We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 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, Tui/Thomson ONLY
Options
Comments
-
Hi, well we have done what romanby1 advised and sent a NBA letter this morning, will see what happens now. Wont hold my breath, but you never know.
Will keep updating.0 -
Just received a reply to my letter I sent about 3 months ago to Thomson - they've investigated, no forms to fill in etc.
Background - flight from Rhodes-Doncaster delayed at take-off by over 5 hours due to technical fault that needed investigating and parts and engineers needed sending from UK. We ended up on a plane that was scheduled to leave for Glasgow an hour later, while they waited for the replacement plane.
Result of their investigation: technical fault developed while the plane was in flight out to Rhodes. They claim this was outside of what is normally in their exhaustive and wonderful maintenance schedules: "problem arises outside of regular maintenance and which is not the result of poor maintenance" and is therefore an "Extraordinary Circumstance". Therefore, no pay out.
As this issue arose "in flight", and isn't something that ought to have been detected during routine maintenance, therefore entirely unexpected.
Do you think I should take it to the aviation authorities? It just seemed like a fob-off really - we've looked at it, yes technical fault, couldn't possibly have forseen it, not our fault...
Thanks!0 -
mdcollins1984 wrote: »Just received a reply to my letter I sent about 3 months ago to Thomson - they've investigated, no forms to fill in etc.
Background - flight from Rhodes-Doncaster delayed at take-off by over 5 hours due to technical fault that needed investigating and parts and engineers needed sending from UK. We ended up on a plane that was scheduled to leave for Glasgow an hour later, while they waited for the replacement plane.
Result of their investigation: technical fault developed while the plane was in flight out to Rhodes. They claim this was outside of what is normally in their exhaustive and wonderful maintenance schedules: "problem arises outside of regular maintenance and which is not the result of poor maintenance" and is therefore an "Extraordinary Circumstance". Therefore, no pay out.
As this issue arose "in flight", and isn't something that ought to have been detected during routine maintenance, therefore entirely unexpected.
Do you think I should take it to the aviation authorities? It just seemed like a fob-off really - we've looked at it, yes technical fault, couldn't possibly have forseen it, not our fault...
Thanks!
The fact that they have subjected the plane to industry-standard and legally necessary maintenance checks is neither here nor there: you'd have to hope they did really, wouldn't you?
There is nothing in the regulations or the precedent case law that says that unexpected technical failures, which could not be predicted, are "extraordinary": after all, if specific technical failures were expected, wouldn't you expect the part to be replaced before that happened?
The Wallentin judgement is pretty clear on this: let's reproduce the relevant bit for old times' sake:24. In the light of the specific conditions in which carriage by air takes place and the degree of technological sophistication of aircraft, it must be stated that air carriers are confronted as a matter of course in the exercise of their activity with various technical problems to which the operation of those aircraft inevitably gives rise. It is moreover in order to avoid such problems and to take precautions against incidents compromising flight safety that those aircraft are subject to regular checks which are particularly strict, and which are part and parcel of the standard operating conditions of air transport undertakings. The resolution of a technical problem caused by failure to maintain an aircraft must therefore be regarded as inherent in the normal exercise of an air carrier’s activity.
25 Consequently, technical problems which come to light during maintenance of aircraft or on account of failure to carry out such maintenance cannot constitute, in themselves, ‘extraordinary circumstances’ under Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004.
Some of the airlines argue that the phrase "failure to maintain an aircraft" means that "if maintenance regimes were below the necessary standard". This is not of course what it means, as such a failure to perform these checks would be illegal. It simply means "failure to prevent an airplane developing a technical fault". If there is any doubt on this on this point, look at the last conclusion from the Wallentin judgement:The fact that an air carrier has complied with the minimum rules on maintenance of an aircraft cannot in itself suffice to establish that that carrier has taken ‘all reasonable measures’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 and, therefore, to relieve that carrier of its obligation to pay compensation provided for by Articles 5(1)(c) and 7(1) of that regulation.
