pav438

Got to say I am disgusted with this reply and excuse .

Dear Mr. Ward 

Thank you for your response to my colleague Kristine. As a senior member of the customer relations department, I've been asked to review your case and consider your concerns further.

I’d firstly like to apologise for our unintentional delay in responding to you. It seems we are just a little busier than expected at the moment. Your patience has been greatly appreciated.

I’ve reviewed your case in full, and I’m afraid there is very little that I can add. We do need to remain sensitive in situations such as passenger’s disabilities. Although I do completely appreciate your disappointment and frustration.

In the case of an emergency situation, it will be the crew’s responsibility to ensure everyone is off the plane safely, and they would do this by any means necessary. With someone with reduced mobility, it can often be easier for them to be situated on an aisle rather than a window or a middle, as it would be easier for them to move around.

That said, I can see Kristine has already feedback your concerns internally for review. We use a coding based system to collate and present issues back to the relevant departments regularly.

Thank you again for taking the time to reach out to us. I know that you may not have been left with the best impression of us at the moment. I hope, in time, this will change and we have the pleasure of welcoming you back onboard.
Kind regards,

See more...

I have first hand experience of Virgin coding the complaint and sending it to the appropriate department...incorrectly. The department probably gets it and files it under not for us, leaving everyone with a false impression of how good they are, which generates a sense of arrogance which pervades through that letter.

Our complaint had the words delayed and luggage in them, so went to the lost/delayed luggage department. We had a car seat delayed, so they told us to hire one. Then decided that it is of paramount importance to reunite passengers and their luggage as soon as possible, which happened to be 4am in the flipping morning, when under their instructions it was not urgent! Surprising how scary it is having your door banged down in a strange villa at that time of the morning. (Local time not UK time)

There is nothing that can be done to retrospectively rectify the OP's situation. Getting something for free now doesn't somehow retrospectively make them safe. Virgin appear happy to chance losing a customer rather than risk offending one that is clearly self centred and wants to take it out on everyone else. I think the takeaway for all of us is to deal with the situation at the time. That cannot be a safe situation for any passenger to be in.
The Civil Aviation Authority might be interested.

[EssexSue]

I don't want to be over dramatic here but I fear that in an emergency situation the brief is to save as many people as possible as quickly as possible. The crew would not have prioritised the disabled passenger and if you couldn't get past him you would be collateral damage.

[Minnie18]

Originally Posted by EssexSue

I don't want to be over dramatic here but I fear that in an emergency situation the brief is to save as many people as possible as quickly as possible. The crew would not have prioritised the disabled passenger and if you couldn't get past him you would be collateral damage.

See more...

That's what me and dh have said since this thread went up.

[SimonB]

Originally Posted by EssexSue

I don't want to be over dramatic here but I fear that in an emergency situation the brief is to save as many people as possible as quickly as possible. The crew would not have prioritised the disabled passenger and if you couldn't get past him you would be collateral damage.

See more...

Until the subsequent investigation which would no doubt go to town on this issue. The Manchester 1985 tragedy was a watershed on cabin safety with lots of new initiatives emerging as a result of the investigation. Sadly , complacency starts creeping in again until another tragedy occurs.

Personally I think Virgin have handled this case terribly but I agree with Tom that they seem to have closed the case on this one.

Finally, I hate the term “reach out” unless it’s said or sung by one of the Four Tops.

[marypoppins38]

Originally Posted by EssexSue

I don't want to be over dramatic here but I fear that in an emergency situation the brief is to save as many people as possible as quickly as possible. The crew would not have prioritised the disabled passenger and if you couldn't get past him you would be collateral damage.

See more...

This is what I also thought. That’s why I would be asking them to clarify what they mean ‘by any means necessary’ to a finer point in their response. Their level of arrogance in that letter is astounding. I truly hope they do come on here and read this thread.

[Thorpy]

Originally Posted by SimonB

Until the subsequent investigation which would no doubt go to town on this issue. The Manchester 1985 tragedy was a watershed on cabin safety with lots of new initiatives emerging as a result of the investigation. Sadly , complacency starts creeping in again until another tragedy occurs.

Personally I think Virgin have handled this case terribly but I agree with Tom that they seem to have closed the case on this one.

Finally, I hate the term “reach out” unless it’s said or sung by one of the Four Tops.

See more...

Reaching out implies they understand OP was looking for help to me, they've not been helpful at all. I can however see both sides as there's no retrospective fix for what happened. What needs to happen is an attitude change to ensure it doesn't happen from now on. Virgin have said they have taken his feedback on board, and to be blunt, it seems like the majority of the thread simply don't believe that to be the case.

The civil aviation have a mandatory scheme whereby people are compelled to report the occurence of certain things with a view to making operations safer. Kind of like a protected mandated whistleblower scheme.

caa/Our-work/Make-...nce-reporting/

Which says occurrences as per the regulation should be reported.
The regulation is here...
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-cont..om=EN#page=3

section 6 is security and part 2 says difficulty in controlling intoxicated, violent or unruly passengers.

I'd say this was an unruly passenger, albeit in a passive way. He just didn't figure that any rules applied to him, he decided what what he would do and how he would behave, and that put other passengers at an elevated risk as well as at a general discomfort.

We don't know if virgins crew have reported this, they may well have, they might also have decided this wasn't serious enough to warrant reporting. Maybe OP needs to report it to the CAA then he's assured somebody independent has seen it and it's not been swept under the carpet.