Airline removed me a because of confusion about medical supplies

Here’s an unusual case with an equally unusual resolution. It involves two airline passengers, a medical device and EU airline passenger law.

Now, before you say, “How exciting!” consider this — while the case may be exceedingly rare, and while this isn’t exactly a blog about medical supplies, the outcome of this medical device mishap could affect you on your next European flight.

So pay attention, you kids in the back of the class. Yeah, you know who I’m talking about.

Holly Mannchen and her husband were flying from Washington to Turkey on Lufthansa recently via Munich. She says they had sought approval for a portable oxygen concentrator before boarding. Her husband needed the medical device because of a lung condition. The transatlantic flight went smoothly.

Related: In today’s edition of The smarter consumer, learn how to speak corporate-ese.

But then things got complicated, as far as the airline and the medical device were concerned. Mannchen explains,

In Munich we were pre-boarded and sat on the aircraft while all the other passengers boarded. Just prior to takeoff, the pilot asked to see the concentrator, which we showed him.

At that time the pilot refused to let us fly and forced us off the aircraft. The pilot was ignorant as to what an oxygen concentrator was.

We were humiliated. We were escorted off the plane and told not to worry we would be on the next flight. When asked what was the difference between this flight that has not yet left, and the next flight, the gate personel answered “the pilot”. We were eventually booked on the next flight seven hours later.

Mannchen feels she and her husband was denied boarding under EU 261. They want their airline to compensate them.

The definition of “denied boarding” is a little slippery, though, and it doesn’t address traveling with medical supplies.

“denied boarding” means a refusal to carry passengers on a flight, although they have presented themselves for boarding under the conditions laid down in Article 3(2), except where there are reasonable grounds to deny them boarding, such as reasons of health, safety or security, or inadequate travel documentation.

Lufthansa sees things differently. It offered the couple a $100 voucher which needed to be used within a month. That didn’t work for Mannchen.

I contacted the airline on their behalf. It conducted its own investigation and send me the following response:

Passenger safety is the top priority for Lufthansa, and ultimately the Captain of an aircraft has the final say on such issues. As defined in AE 261 Article 2(j) “denied boarding” means a refusal to carry passengers on a flight, except where there are reasonable grounds to deny them boarding, such as reasons of health, safety or security, or inadequate travel documentation. According to the Captain of this particular flight, this was a health / safety issue and he had to make a judgment call, since he is responsible for all passengers. Furthermore, I have been informed that the passenger did not have a doctor’s note on hand to confirm that he was safe to fly.

Lufthansa was able to look into the situation and further research the issue, and so therefore the Captain of the second plane that the Mannchen’s flew on had more information when making his decision.

We completely understand that this was an unpleasant situation for Mr. and Mrs. Mannchen, and hope that they recognize the important responsibilities that a flight Captain has under him/herself. We will also contact the Mannchen couple and offer them each a $300 voucher with the hope that they will choose to experience a Lufthansa product once again.

I thought that was a pretty fair gesture, considering the medical supplies issue only delayed the couple by a few hours.

But it didn’t work for the Mannchens, so they appealed to Lufthansa’s executives. In a letter taking Lufthansa to task for the way it handles passengers and their medical supplies, and their medical device in particular, she explains her reasons for rejecting the offer.

While this falls far short of the EU Regulations governing refunds for denied boarding, this would be acceptable if my husband was ever going to fly again, but since that trip he has decided never to fly again due to the humiliation and trouble he encountered with your airline. The problem is that the voucher is in my husband’s name and therefore cannot be used by me or anyone else, thereby will go unused.

I respectfully request you review our situation. It is my and my husband’s hope to have his voucher reissued in my name. While this does not change your current offer of $600 it will allow the offer to be of use to us.

Otherwise, I would appreciate that you would follow the EU Regulation 261/2004. (our flight was greater than 1500km and the alternate flight delay was 7 hours) and issue to my husband and me each by check a refund in the amount of EU400 (or USD equivalent).

And guess what? Lufthansa cut her a check for $555.

Maybe it does pay to fly with your medical supplies.

  • Tony A.

    Actually MOST airlines require that you inform them at least 24 hours before departure that you intend to bring a POC on board and they also usually require a Physician’s certificate. Even for pre-approved POCs on USA flights, the FAA requires batteries equivalent to at least 150% of cumulative flight times. In other words, you cannot just show up during boarding and declare your intention to take a POC with you.

  • Linda Bator

    And their rules clearly states you must have a letter for the machine – which of course, they did not have.  And heaven forbid THEY should take responsibility for that.  The letter would have sufficed – no letter, no boarding. 

  • Linda Bator

    Which is WHY they require the letter of requirement.  To avoid any such problems.

  • Linda Bator

    Which, by LAW, requires a letter of requirement.  To avoid any such problems.

  • Bodega

    Not all airlines allow permit POC’s onboard.  Make sure to check with your carrier before you book your flight.  Most airlines require that you contact them at least 48 hours before your flight departs to inform them you will be traveling with a POC.
    Before you fly you must obtain a signed statement from your physician.  Pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations, anyone wishing to use a POC onboard an airline must obtain a written statement from their physician stating your ability to hear/see and respond to alarms, when oxygen use is necessary (all or part of the trip) and the maximum flow rate corresponding to the pressure in the cabin under normal operating conditions.  Here is a template of the Medical Verification Statement Required by Continental Airlines.  Every airline offers their own template for a statement, though they are generally all the same.  You should be able to use one statement for the majority of your air travel.  Like an I.D. it is something you present and keep with you.
    *******************************************
    The above is from the website oxygenconcentrators.org

    I seems pretty clear that the passengers didn’t do what they needed to do. While LH out of the US allowed them to travel, as LH does allow POC’s, the connecting flight carrier, might have been a codeshare carrier, which has not been clarified and that is why the pilot questioned this.  LH probably realized that they didn’t follow procedure themselves and are paying up now for their mistake.

    My question is; where did the passengers purchase their tickets?  Online?  This is a ticket I would never had allowed to be purchased without properly verifying in writing to the client what they had to do, provided they informed me about traveling with a POC.  I have assisted dozens of passengers over the years who had to travel with oxygen.  If you have special needs, the internet is not a mind reader and can’t see you to provide you with important information.  IMHO, the passenger failed their responsibility, too, along with LH. 

  • Joe Reynolds

    I think the pilot did not want the person on the aircraft because he appeared to sick to fly and the pilot would have taken on a risk unfair to the rest of the passengers. Any patient using an Oxygen generator on an aircraft rather than portable oxygen is too sick to fly. Remember the plane will go to 10,000 feet and there is less oxygen in that air than on the ground.
    The patient should have had a note from his doctor that he was OK to fly and still may not have been. I support the first pilot.   The second pilot just got away with it taking a chance. If that patient got into any kind of trouble on the aircraft like diarrhea and had to make frequent trips to the restroom that caused exertion at 10,000 feet cabin pressure he could have gotten into trouble. Were they in 1st class where they have 110 electricity to plug the oxygen generator in or did the aircraft have 110 electricity in economy.
    The oxygen generator was not a threat, the patient was. He should have had enough portable Oxygen to fly his distance without the generator.
    The first pilot was protecting his flight from being aborted because of a sick passenger.

  • http://www.roomfor5.co.uk Drina Murphy

    Hmm. seems a little harsh but surely you would fly with a doctors note explaining the medical equipment? I’m sure people reading this will definately think about acquiring one in the future;)

