Monarch delays & Compensations. Listed flights denied in O.P.

russetred · 25 January 2013 at 2:16PM

I am anticipating having my claim rejected as I could not supply my boarding cards or original booking form from 4 years ago.I have proof, as do Monarch, I was on the delayed flight. In fact I hope they do issue a rejection letter so I can issue my LBA and get on with the court case.

djmineral · 25 January 2013 at 5:30PM

Vauban wrote: »

To be honest, I would welcome any correspondence - regardless of the tone. The fact that three months in I continue to have had no response from Monarch is fairly telling though.

In my case, I believe the delay of over 24 hours was caused because the incoming flight discovered that the windscreen had developed a crack, as it was preparing to leave Gatwick. Assuming this to be true (this was only what was suggested at the time; all I have is an apology letter from April suggesting "technical difficulties"), I don't accept it should have led to a 24 hour delay before we were picked up from Egypt, or that it can be classed as "extraordinary circumstances". It ought to have been within the airline's control to resolve long before then - not least as they were at a major hub airport. And all this before there is a debate about whether the crack should have been identified long before immediately before take off.

But as a party of five, for a delay over 4 hours, and from over 3,500km, this will be expensive for Monarch if they are obliged to pay up. So I anticipate having to fight for it. Which I will.

By the sound of it you must have been on the return flight back from sharm on the 8th April 2012 ?. My party were on the outbound flight and after putting the claim in some 2 months ago have also heard nothing more from them.

Would be interested to learn how you get on and will let you know likewise.

glentoran99 · 25 January 2013 at 7:10PM

So latest from Monarch,

So Hi Ho Hi ho off to court we go

[FONT=&quot]As advised in our previous communication, we do understand the inconvenience and frustration that can be experienced during periods of operational disruption and every effort is made to minimise the impact this has on your travel plans. We also acknowledge our obligations during such situations. As such, we have procedures in place to ensure we are assessing such claims in accordance with the applicable legislation. Having reviewed your case we are satisfied that our initial assessment of your claim was correct. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The European Court of Justice in Wallentin –v- Alitalia held [/FONT][FONT=&quot]that technical defects which come to light during maintenance, or an account of a failure to maintain, do not, per se, constitute extraordinary circumstances in themselves, but “technical problems are covered by those exceptional circumstances to the extent that they stem from events which are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its control”. Thereafter providing illustrative examples of technical problems that would amount to extraordinary circumstances (including such events as a manufacturing defect, airworthiness issue etc). On account of the technical failure, details of which we have already provided to you, we remain unable to offer you compensation under Regulation 261/2004.[/FONT]

I dont see details of an extraordinairy event causing the problem??

Vauban · 25 January 2013 at 8:39PM

glentoran99 wrote: »

So latest from Monarch,

I dont see details of an extraordinairy event causing the problem??

Nor me. Ridiculous.

Pathetic that they waste the courts' time with all this. The judiciary should give them a proper telling off!

Vauban · 25 January 2013 at 8:41PM

djmineral wrote: »

By the sound of it you must have been on the return flight back from sharm on the 8th April 2012 ?. My party were on the outbound flight and after putting the claim in some 2 months ago have also heard nothing more from them.

Would be interested to learn how you get on and will let you know likewise.

Yes I'd be interested in staying in touch - and in knowing what you were told about your delay. I'll send you a private message.

Mark2spark · 26 January 2013 at 12:32AM

No, complete failure to describe an EC IMO Glentoran

Court it is.

Vauban · 27 January 2013 at 4:47PM

So today marks exactly three months to the day that I wrote to Monarch, following the clarification of the EC's judgement. Still no substantive reply - just the usual "we are dealing with it" nonsense.

So anticipating that they're only going to claim Extraordinary Circumstances anyway, I today wrote my Notice Before Action and put them on 14 days notice.

I have tried to be patient and reasonable. But they have forced me onto this legal track. What else can a Vauban do?

Mark2spark · 27 January 2013 at 5:19PM

Nothing. 3 Months is more than a reasonable amount of time to wait for a response.

blondmark · 27 January 2013 at 7:10PM

Two weeks' notice of legal action ('or such later time as I may subsequently agree with you') is fine. No need to bend over backwards for airlines denying you your consumer rights.

Vauban · 27 January 2013 at 7:38PM

blondmark wrote: »

Two weeks' notice of legal action ('or such later time as I may subsequently agree with you') is fine. No need to bend over backwards for airlines denying you your consumer rights.

Quite.

This is what I sent Monarch:

Monarch Airlines Ltd
Prospect House
Prospect Way
London Luton Airport
Luton
LU2 9NU

BY EMAIL

27 January 2013

Dear Sir/Madam,

NOTICE BEFORE ACTION

Delayed Flight Compensation
Flight number: ZB249
Date of flight: 8/4/12
Booking Ref: xxxx
Passenger names: Vauban and the Vaubanettes (family of 5)
Amount claimed: 600 euros per passenger

Further to my emails of the 12th May, 27th October and 5th November, I am writing to express my disappointment at Monarch's failure to offer a substantive response to my request for compensation under EC Regulation 261/2004.

To recap, our flight (detailed above) was delayed leaving Sharm el Sheikh and we arrived in Gatwick some 24 hours after the scheduled arrival time. We were informed that the flight was delayed due to a 'technical problem with the operating aircraft'. I understand from correspondence with other passengers that the issue was with a preceding flight that was unable to leave Gatwick, due to the discovery of a crack in the airplane's windscreen.

Technical problems have been ruled by the ECJ to be unlikely to be held as a valid defence of extraordinary circumstances to a compensation claim. If, despite this, you propose to cite such a defence, I should be grateful for:

a) full details of the alleged technical fault, including when it was discovered;
b) why you believe this alleged technical fault was not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of your airline;
c) why such an alleged fault was beyond Monarch's control to rectify in a timely manner;
d) and why it was impossible for you to dispatch another plane to Sharm for 24 hours.

I am confident that, as the case of Friederike Wallentin-Hermann V Alitalia – Linee Aeree Italiane Spa is the recognised legal authority for what constitutes "Extraordinary Circumstances", a UK Court would determine that Monarch has no justification for citing extraordinary circumstances in this instance.

As Monarch Airlines have had three months to consider my claim, I must now insist that you settle it in full within 14 days or - if you intend to claim the defence of "Extraordinary Circumstances" - provide the details requested above. Unless I hear from you to my satisfaction by the 11th February 2013 I shall with regret have no option but to issue legal proceedings without further notice, with intent to recover the compensation due, with interest.

Yours faithfully,

Vauban

Monarch delays & Compensations. Listed flights denied in O.P.

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free