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

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is today updating passengers about when airlines are liable to pay them compensation following cancellations and long delays. Today’s update follows new European Commission (EC) guidelines.

The guidelines clarify when a delay or cancellation should generally be considered to not be an airline’s fault (so called ‘extraordinary circumstances’). Airlines have to compensate passengers when flights are cancelled within two weeks of departure or arrive more than three hours late, but only if the issue was within the airline’s control. Regardless of fault, airlines are obliged to provide assistance to passengers, including refreshments and accommodation where necessary, even where there is no requirement to pay compensation.

Until now, there has not been agreement on which circumstances are considered extraordinary and which are considered to be within an airline’s control. Following close cooperation between European regulators, engagement with technical experts and discussion with the airline industry, yesterday’s publication of the EC list should allow passengers to have a better idea if disruption they face could lead to compensation, and should also speed up the process of assessing and paying claims.

Iain Osborne, CAA Group Director of Regulatory Policy said: “The vast majority of passengers take flights without any hiccups, but the small proportion who do experience cancellations and delays can find it confusing to work out if they are owed compensation. The EC guidelines should help to inform passengers more about their rights.

“We also hope they will assist airlines to assess passenger claims correctly when they are received, reducing the time it takes for passengers to get their money, and the time spent by the CAA checking airlines’ assessments.”

Since the European Court of Justice ruled in October 2012 that passengers who experience delays of over three hours on arrival should be due compensation as well as those who experience cancellations, the CAA has seen significant increases in the numbers of passengers seeking help when airlines reject their claims. This has led to delays in responding to consumers.

Along with publication of today’s guidelines, the CAA is asking airlines to use it to reassess claims they have previously rejected. This should speed things up for passengers and allow the CAA to focus resources on other support for consumers. The CAA is also considering other measures to reduce the amount of time passengers are left waiting for a decision on their claims and improve airline compliance with the regulations, including ensuring airlines correctly assess more new cases without them needing to be referred to the CAA.

For further media information contact the CAA Press Office on: 0207 453 6030 or email press.office@caa.co.uk

Follow the CAA on @UK_CAA

Martin85 wrote: »

There was an article in the Sunday Times Travel section (Page 3) yesterday with the headlines Airport Payout Loophole Closed. Basically it said the EU had issued new guidelines defining extraordinary circumstances which excludes technical breakdowns of crew shortages. Does this rule apply to all outstanding claims. Has anyone else read the article and what is your intruptaton of this ruling. Any feedback please.

I have posted my views on this document here: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=62675343&postcount=2234

But basically I agree with Klint.

klint wrote: »

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-203_en.htm

I think a key sentence is:

"A threshold of three hours is in most cases too short for spare parts or replacement aircraft to be flown in, especially for technical failures at an airport away from a carrier's bases."

This implies that technical failures are never extraordinary circumstances, since, if they were, there would be no compensation anyway.

Thanks for this Klint :T

If this proposal does go through it will help and hinder a lot of people. For instance the increase in delay hours before a claim "For the remaining international flights the deadline is 9 hours for flights of less than 6,000 km and 12 hours for flights of more than 6,000 km. The aim is to give the air carriers a reasonable time to solve the problem and encourage them to operate the flight, not just cancel it. A threshold of three hours is in most cases too short for spare parts or replacement aircraft to be flown in, especially for technical failures at an airport away from a carrier's bases. The current provisions tend to incentivise cancellations to the detriment of passengers (because the problem cannot be remedied within a very short deadline)."

Also "Complaint handling and enforcing individual rights

Today, passengers often do not know how to submit complaints to the airline or the latter does not reply.

Under the proposal, airlines will have to provide clear complaint-handling procedures (web form, e-mail address). They will also have to reply to passengers within given deadlines (one week for the acknowledgement of receipt and a formal reply within a deadline of two months).

Where disputes arise, passengers will be able to turn to out-of-court complaint handling bodies that will seek to resolve the dispute (in an inexpensive and simple way)"

May be a silly 'crystal ball' question but:

Any speculation as to when this proposal may go ahead?
If/when it did go ahead, would flights prior to the new proposal be judged/ruled under the new ruling?

Luckily for us consumers, courts all across Europe aren't taking too much notice of the CAA's guidelines.[/QUOTE]

Hi Mark, nice to see you back do you want a copy of the skeleton arguement?;);)