|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 2 1350的cap说的是法律要求公司给被强行踢下去的人赔付至少机票的四倍或者1350，也
就是说赔付的下限是min(4xticket price, 1350)。并不是说法律规定最多只陪1350，
理论上航空公司为了避免纠纷当然可以自愿赔的多一点。乘客也可以提供证据证明自己
的损失远超过这个下限而在法庭上要求更高的赔偿，不过律师建议如果有这个打算的话
最好先不要接受航空公司的任何赔偿，以免被认定是已经达成和解。
现在网上很多人把1350解读成了法定赔偿的上限，尼玛英语水平真够烂的。
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
d****o
发帖数: 32610 | 3 ... or if the airline does not make any substitute travel arrangements for
you, the compensation doubles (400% of your one-way fare, $1350 maximum). |
|
z****g
发帖数: 3509 | 4 up to 1350
老中普遍英语水平是不行，但你的英语水平更不行。 |
|
|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 6 1350 maximal here refers to the maximal amount for the minimal compensation
required by law. Again, this means:
Minimum compensation required by law = min(4 x ticket price, 1350)
The law does not forbid the company to go above the minimum requirement or
the court to determine a higher compensation based on the actual cost
incurred to the customers.
You are another one who misunderstands this sentence.
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 7 Up to 1350 is for the minimum requirement. The minimum requirement is
4xticket price up to 1350. The law does not set a maximum. Customers who
believes he should be compensated more than that can claim it at a small
claim court. The lawyers, however, suggest whoever plans to do so should not
accept any other form of compensation before the court rules.
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
z****g
发帖数: 3509 | 8 法律强制的或者说法律支持的赔款到1350就为止了，说是上限毫无问题。
法律当然不“禁止”更高的赔款。有人愿意白送别人钱法律还能禁止？
compensation |
|
|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 10 说了乘客可以事后要求，小额法庭可以跟据实际情况判罚，实际上也常有这种情况。
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 11 In any case, 下限的上限和上限是两回事，一个是下确界一个是上界，不应该搞混了。
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
z****g
发帖数: 3509 | 12 得看承运合同里是怎么写的。航空公司的律师不是脑残的话肯定限制了赔偿额。想让小
额法庭推翻合同？很难。 |
|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 13 According to an article on WSJ, it is not uncommon for customers to be able
to claim a higher compensation later by suing the company. They do
have to remember not to take the minimum offer at the gate, and not to
accept further travel arrangement from the same airliner. Although most
people probably find it is too much a trouble.
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
|
m*****t
发帖数: 16663 | 15 你还嘴硬啊。
逻辑上说，法律条款需要定两个底线么？
岂不是每次都引发扯皮，乘客要求高的底线，航空公司给低的底线。
结果大家都不违法。
compensation |
|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 16 Minimum compensation required by law = min(4 x ticket price, 1350)
There is no upper limit set by law and the actual amount can be determined
by the small claim courts.
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
m*****t
发帖数: 16663 | 17 你脑子真的好有问题啊。4倍票价和1350取低的，集合上，跟1350是法律支持的上限有
啥区别？
人家这个是针对航空公司不需要调查就可以offer的法定赔偿，你要是申诉你的实际损
失比这个大，是可以打官司啊。
也就是说，航空公司offer了4倍或者最多到1350就肯定不违法了，你觉得你应该要更多
，就需要法官来判决了。 |
|
b***y
发帖数: 14281 | 18 应该是法律规定航空公司给予的补偿不得低于票价的4倍和1350元中较低的一个。
其他不解释了。
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 16 |
|