Of course, don't assume that you can put this to the airline in a letter and that they will respond constructively. There's little point in being pen pals with them. If you want your money, you'll need to initiate legal action, unfortunately.0 -
Hi,
I travelled to Mexico on TOM092 Gatwick - Cancun on 14 Jan 2010.
The day before we were due to fly we received a phone call from Thomson saying that the flight was being re-scheduled for the following day due to them having to fly it out to the Maldives as that plane had broken down and they needed to get those passengers back to UK.
Problem is.....I have checked the flightstas website and it shows only a 15 minute delay??? NOT 24 hours delay.
Was anyone else on that flight that confirm I'm not losing my mind??
Thanks in advance0 -
So back from holiday and no reply from Thomson (any surprise?)
Anyway anyone got a good template for the MCOL website? And what is the easiest way to calculate the interest (8% per year calculated on a daily basis I think?)0 -
So back from holiday and no reply from Thomson (any surprise?)
Anyway anyone got a good template for the MCOL website? And what is the easiest way to calculate the interest (8% per year calculated on a daily basis I think?)
Have a look at the thread "Taking the airlines to court" - there's useful stuff on there, I recall.0 -
I started a claim for flight delay compensation on 11/01/13 for flights from Manchester to Rhodes and back again at the end of May/ start of June 2010 (sent all correct info to Thomsons re dates/flight nos and delay time-scales).
I didn't hear anything, so I sent an email 11/03/13 which got no response. I then rang them in May and was told they had a massive workload and would be in touch.
Finally got a telephone call from them today and they have said that as I did not raise the claim within 2 years there is no case.
I did ask for info about why the flights were delayed but was told they don't have to give me that info as there is no case.
Don't think I'm going to get a confirmation letter or anything else from them.
Is there any point in carrying on with this or is she correct and I should just drop it ?0 -
I started a claim for flight delay compensation on 11/01/13 for flights from Manchester to Rhodes and back again at the end of May/ start of June 2010 (sent all correct info to Thomsons re dates/flight nos and delay time-scales).
I didn't hear anything, so I sent an email 11/03/13 which got no response. I then rang them in May and was told they had a massive workload and would be in touch.
Finally got a telephone call from them today and they have said that as I did not raise the claim within 2 years there is no case.
I did ask for info about why the flights were delayed but was told they don't have to give me that info as there is no case.
Don't think I'm going to get a confirmation letter or anything else from them.
Is there any point in carrying on with this or is she correct and I should just drop it ?
It is a profound question 2 JAGS: "Is there any point in carrying on?" ....0 -
Have a look at the thread "Taking the airlines to court" - there's useful stuff on there, I recall.
Thanks
Considering that my flight was from Manchester, which thomson have a large fleet at, could the extraordinary circumstances be easier to brush aside?
e.g. the plane had a mechanical failure, my response would be there were several other aircraft that could (and did) be used?
there was no flight crew, my response would be surely such a large airline with such a large base would have flight crew on standby?
Obviously these are just basic q&a's but would this be feasible?0 -
So...this is an interesting one...
Was forced to file against Thomson as they kept claiming Extraordinary Circumstances when we all know this still does not cover them. Many letters went back and forth, what a waste of my time.
They forced me to take the matter to Court. They then offered to settle the claim before their defence was due - for what the Pound equivalent of 250 Euro was SIX YEARS AGO (about £45 less than what it is worth now) and with no interest - the interest added to my claim, as it is six years old, is worth £100, and I feel it is deserved as I have had to take legal action to get Thomson to cough up in the first place.
So 2 questions peeps
1) Are they allowed to pay this out for what 250 Euro was worth six years ago, and
2) do I have a right to ask them to pay the interest even if we settle this before it goes to Court? I would have thought if the final total I am pursuing in Court is PLUS INTEREST, then I have the right to ask for a settlement of this much?
I won the case by default by the way, for the full £370 I wanted, and then they said "oh we sent you a cheque and settled this."
Only I sent them a letter telling them not to send the cheque as I wasn't happy with the settlement they proposed, and they did anyway.
They have now written a letter to the Courts (not an application) asking for the default to be struck out as they already settled my claim! The cheek of it eh?0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards