Quote:
Originally Posted by jimworcs
I don't know why there is such a mystery about this relatively minor incident here. During boarding a passenger notices a laptop under their seat and thinks it was there prior to boarding and hands it to the FA as something that was left behind. There is no evidence of bad faith. The FA was seriously remiss in not checking with other passengers, as after every flight the cabin is supposed to be checked anyway for security reasons. However, the FA's actions of leaving the laptop at the gate was the right action given that it was assumed a passenger who had disembarked from the earlier sector had left it onboad. So far, so routine. There is no "theft" and neither is there any suggestion of malfeasance.
|
The flight attendant would not be remiss, at least as far as accepting a lost item, if the passenger who found the laptop led the flight attendant to believe that the laptop was found in the seat back pocket, in the bathroom, on the jetway, etc. In other words, where the flight attendant understood the passenger to have found the laptop may matter. I find the scenario in which the passenger gave the flight attendant an incorrect understanding of the situation more plausible than the one in which the flight attendant accepted a carry-on item that was stowed in a designated area as being lost or abandoned. More simply, I find it difficult to accept that any flight attendant would accept any item turned in during the boarding process as lost unless the person turning the item in somehow conveyed to the flight attendant that the item was found in place where it was not supposed to be.
Whether the passenger's actions that led to the OP being deprived of the laptop were intentional is not relevant from the OP's perspective. The act of deprivation should be sufficient for establishing a possible act of theft. Any investigation that is subsequently carried out would have the question of intent as an objective. It is, after all, the police department's job to determine if a possible criminal act is in fact a criminal act. I should also note, lest this is not clear, that I am in no way suggesting that the airline is criminally liable. I suspect that the passenger who found the laptop is most likely responsible for any action taken by the flight attendant by mis-representing the details of finding the laptop. Whether this mis-representation was intentional or unintentional is one question that I would expect the police to determine.
While in agreement with you regarding small claims court, I think pursuit of a criminal complaint may be a more productive first step. If, and it is a big IF, the police were willing to investigate this event; they are in a better position to identify and interview both the passenger and the flight attendant. The police are also likely to have a greater ability to determine the fate of the laptop after it left the flight attendant's control. If the laptop was passed on to a lost and found department and then disappeared, that would be a criminal matter as well. Further, a criminal complaint will be simpler for the OP to implement, only requiring the filing of a police report. Attempts at redress through Lufthansa may involve a great deal of time and communication, while small claims court will at least require the payment of a filing fee. Lastly, if the police determine that no crime was involved, civil action would still be an option. I also note that a police report, and the results of any investigation, may prove useful in arguing a civil action. If the police were able to trace the laptop from a particular passenger, to a particular flight attendant, to a particular gate agent, etc., to the point at which it disappeared, that would be a difficult position for Lufthansa to defend. I see no reason not to pursue any avenue that may result in redress.
As to
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimworcs
mystery about this relatively minor incident
|
My interest is stimulated by the involvement of another passenger. In some sense, this is not precisely an airline complaint, but rather a complaint about an airline's act prompted by the action of a third party. I find the actions of that third party to be questionable. Who, among the many travellers party to this site, has actually checked underneath their seat while boarding an aircraft? If you did check, would you assume that whatever you found was left by a passenger from the previous leg? If you noticed a laptop protruding from beneath your seat, would you not ask the passenger behind you before assuming that it was left by a passenger on the previous leg? If this is the act of a good samaritan, it is one that exhibits a lack of understanding of normal airline procedures for carry-on luggage that boggles the mind. If this passenger saw my car parked in front of my house, would he assume that I had abandoned the car and help me out by having it towed? Would this then only be a dispute between the towing company and me, with the third party held blameless? It is simply my belief that the passenger who turned the laptop in should not be completely uninvolved and held blameless. Since I view the intention of this passenger as being quesionable, I think that involving an agency that is empowered to question intent and motive is appropriate.