[AirlinesMustPay]

Originally Posted by Jetliner

Who knows what her motive is. She didn't get the exact seat she wanted, or they were out of her brand of soda that day - who knows?.

We don't have to speculate as to what got her angry. If the FA took away her carry on then invaded her privacy by opening her purse, then instead of giving it to her at the end of the flight they tag it to a further point, that is enough to get anyone angry enough to make an inflated claim.

It's like if the police go into a home without a warrant, conduct an illegal search, and rough up some of the occupants, after they leave the occupants suddenly realise that they had a wad of $100 notes under the mattress that went missing after the visit by the police. They know they have the police on the hook for entering without a warrant, and so they hope the authorities will settle instead of let their unlawful acts be publicised

[Silent Bob]

Of all the analogies used on this site, airlinesmustpay, your's just happen to be the worst. if the occupants of an illegal search realizes that money under a matress went missing, they'd have to prove the money wasn't hidden there because of something illegal i.e. drugs and/or a robbery. (police have been known to rob from drug dealers, etc) Most likely if they are drug users, they wouldn't report the case simply because they are dealers and don't wanna face time or fear of revenge of the cops who took the loot. Now if they did persue it, and the money was illegal to begin with, I do believe the city/state wouldn't settle with criminals (though i wouldn't be surprised if they did) and the officers would face serious charges. But ultimately the occupants of the house would have to prove there was a large amount of money under the mattress, and though the police did enter illegally, it would still come down to a back and forth he said - he/she said. It's actually deeper than how i put it, but it really is a bad analogy.

In the case of the OP, I do have doubts as well that the FA moved her bag full of valuables. In all my flights, I've seen the overhead get full, but never have I seen an FA take someone else's bag down and then move it to make room for others. When that happens those whose bags that do not fit in the overhead place them under their seats or they get tagged and placed underneath the plane OR the gate agent starts tagging bags before boarding because of the possibility that the space in the overhead will be limited. (this is usually done on the smaller planes). If an FA helped the OP put her bag in the overhead then there is no reason for staff members to start takin stuff down to make room. Make room for what exactly? Someone else's bag? That'd be stupid.

Do I think this tale is exxagerated and the contents of the bag inflated? Oh yes definitely. Why? Money that's why. People have done crazier things for money, especially when dealing with a huge corporation:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Wen...152355086.html (Woman chops off finger)


How much of a loss are we claiming here? thousands? millions? This is gonna be a tough case, but one that will work in the airlines favor. They may settle but for far less than what the OP is asking.

[AirlinesMustPay]

I also agree that the OP's loss is inflated and I thought that would have been clear from my posts. My analogy about the money under the matress also is about where someone makes an inflated claim. But both cases have this common thread, which is that where someone in authority does an illegal act, the victim, knowing he has the authority on the hook, is tempted to make an inflated claim. If you live in New YOrk I'm surprised you don't know that this often happens. Police sometimes conduct illegal searches and then face all kinds of allegations about things going missing. With regard to my analogy, persons do not have to prove that money in their possession is not from an illegal source. You would be reversing the burden of proof. The burden would be on those who allege illegality to prove it. Again, you can't be living in the United States and not know that someone accused of something has no burden to showing anything. Countries such as the US and England have led the way in establishing the rights of individuals. Lawmakers in other countries have followed your lead in enacting laws to protect rights of individuals, and now to my surprise, I see someone from New York saying that people have to prove that something is not illegal.

Anyway that is really a side issue. In this OP's case, I have seen this happen. People who last enter a crowded flight, find the overhead bins full. They look for space and sometimes go several seats away to find a space in an overhead bin. Before take off the FAs close all the doors on the bins. Sometimes a bag is protruding and the door cant close. It is not that the FA took out one bag and put in another. The FA takes out the bag that is sticking out, asks for the owner and helps the owner store it elsewhere. What seems to have happened here is that the OP did not see or hear when the FA was removing her bag and did not answer when the FA asked whose bag it was.

So the question of liability seems crytal clear based on what the OP says, but I agree that her alleged losses may have been inflated.

[Silent Bob]

Living in the NY, thus the U.S, believe me I know that cops do a little dippin even on legal searches. And I even stated that in my original post.