  • Fordmann

    While Chris did an awesome job telling our very long story in a shortened version, he missed a couple of key facts IMHO.  Lufthansa’s statement of  ”I have been informed that the passenger did not have a doctor’s note on hand to confirm that he was safe to fly.”  was an error and we did in-fact have a medical letter from my husband’s doctor stating he was cleared to fly.  The letter also stated he did not need the Oxygen Concentrator during flight, but simply to board and de-plane.  We offered to check it but was denied that as well.  The issue was strictly the concentrator and the pilot’s ignorance as to what it was NOT the health and well being of my husband.  It was not even addressed until after we were thrown off  and only to cover Lufthansa’s butt.  Additionally we had a copy of the FAA website showing the devise as approved.  Unfortunately our carry on had to be checked on our first leg & it inadvertently was checked in that bag, but we did have the Doctor’s letter with us.  We were cleared on our outbound flight out of Dulles and were on Lufthansa our entire trip so thought we were cleared all the way though.  My husband did due diliigence in checking the Lufthansa’s website to check for medical device clearance but could not find any info.  Lufthansa acknowledged that in the first letter stating they were going to update their website.  Additionally they agreed the pilot needed additional training and they were going to use our situation to educate their employees in the future. 

    Addressing the issue several folks have had about my  husband being “too humiliated to fly again”, that was not an attempt to more money, it was simply the truth and the certificates they had issued in his name would never be used, I just wanted what they offered in a usable format to us.  My husband is a quiet, private man and his disability has caused him enough embarrassment just having to wear his oxygen in public.  Having him boarded before everyone else then kicked off the plane in front of everyone was too much for him to handle.  Judge him if you want, but he will never fly again, and I know this to be true.  The compensation of a $555. check for each of us is only what the EU regulations call for when denied boarding of a flight greater than 1500 km and delayed greater than 3 hours (our delay was 7 hours in Munich with no way to contact those that were waiting for us in Izmir, Turkey).  We weren’t asking for more than the laws allow.

    I hope this clears up issues some of you have.  For those of you who have seen our side, thank you for your kind words and support.

  • Fordmann

    While Chris did an awesome job telling our very long story in a shortened version, he missed a couple of key facts IMHO.  Lufthansa’s statement of  ”I have been informed that the passenger did not have a doctor’s note on hand to confirm that he was safe to fly.”  was an error and we did in-fact have a medical letter from my husband’s doctor stating he was cleared to fly.  The letter also stated he did not need the Oxygen Concentrator during flight, but simply to board and de-plane.  We offered to check it but was denied that as well.  The issue was strictly the concentrator and the pilot’s ignorance as to what it was NOT the health and well being of my husband.  It was not even addressed until after we were thrown off  and only to cover Lufthansa’s butt.  Additionally we had a copy of the FAA website showing the devise as approved.  Unfortunately our carry on had to be checked on our first leg & it inadvertently was checked in that bag, but we did have the Doctor’s letter with us.  We were cleared on our outbound flight out of Dulles and were on Lufthansa our entire trip so thought we were cleared all the way though.  My husband did due diliigence in checking the Lufthansa’s website to check for medical device clearance but could not find any info.  Lufthansa acknowledged that in the first letter stating they were going to update their website.  Additionally they agreed the pilot needed additional training and they were going to use our situation to educate their employees in the future. 

    Addressing the issue several folks have had about my  husband being “too humiliated to fly again”, that was not an attempt to more money, it was simply the truth and the certificates they had issued in his name would never be used, I just wanted what they offered in a usable format to us.  My husband is a quiet, private man and his disability has caused him enough embarrassment just having to wear his oxygen in public.  Having him boarded before everyone else then kicked off the plane in front of everyone was too much for him to handle.  Judge him if you want, but he will never fly again, and I know this to be true.  The compensation of a $555. check for each of us is only what the EU regulations call for when denied boarding of a flight greater than 1500 km and delayed greater than 3 hours (our delay was 7 hours in Munich with no way to contact those that were waiting for us in Izmir, Turkey).  We weren’t asking for more than the laws allow.

    I hope this clears up issues some of you have.  For those of you who have seen our side, thank you for your kind words and support.

  • flutiefan

    “strange medical contraption”??!?! laughable.  POCs have been in common usage over the past few years. we don’t require medical documentation for a passenger to carry one on board. this pilot was just ignorant.  he probably thought it was actual an actual oxygen tank, which does require doctor’s documentation. but they are very different items and we have been trained to know that. Lufthansa eventually did the right thing.

