We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY
Comments
-
(Just playing devil’s advocate)
The reason most of us are sending one, two, even three letters to Jet 2 with regards each of our complaints is that I / (we)
wish to show any arbitrator that we (as the aggrieved party) has in a sense bent over backwards in giving them a chance to make things right.
In a sense, I wish it to be perceived that I have tried every option and that it will be with much regret and a heavy heart that I am FORCED by Jet 2 to go down the court route.
I know it will go to court / Jet 2 know that the only way I will possibly get any money out of them is by going to court. I am trying to make my claim look better by showing any judge that reads my case that I have exhausted every option.
In my opinion, one letter sent and one letter received, then "off to court I go", makes my case look bad.
However, I will not be deterred.
My claim is for 2000 Euro.... There is no rush.
If I get it, I get it, if I don't..... I don’t.
John
Interesting theory. However in practice the court gets its definition of 'reasonable' from the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct which only requires one letter giving 14 days notice of proceedings. If the defendant reasonably requires further time to furnish you with evidence, the Practice Direction merely requires that you provide a further 7-14 days.
Going beyond what the court itself says is reasonable does not buy you any brownie points, and only serves to play into the hands of crooked airlines whose priority is to fill your path with imaginary hoops to jump through.0 -
Blondmark, so you don't think it prudent to initiate a claim with an airline, and then send back an NBA after 14 days if there's been no reply, and then file MCOL or other court claim?0
-
Hi all, we were delayed 5hrs faro to manchester May 2012. I have been following this forum with great interest and yesterday received my 2nd rejection letter from Jet2. This does actually give an explanation for the flight safety shortcoming:
"I understand from your letter that you believe your flight delay was not caused by extraordinary circumstances. Please be assured we have investigated your claim thoroughly on an individual basis and I can confirm that the flight safety shortcoming was caused by a windscreen heating fault, which was an extraordinary circumstance which could have not been foreseen and which was beyond Jet2.com's actual control. Despite taking all reasonable measures to avoid the delay, Jet2.com was unable to do so. Under Regulation EU 261/2004 airlines are not liable to pay compensation if the delay was a result of extraordinary circumstances."
So I suppose my question is: are Jet2.com fobbing me off again or are they correct?
Does anyone know please?
Thanks0 -
Fobbing you off. Jet2 are claiming everything as EC.. In most cases the fault lies with their geriatric aircraft fleet and/or inadequate servicing maintenance given fleet age.If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide
The alleged Ringleader.........0 -
I see on the CAA website it says they may take up cases if the airline refuses to pay after sending an initial letter. Isn't this a more painless way to proceed?0
-
Mark2spark wrote: »Blondmark, so you don't think it prudent to initiate a claim with an airline, and then send back an NBA after 14 days if there's been no reply, and then file MCOL or other court claim?
The first letter is essentially a superfluous step and an unnecessary duplication in the process of making any claim. If you have a claim relating to a flight delay or cancellation, then the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct only requires that you exchange information about the issue (s.1.1(1)) providing sufficient information to enable the other party to understand the issues (s.4.4(1)).
"Exchanging Information before starting proceedings"
7.1 Before starting proceedings –
(1) the claimant should set out the details of the matter in writing by sending a letter before claim to the defendant. This letter before claim is not the start of proceedings; and
(2) the defendant should give a full written response within a reasonable period [normally 14 days], preceded, if appropriate, by a written acknowledgement of the letter before claim.
(3) where a matter requires the involvement of an insurer or other third party or where there are issues about evidence, then a full response should normally be provided within 30 days;
So the legal requirement expected by the courts is one letter before claim providing 14 days notice of proceedings, or up to 30 days where the other side requests further time to locate evidence.0 -
wondered if anyone had comments on these Jet2 reasons for delay in this
letter 0 -
wondered if anyone had comments on these Jet2 reasons for delay in this letter
Your letter linked me to a young lady on a webcam with no clothes on offering services that were not strictly relevant to delayed flights. Notwithstanding this, Jet2's letter is a gift in the form a signed confession that your flight was affected by knock-on technical problems. A double whammy because technical problems aren't generally extraordinary circumstances (C-549/07 Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia) and the knock-on effect of extraordinary circumstances from a previous flight don't create ECs on your flight (C-22/11 Finnair Oyj v Timy Lassooy).0 -
Your letter linked me to a young lady on a webcam with no clothes on offering services that were not strictly relevant to delayed flights. Notwithstanding this, Jet2's letter is a gift in the form a signed confession that your flight was affected by knock-on technical problems. A double whammy because technical problems aren't generally extraordinary circumstances (C-549/07 Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia) and the knock-on effect of extraordinary circumstances from a previous flight don't create ECs on your flight (C-22/11 Finnair Oyj v Timy Lassooy).
thanks ive changed that link if you want to edit itout of your post- apologies. Do you think I should quote those cases in my initial letter?0 -
Hi all
Received my reply from J2 with the above mentioned speel with the specific technical fault as a 'left hand auxillary pitot issue'.....well in that case ill drop everything!!!
Incidently they have also stated that a Customer information bulletin was made at the airport re refreshments (balls). They have offered to consider reimbursing on production of receipts.
Awaiting reply from CAA who i wrote to concurrently. J2 have stated in the letter they will 'respond and cooperate fully'. Sounds like a challenge??....Off to court we go!!!! hi ho...hi ho...0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 350.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.3K Spending & Discounts
- 243.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.7K Life & Family
- 256.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards