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

kevjen · 23 February 2013 at 12:41PM

They are also refusing to pay for flight ZB660 Manchester to Malaga 6th June 2010, reason technical fault, power transfer unit.

Mark2spark · 23 February 2013 at 12:46PM

kevjen wrote: »

They are also refusing to pay for flight ZB660 Manchester to Malaga 6th June 2010, reason technical fault, power transfer unit.

Added to OP

cart583 · 23 February 2013 at 1:02PM

thanks mark, yeah it would be lol. do all of us (party of 8 adults and 1 child) have to send a seperate nba or can we just send 1 with everyones details on? we had to completer seperate claim forms but sent them all together in 1 envelope so i believe its being classed as 1 claim. thanks

rubybloo · 23 February 2013 at 3:36PM

kecat wrote: »

Well done to you
However I really can't see how this one technical fault would be any different to most of the ones already listed that have been denied. I can't understand how they are deciding which few they are paying out on!

I know, it's terribly inconsistent isn't it?

I think the tipping point for our flight was that it was an extremely long delay for a very short flight, originating out of London near their home base, and so they should have realistically had the resources to ensure that we at least left on the same day.

Information on what went wrong was scarce, but I gathered during our long delay that Monarch uses one plane to do five ski resort charter flights on a Saturday, and we were fourth in the "chain", and they were aware before the first flight leaving Austria that they had problems.

Anyone who was on MON6073 on the 22/12/12 which is the final flight in the "chain" (leaving Grenoble at 5pm) should also be entitled to compensation, as they also incurred an overnight stay due to this incident.

lw7876 · 23 February 2013 at 4:01PM

First time posting on here but wanted to add my flight details and response from Monarch. We were on flight ZB737 from Malaga to Gatwick on 22nd Sept 2012, delayed by approx 7 hours. We were travelling with two young children (ages 4 and 1 at the time). Given €12 per person refreshment vouchers on check in; no further information given, we had to keep checking the departure display boards.

I was the main passenger for our booking so received an email from them on 24th Sept advising it was due to technical difficulties. I wrote to them on 1st Oct requesting compensation; heard nothing until 7th January when I received a claim form. Filled out the claim form and sent off with all the requested documentation, on 8th January. Received a response dated 20th February which uses the EC excuse, here is the text of the letter:

"Our records show that shortly after takeoff the previous flight to London Gatwick the aircraft performed an 'unauthorised pitch during climb'. As a result it was necessary to immediately return to the airport for inspection and remedial work by engineers based locally. On inspection of the aircraft engineers found that the fault was caused by the elevator aileron computer which consequently required replacing. As such, spares were sourced and fitted at the earliest opportunity and the aircraft was declared servicable the following day, the day which you were scheduled to travel. Unfortunately as a result of these events the aircraft was not in position at Gatwick to operate your flight. As a consequence and in order to reduce the length of your delay, passengers on your flight were transferred to the first available aircraft from within the Monarch fleet.

Having considered the factual background of this incident, I am satisfied that this was indeed an extraordinary circumstance that could not have been reasonably prevented by Monarch. Therefore I am unable to agree to your claim for compensation."

Given that this is a) technical difficulty and b) relates not to our flight but a flight the PREVIOUS DAY, I have just lodged a claim via MCOL.

Whatever the outcome, I won't be flying with Monarch ever again and will be telling everyone possible to do likewise. If they had settled this within a reasonable time limit or even offered a goodwill gesture my opinion may have been different, however, after over 7 hours with two young children at Malaga airport, and trying to eke out €48 for a day's food and drink between us, I want a better response.

Good luck to all on here pursuing claims.

LMZ25 · 23 February 2013 at 6:30PM

Hello,

Thanks to everyone who is helping on this forum, it's reassuring to know there's somewhere to go for assistance.

I have been waiting for a response from Monarch in relation to flight ZB909 Dalaman to Birmingham on 27th May 2010 and yesterday I finally received it. Obviously from reading this forum I was expecting my claim to be denied due to extraordinary circumstances, probably from a technical fault! However, this one has thrown a different perspective:-

"Our records show that the aircraft that was scheduled to operate your flight was unavoidably delayed on a previous flight due to French air traffic control industrial action. Unfortunately, this was totally beyond the control of Monarch.

As a result, your flight was subject to a delay as, despite Monarch's best efforts, we were unable to transfer your flight on to another aircraft from within the Monarch fleet, or indeed, to transfer passengers to an aircraft chartered from a third party operator.