  • flutiefan

    “strange medical contraption”??!?! laughable.  POCs have been in common usage over the past few years. we don’t require medical documentation for a passenger to carry one on board. this pilot was just ignorant.  he probably thought it was actual an actual oxygen tank, which does require doctor’s documentation. but they are very different items and we have been trained to know that. Lufthansa eventually did the right thing.

  • flutiefan

    actually, i HAVE been tested at the genius level. thanks for recognizing that.

  • flutiefan

    sure, they were after your precious knife. *snort*

  • Tony A.

    I have a question regarding the “math”. As far as I know the two (2) of you were denied boarding, correct?
    If the distance (measured by Great Circle Method) between MUC and IST is 1575 kms. and you were delayed arrival in IST exceeded 3 hours (even after re-routing), then EACH of you are entitled to 400 EUR.
    Chris mentioned only one check worth $555. You should be getting twice this.

  • Bodega

    I am pleased that you got to your destination and that LH is acknowledging their error, but there are a couple of concerns I still have.  Where did you pruchase your ticket?  With an online company or on LH’s webpage?  I don’t think you used a local travel agency, which might have been a better way to get these tickets as you would have been given the information concerning your husband’s needs.  LH does address health issues on their website.  While it doesn’t list specifics, it does say anyone with health issues, which your husband has, is to contact the carrier at least 48 hour prior.
    http://www.lufthansa.com/us/en/Help-and-Contact

    It appears that you didn’t contact the airline and waited until the day of departure.  Why?  When something so important was a concern, calling their toll free number along with checking their website shouldn’t have been a step that was overlooked. 

  • Bodega

    I am pleased that you got to your destination and that LH is acknowledging their error, but there are a couple of concerns I still have.  Where did you pruchase your ticket?  With an online company or on LH’s webpage?  I don’t think you used a local travel agency, which might have been a better way to get these tickets as you would have been given the information concerning your husband’s needs.  LH does address health issues on their website.  While it doesn’t list specifics, it does say anyone with health issues, which your husband has, is to contact the carrier at least 48 hour prior.
    http://www.lufthansa.com/us/en/Help-and-Contact

    It appears that you didn’t contact the airline and waited until the day of departure.  Why?  When something so important was a concern, calling their toll free number along with checking their website shouldn’t have been a step that was overlooked. 

  • Byron Cooper

    I am a pulmonary physician and I often deal with patients who require supplemental oxygen during air travel. In every case that I can recall, the patients have gotten the appropriate paper work from me and have not been hassled by the airlines. In one instance, I spoke to a physician for Lufthansa. When we discussed the details specific to the specific passenger and her medical situation and destination, we agreed that it was not safe for her to fly at that time, with or without oxygen. The Lufthansa doctor made himself very accessible and even gave me his home number. 

  • Fordmann

    Yes, we will be getting (2) checks for $555.  This is equal to 400EU at the exchange rate in effect at the time of our travel.  It is exactly what we should have been given in the first place.

  • http://traveltamed.com/ Azeem Ahmed @ travel tamed

    Hmm sad what happened with the couple. Still, i agree what they say “for the sake of passenger safety”, but there is one thing to understand that the pilot either needs to have sufficient knowledge about what the passengers carry with them or he can at least speak to his fellow concerned authorities and take a decision instead being arrogant and humiliating by keeping them out straight without even investigating the issue thoroughly.

