Handling of luggage complaint (1)

May I reassure Mr Robby Borg of British Jet (The Sunday Times, September 17) that my preference is still to travel with Air Malta, because I consider it in the national interest to do so, as long as service and costs are comparable.

Air Malta did not have the Stansted flight that I required when I chose his airline. If he wishes to tune in again to RTK for the programme Stampa Cara, he might hear me reiterating the same position.

Regrettably, the current difficulties surrounding my luggage have made me rue my experiment elsewhere. My return flight to and from Stansted with British Jet cost me £173.04. I have taken flights to and from London airports with Air Malta at comparable prices, with the difference that when my luggage was damaged in a flight to and from Libya in September of last year, there was no quibbling.

It was immediately replaced with a new one. It is the trolley bag that had its wheels and foot guide wrenched off during my flight to Stansted with British Jet. It was indeed a year old but still new, unused.

Client satisfaction is by far the best advertisement. An attitude of "we have got him now, go for the next customer" is what may have lost Malta the edge in the tourist trade. An attitude of the client being always wrong rather than right, might be another. Clients are not hostages to entrepreneurs, or should not be, not even in Malta.

I note that Mr Borg has chosen not to reiterate what his employee Marie Louise Buttigieg said in her letter of August 24: "Please note that the airline is not responsible for damaged luggage, due to the fact that airports have several conveyors from which luggage could drop from one conveyor to the other, therefore such damage is beyond the airline's control...". Does this mean that he disagrees with her and holds that an airline does bear responsibility?

Mr Borg again harps about the fact that the form filled by his representatives in Stansted is neither dated nor signed. Is he implying that had the form been dated and signed, British Jet would have immediately replaced the luggage damaged on their flight? Is he also implying that this fault lies with Stansted Airport? I would have no difficulty in taking the matter up with the Stansted Airport authorities, were that the case.

However, I would like to remind Mr. Borg that said representatives at Stansted had told me that his airline had given them no instructions other than to address claims for damaged luggage and had not supplied them with any specific forms by British Jet.

Mr Borg also chose to ignore that his representatives in Stansted, on direct inquiry by me as to what I should do next, told me to contact British Jet when I returned to Malta. However, as indicated in my letter of September 10, I telephoned British Jet from London to see if they could do anything about my luggage before I travelled to the continent.

After much equivocation and having eventually spoken to British Jet representative Marie Louise Buttigieg, I was given the peremptory advice that British Jet could not help and that I had to wait until I returned to Malta. Hence, it would be the ultimate in cheek to suggest that, having done what his representatives in Stansted and in Malta told me to do, I should now be disqualified from having the new trolley bag, damaged on a British Jet flight, replaced or repaired by them because of some new interpretation or advice.

Mr Borg intimates that I stated that Ms Buttigieg took my luggage. I never said so. Rather I wrote that my luggage was taken and I was promised that Ms Buttigieg (who was not there at the time) would have telephoned on the Monday, which of course she did not.

I am rather unsure of the implications for the poor European Union in this matter. By his reference to EU regulations, is Mr Borg implying that British Jet has been exempted from all responsibilities for the safe handling of their customers' luggage? Is he saying that he and his alone are exempted from the accepted principle of deposit whereby, a person receives things belonging to another person subject to the obligation of preserving it and of returning it in kind? If yes, could he please give me chapter and verse, so that this may be addressed?

Does Mr Borg's reference to a Website imply that passengers must now read reams of bites in Websites before travelling? If so, why was I not warned to do so?

While awaiting his replies, might I again be allowed to enquire whether we should be surprised when numbers drop if clients - and tourists visiting us are clients - are treated in the same way? Do the tourism and aviation authorities and the Office of Fair Trading feel that they have any responsibilities to ensure an acceptable service to passengers by such licensees and that passengers are not held hostage?

Do they actually care to comment on whether licensees bear any responsibility for the safety of clients' luggage, not to mention the clients themselves? Finally, may I publicly acknowledge Air Malta for accepting their responsibilities immediately and without quibbling and replacing my luggage damaged on one of their flights, sadly only to be damaged on its maiden voyage on a flight with British Jet.