Having considered the factual background of this case, we are satisfied that the disruption was caused by an extraordinary circumstance......." you all know the rest!!

I have a couple of queries, obviously industrial action is an extraordinary circumstance, however given Monarch's track record, would there be anywhere I could check that this information is true? (I don't recall any mention of this at the airport) also, the industrial action happened to the previous flight, from reading other threads, am I correct in understanding that Monarch cannot use the excuse of a previous flight as an "extraordinary circumstance".

Lastly, our flight delay was only just over 3 hours, from completing Monarch's claim forms I seem to recall them stating that they will only compensate half of the amounts stated by the EU ruling - can they do this?

Any advice will be gratefully received.

Many thanks.

suelees1 · 23 February 2013 at 8:26PM

keftin wrote: »

ZB533 Palma - Manchester 9th April 2011

Today received a refusal on EC grounds.
...aircraft developed a rudder defect that rendered the aircraft unserviceable and unsafe to fly etc etc etc...

For the record I have not made any contact with Monarch (nor they with me) since I submitted my claim in mid-December 2012.

I think it quite reasonable that if they think they have an arguable defence, then it should be encumbent upon me to rebut such a defence in a claims action. Additionally, if the faults being given by Monarch are genuine faults resulting in delay, it demonstrates a sound approach to passenger safety regardless of whether it exonerates them of being liable for compensation claims.

As a point of clarification: Does the EC apply to the circumstances that existed in relation to a planned flight or the aircraft itself?

ie a fault on flight A causes its delay. The fault is fixed but the knock-on effect is that the return flight B on the same aircraft is delayed. In my view the return flight is a different flight with a different reference number which must pass a sepearte safety check?

Keftin I'm just wondering whether there is any connection between your delayed return flight from PMI to Man and the delay to our outgoing flight ZB532 from Man to PMI. Our 9am scheduled take off was delayed 5+ hours. What time should you have left PMI?

suelees1 · 23 February 2013 at 8:59PM

https://www.facebook.com/MonarchComplaints/posts/490635797660251?comment_id=4871988&notif_t=share_comment

As mentioned already by 111KAB

lizzielie · 24 February 2013 at 1:32AM

kevjen wrote: »

They are also refusing to pay for flight ZB660 Manchester to Malaga 6th June 2010, reason technical fault, power transfer unit.

Been following this thread with interest, as I was also on the above flight. As I live in Spain, it would be difficult to take monarch to court if the declined a claim. Is all lost, or would anyone here know if I submitted a claim to them, and with a refusal, what to do?

Thank you in advance

carrsy78 · 24 February 2013 at 5:13PM

any one else dealing with this filght or can advised if i need to do anything else?

Re: Flight MON1287 Sharm el-Sheikh to Manchester 06th October 2011
Further to your claim for delay compensation, we are writing to advise of our conclusion.

Providing our passengers with a safe and efficient service is our first priority. We would like to reassure you that every reasonable effort is made to ensure that Monarch Airlines flights depart on time and in the unlikely event we are unable to do so through disruption, we aim to provide a solution at the earliest opportunity.

As previously advised, in some circumstances passengers may be entitled to compensation for such disruption under European Union laws. However, any monetary payments are subject to certain criteria being satisfied. Under these laws where the disruption is caused by an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ which the airline was reasonably unable to prevent, the carrier is not obliged to pay compensation. Extraordinary circumstances have been defined by the courts and the European Regulations themselves provide a non-exhaustive list of which circumstances can indeed be categorised as extraordinary.

Our records show that your flight was delayed due to a flight instrument fault, which arose just prior to the departure of the outbound sector. The aircraft, which had been scheduled to operate your flight, was rendered unserviceable and therefore unsafe to fly. In order to rectify the fault a replacement part was required and this was flown by helicopter from Redhill to Manchesterand the fault was rectified.

However upon arrival into Sharm el-Sheikh the crew exceeded their legal duty hours and were required to take a period of minimum rest. As a result passengers on your flight were required to night stop in Sharm el-Sheikh. Your flight operated at the earliest opportunity the following day once the crew had completed the requisite rest period.

Having considered the factual background of this incident, we are satisfied that the disruption in your case was caused by an extraordinary circumstance that could not have reasonably been prevented by Monarch Airlines. We are, therefore, unable to accept your claim for compensation for the reasons given.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can provide any further assistance or information.

Yours sincerely,

EU Claims Team

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