  • Fordmann

    I did purchase our tickets through an online agency but that should not matter as we are capable of taking care of travel arrangements.  My husband had all the documentation he needed with him originally and was checked in and cleared upon arrival at Dulles.  It was his first time flying with a concentrator but had looked on the LH website for guidance and there was none.  They have since added the note about contacting the carrier (our trip was a year ago).  Since we were cleared in Dulles and notes were put in the computer record (we saw the computer screen with the note of clearance). We were forced to check our carry-on because it was slightly too large for their bin and some of the paperwork was left in that bag.  We did keep the letter from the doctor, and the concentrator clearly had the FAA approval label on it.  My husband was not denied boarding because of his health issue…he was denied boarding because they would not let the concentrator on board.  The Pilot was ignorant as to what it was.  I think he thought it was oxygen under pressure like a tank.  As others have pointed out, this is not a rare piece of medical equipment and the pilot should have been very familiar.  My husband did not need the Oxygen onboard, as I said we offered to check it.  He would not allow it.  We him we had information from the FAA website allowing them, he asked to see it but it was in our checked carryon.  He said, “then I can not let you fly”  so it had everything to do with the device, not his health.  LH immediately knew they had made a mistake after the flight took off without us, even the gate person knew the PILOT was the issue.  Handicapped people should not have to jump through hoops to be treated equally.  

  • Fordmann

    I did purchase our tickets through an online agency but that should not matter as we are capable of taking care of travel arrangements.  My husband had all the documentation he needed with him originally and was checked in and cleared upon arrival at Dulles.  It was his first time flying with a concentrator but had looked on the LH website for guidance and there was none.  They have since added the note about contacting the carrier (our trip was a year ago).  Since we were cleared in Dulles and notes were put in the computer record (we saw the computer screen with the note of clearance). We were forced to check our carry-on because it was slightly too large for their bin and some of the paperwork was left in that bag.  We did keep the letter from the doctor, and the concentrator clearly had the FAA approval label on it.  My husband was not denied boarding because of his health issue…he was denied boarding because they would not let the concentrator on board.  The Pilot was ignorant as to what it was.  I think he thought it was oxygen under pressure like a tank.  As others have pointed out, this is not a rare piece of medical equipment and the pilot should have been very familiar.  My husband did not need the Oxygen onboard, as I said we offered to check it.  He would not allow it.  We him we had information from the FAA website allowing them, he asked to see it but it was in our checked carryon.  He said, “then I can not let you fly”  so it had everything to do with the device, not his health.  LH immediately knew they had made a mistake after the flight took off without us, even the gate person knew the PILOT was the issue.  Handicapped people should not have to jump through hoops to be treated equally.  

  • Michael K

    Update: According to the OP’s comment below, they DID in fact have the right paperwork (a written statement from their physician).

  • Rosered

    Actually, it was a limited edition knife.  “snort”

  • Tony A.

    Actually you made it very clear in your former post that your husband never intended to use and did not need to use the Personal Oxygen Concentrator (POC) while inside the airplane. You also made it clear that your husband health while in carriage was not the issue. The only issue, therefore, was carrying a POC on board; and not it’s use.

    I would like to present a reason why you had this problem – the rules in the USA regarding POCs are very different from that of Europe’s and the rest of the World.

    In the USA, we have a law – Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) – and it’s rules are codified in 14 CFR Part 382 (aka Part 382). Part 382 is very detailed and lengthy and has many chapters dealing with POCs.

    To put it bluntly, for flights within, into and from the USA, the carrier may NOT bar you from taking on board and stowing an FAA approved POC. I quote the DOT FAQ addressing that issue:

    Source: http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/rules/FAQ_5_13_09.pdf

    53. May a carrier refuse to allow a passenger to stow on the aircraft any respirator, ventilator, CPAP machine or FAA-approved POC that does not have a manufacturer’s label indicating compliance with the standards of RTCA/DO-160 (current edition) or other applicable FAA or non-U.S. government requirements for medical portable electronic devices?Answer: No. Carriers must allow passengers to carry a respirator, ventilator, CPAP machine or FAA-approved POC onboard aircraft, subject to applicable safety requirements, even if the device may not be used onboard the aircraft.

    Having said this, your flight from the USA to Munich on Lufthansa was obviously in compliant with this DOT rule.

    Unfortunately, flights between 2 points that are not in the USA and operated by foreign carriers do not need to comply with US rules. So the flight from Munich and Istanbul simply had to comply with German, Turkish rules and EU directives.

    The EU directive concerning the rights of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air is EC1107/2006. Again, since you say your husband did not need to use the POC while on board, then we could reasonably conclude that he was not disabled. He was merely TRANSPORTING a POC.

