AJet Refused Robot Vacuum Despite Written Confirmation

On 22 September 2026 I travelled with AJet on flight VF1988 from London Stansted to Istanbul Sabiha Gökçen, under reservation code 4NNN51, booked in the name of Ali Bilal Erdoğan for two passengers. Before the flight, I contacted AJet via WhatsApp and clearly asked whether our Roborock Qrevo 2 Pro robot vacuum could be carried in checked baggage. I provided the exact battery details in writing: a 14.4V / 5200mAh = 74.88Wh lithium‑ion battery, installed inside the device. AJet confirmed in writing that, since the battery was below 100Wh and installed in the device, the robot vacuum could be carried in checked baggage with the battery installed. I have the full WhatsApp correspondence proving this. Despite this written confirmation, at around 10:30 on 22 September 2026, when my husband tried to check in the item at London Stansted, AJet staff refused to accept it simply because it contained a battery. We showed them AJet’s written WhatsApp confirmation, the battery specifications and the relevant rules, but they still refused the item. They then changed the reason and refused it on the basis that the original manufacturer’s box had a Dangerous Goods marking. We clearly explained that this was the original packaging and offered to show the actual device and its technical specifications, yet the staff still insisted on refusing it. We spent roughly an hour at the airport trying to resolve this issue with the staff. Only when there were about 50 minutes left before departure did they say they could inspect the item, while at the same time warning that this inspection could take hours and that my husband might miss his flight. Under this pressure and with no realistic alternative offered, my husband had to leave the robot vacuum at the airport’s paid storage facility in order not to miss the flight. As a direct result of the inconsistent and misleading information provided by AJet and the handling by the ground staff, we suffered concrete financial loss. We paid 1,572.65 TL for checked baggage that we were not allowed to use for the robot vacuum. We paid an additional £80 for airport storage at Stansted. On top of this, we will incur further documented courier or transport costs to collect the device from Stansted, which we would not have faced if AJet had honoured its own written confirmation. In light of the above, I request a full refund of the 1,572.65 TL checked baggage fee for this item, reimbursement of the £80 storage fee, and payment of reasonable, documented courier or transport costs that arise from having to recover the robot vacuum from Stansted. I also request a detailed written explanation of why your staff refused to carry the item despite AJet’s explicit prior written confirmation that it could be transported in checked baggage under the applicable battery rules, and how you intend to prevent such contradictions and resulting losses for passengers in the future. In addition, I expect appropriate compensation in view of the time lost, stress caused and the financial losses directly arising from this incident.