Of all the analogies used on this site, airlinesmustpay, your's just happen to be the worst. if the occupants of an illegal search realizes that money under a matress went missing, they'd have to prove the money wasn't hidden there because of something illegal i.e. drugs and/or a robbery. (police have been known to rob from drug dealers, etc)

So do I believe that police steal from drug busts, searches, etc? Oh definitely yes. My point is, going back to your original analogy, if the accuser steps forth and says "hey when those officers searched my house, they stole thousands of dollars" how can they prove their case, if the cops say they didn't do it? The burden of proof falls on the person making the accusation. You NEED proof before you can make any accusation or our legal system would be flooded with cases of people suing anybody simply because they can (And the U.S. is sue happy enough). Again looking at your analogy, we have an illegal search and money missing. If the, now victims, of the crime accuse the cops of taking it and the cops deny it, well then its a back and forth battle because there would be no proof other than the accusers word that the money was there.

and now to my surprise, I see someone from New York saying that people have to prove that something is not illegal.

I don't know where you got that, I don't even know what you're talking about at this point because it has nothing to do with my original statement. please clarify.

I have seen this happen. People who last enter a crowded flight, find the overhead bins full. They look for space and sometimes go several seats away to find a space in an overhead bin. Before take off the FAs close all the doors on the bins. Sometimes a bag is protruding and the door cant close.

That was my point originally, but in the case of the OP her bag was placed by the FA in the overhead a few rows away from her seat (her words), so it must have fit properly enough that it satisfied the FA to be there. But i don't see a gate agent coming on board and removing her bag from the overhead, moving it to the lower area and no one told the OP until AFTER they started take off. If they can find her during take off, why couldn't they find her before hand?

[AirlinesMustPay]

Originally Posted by Silent Bob

If they can find her during take off, why couldn't they find her before hand?

You hit the nail on the head Bob. Seems to me like you are arguing the case on behalf of the OP.

I think I had misread your post when I concluded you were saying that people would have to disprove illegality. Sorry.


In a civil suit, the Plaintiff does have the burden of proof. If the police find themselves illegally in someones home, the Plaintiff's job is very easy. To prove something in this case like if they took money, the first question is did they have the opportunity the answer is of course yes. Next did they have the motive, again putting someones money in your pocket to enrich yourself is always a motive. But the case does not end there. It depends on whether the Judge will believe the Plaintiff. Where it is a question of whose word the judge will take, it depends on what is believable. Is the Plaintiff a known criminal with a record? Police officers flouting the law by making an illegal search> That goes against them. If the amount of money is ridiculously high given who the occupants of the house were, the Judge may not believe them. But what if they say the wife had her jewelery in a cabinet wher the police searched and the jewelery went missing? Would a policeman have a motive to put it in his pocket? Well he would. Questions of fact like this are answered by the Court when the witnesses give their evidence in Court. The judge looks as who the people are and whether it is reasonable to expect that they would have had what they say they lost.

In this case, the FA or gate attendent was clearly wrong to take away the bag and I have no doubt that a Judge will find that she did take it away. The OP says there was a tag number. If that number was fictitious, Continental could pull that number up on its computers and tell her so. The fact that they hire lawyers to ask her for receipt tells me that they know that the bag was taken away but suspect as we do that she is inflating he losses. Again to prove her case in Court it depends in part on what is reasonable for her to have been travelling with. A lady going to a function will be expected to have some jewelry with her. If she says she had a diamond necklace worth $5,000, a Court will readily believe her. If however she says she had jewelery worth $50,000 a Court will want to be convinced of her means and that she is a person likely to have been travelling with that.

It depends too on the demeanour of witnesses in cases of who says what. The OP will give her evidence and the FA will no doubt be brought to court by the airline to say she did not take any jewelery out of the bag. The OP's lawyer will ask her just what you asked as I quoted you above. The Judge's job will be to determine who is lying

In this case the FA put herself in the wrong (just like the police who enter a home illegally) by taking away the bag. When flight is about to leave there are gate attendants at the door before the door is closed. They take hand luggage that cant fit and put in in the hold and give the passenger a tag for it. This has to be what happened. There can be any number of reasons why the bag could not fit. Another passenger may have moved it aside to fit his own bag. The FA took the bag to the gate attendant. They opened it to see a name. They found the name. Instead of immediately returning the bag to the passenger, they put it in the hold with the checked luggage and gave it a tag. The FA told her about it after the door was closed and gave her the tag number.

An entirely believable scenario.

My own experience is that airlines will try to avoid this kind of litigation. Even if the OP proves only $500 in lost jewellery, the airline's reputation will suffer immensely, if passengers get word that Continental has FAs who steal jewelery from hand luggage