    But consider this conundrum – how can an airline employee in Germany reasonably determine whether you will actually use the POC or not if you take one on board? I think you said that you had the doctor’s statement on a checked luggage and therefore could not show it in Munich.

    Again unfortunately, OUTSIDE of the USA, Lufthansa identifies a POC as a “Dangerous Goods that may be carried under certain Conditions”.
    Source: http://www.lufthansa.com/mediapool/pdf/90/media_832590.pdf
    Unlike USA regulations that give you the “right” to stow an FAA approved POC, there is no such “right” in Europe.

    I quote:

    Portable oxygen concentrators
    Description: Portable oxygen concentrators powered by gel batteriesfor medical use, also for use on board.Checked baggage: NoCabin baggage: YesApproval of carrier required: Yes

    Rule: The approval has to be requested via the LH Meda desk.

    So, according to Lufthansa’s GERMAN website, you need to seek MEDA approval to carry a POC on board (whether you use it or not).
    I assume you never filled up Lufthansa’s MEDIF form and hence did not get such an approval to carry a POC on board for the Intra-European flight. Note: A letter from your doctor is not a substitute for a MEDIF form.

    The MEDIF form complies with the IATA Resolution 700 and the data fields are formatted in such a way as they can be entered in the airlines system and transmitted accordingly. It is the airline’s Medical Department that clears the transport and use of the POCs; not the airport or desk agents. All the agents can do is enter an SSR code for MEDA, meaning the passenger needs Medical Assistance. And what this does is trigger an alert to all the succeeding flights so special passenger handling is done. In addition the Captain is ALWAYS informed of all incapacitated and disabled passengers AND the presence of any POC on board.

    While I agree with you that it is humiliating to be “escorted out” of an airplane (PS believe me it has happened to me several times when I was flying “standby” as an airline employee), I also can agree with the possibility the the Lufthansa captain on the Intra-European was only doing his job (No MEDIF/MEDA clearance, No POC on board) as per Lufthansa rules OUTSIDE the USA.

    Yes you were denied boarding hence you claimed compensation under EC261/2004. But your experience should be an example for ALL Americans wishing to take a POC outside the USA. We should not assume that the rest of the world have the same FAA or DOT rules that we have here.

    Furthermore, I disagree that Lufthansa crew need to do more training. There is no reason to train European and Non-USA personnel on US Rules when the rules of the rest of the World may be different. IMO the training should be for American Passengers – different rules outside America.

    Well, at least you got your Denied Boarding Compensation.

  • Tony A.

    Bodega, the only error here is the wrong assumption of many travelers – they believe that the Rest of the World operates with American-like rules and vice-versa. The air transport and use of a POC is only one example of this dichotomy. 

  • Julie Northrop2009

    Carver,
    There is quite a difference between a medical condition and carrying a medical device, I’m not debating that.  However, post 9/11, getting through security can be problematic. Especially if you set off the alarms in the metal detector.  Rather than having to jump through hoops to catch my flight, I make sure I have the right documentation so that they know the metal in my body is from medical procedures, not to blow up the plane.  I’ve found that the note is sufficient and gets me out of security much quicker than the alternative.  I do realize that having to clear a medical device is a whole other matter, but if you have the right documentation it shouldn’t be an issue….at least in the US.

  • Tony A.

    From an airline safety transport perspective, CPAP, POC, and oxygen canisters, etc. are NOT SIMPLE devices. They are dangerous goods.
    The airlines also assume that if one takes a POC on board that they either intend to use or may need to use it. Hence, the assumption of a medical condition.

  • Bodega

    No, handicapped people should not have to jump through hoops, but as you learned, there is a responsibilty on your end, too.  I am glad the carrier saw their responsibility in this confusion and stepped up.

    I had a message from United in the PNR one time regarding a client who had checked in and the airline felt she needed to be seen by a medical professional, which they have at the airport.  They would not clear her to fly unless she consented to this.  She insisted she was fine, but if the airlines have a safety concern, they have a repsonsibility to address it.  She was seen, cleared for travel and made the flight home. 

     

  • Bodega

    I concur.  I wonder what the pamplet instructions for this machine says about taking it on a plance?  From the little research I have done, it is recommended to contact the carrier.  When you health is an issue, looking online is just one step.  Why wasn’t the airline contacted?  They have a toll free number. 

    Here in the US, a passenger can be detained from boarding a flight if the airline is questioning the health of the passenger.  I had a message in a client’s PNR one day stating that a request for the passenger to be seen by the airport medical staff was made and would not be allowed to fly until she was cleared.  She initially refused, then consented and was cleared for her flight.

    I am sure LH felt there was some error on their part, but from what I read here, there were also errors on the passenger’s side, too. 

  • Bodega

    I would say, no, you weren’t capable of getting the information you needed and what did you save instead of using a travel professional?  I don’t want to come across as harsh, but when you knew a health issue was at stake, you took a chance and lost part of your vacation at the airport.  I have sold tickets over the years to people with oxygen needs and I take care of getting them the proper paperwork and contact person at the airline.  I also instruct what you need to have for boarding and what not to let go of when a carryon is gate checked.  You need to be prepared and that online company and airline website isn’t going to provide you with the needed tips.  You landed in a foreign country, not Kansas. 

  • Anonymous

    Except Lufthansa did accept the POC so the passenger did do something in advance that was acceptable to Lufthansa.  Once Lufthansa accepted the POC from the US, they cannot abandon the fliers in Germany for some nonexistent or fabricated risk.  That’s asinine. 

  • Anonymous

    Linda, as you’ve had a lot to say on this column, much of it very HARSH to these passengers, I hope you read the comments from Mrs. Mannchen below.  She did have paperwork from the physician.  The pilot didn’t accept it. The comments are under the username “Fordmann.”

  • Tony A.

    Nope they actually can. Even the US DOT acknowledges the limits of the regulations. In fact they use the sample USA-LON-CAI where they state the LON-CAI flight does not have to comply with USA rules.
    This is essentially what happened to the OP.
    You need to realize that US and European rules are not the same.

  • Tony A.

    Bodega, I am actually a perplexed at Holly Mannchen statement – Handicapped people should not have to jump through hoops to be treated equally. Well, I thought she eloquently made the point the the issue WAS NOT her HUSBAND’S HEALTH because he was cleared by his doctor to travel and that he DID NOT NEED SUPPLEMENTAL OXYGEN while in flight. In other words, her husband is not handicapped.

    If her husband had no intention or need to use it, then the issue is simply transporting a POC which is considered dangerous goods by IATA (whether the transporter is handicapped or not).

    Americans need to know that they cannot simply transport a POC by air within Europe or other parts of the World without the necessary paper work. And that paperwork is an IATA MEDIF form that is not used in the USA and Canada.

    As you said Munich ain’t Kansas.

  • Tony A.

    Also, assertions were made about the Lufthansa pilot being IGNORANT!
    Other posters piled on. I would like to know exactly what the pilot was ignorant about and why that affects his ability to safely fly his passengers from Munich to Istanbul. Is a German pilot required to have a mastery of FAA and US DOT rules regarding POCs if he is not flying routes to and from the USA? From the German point of view, maybe the OP is ignorant of their own regional/local POC requirements.

  • Anna

    “IMO the training should be for American Passengers – different rules outside America.”

    And that’s the take-home message from today’s story… if only people would learn!

  • Michael K

    There is no reason to train European and Non-USA personnel on US Rules when the rules of the rest of the World may be different. 

    —–

    Shouldn’t personnel who deal with international itineraries be trained in all the international rules that may apply to their airline?

    Does the airline not have some responsibility to determine at the point of origin whether the passenger’s itinerary is complete-able?

  • Anonymous

    Out of curiosity, has LH done anything about the pilot?  Have you been informed of any actions LH has taken with regards to the pilot?

    Thank you.

  • xpatinasia

    It’s amazing that their humiliation disappeared when they were given $550.