Monarch Airlines stops trading - latest info and your rights

1414244464762

Comments

  • N4t4lie
    N4t4lie Posts: 197 Forumite
    Saraht wrote: »
    Sadly only flights so not ATOL protected.

    Was each flight over £100? If it was I'd stick to Section 75, but if each flight was under £100 even though the total comes to more then Section 75 doesn't apply and it would have to be done by chargeback. If it does qualify and they refuse get it in writing and go to the Financial Ombudsmen.

    Seems odd to ask you to waive your right to S75. In the end if they are willing to assure you in writing that a chargeback will be successful (and there is no reason to think it wouldn't be) then take it. I assume that chargeback costs them nothing where as a S75 does.
  • Ive just received an email from the administrators. May confuse a lot of people who still have no idea which route to go down to get their package holiday money back.

    Yes, I also got one of these today. I have sent it to the news email of Martin's site in the hope they might cover it as loads of people must have got one.
  • Has anyone had any luck with John Lewis Partnership card in getting even an acknowledgement of a Section 75 claim?

    I sent one in on Monday 2nd, using Martin's template, having been told by their customer service team that "we're not a charity, you know!"
  • N4t4lie
    N4t4lie Posts: 197 Forumite
    TheFletch wrote: »
    Has anyone had any luck with John Lewis Partnership card in getting even an acknowledgement of a Section 75 claim?

    I sent one in on Monday 2nd, using Martin's template, having been told by their customer service team that "we're not a charity, you know!"

    Make a complaint, get them to review the call, that agent needs retraining. I am horrified by that response. If you are claiming for a package holiday it is a consumer right to be able to claim under Section 75. I think they owe you an apology for that comment. When the S75 letter hits the right desk you should get a refund, it may take a bit of time, but if they refuse get it in writing and go to the Financial Ombudsmen. I have a John Lewis CC and hearing that makes me angry enough to want to cut it up and send it back!
  • GGardner
    GGardner Posts: 10 Forumite
    silvercar wrote: »
    Well done! This may prove to be a game changer for others.

    Thanks so much for this thread Silvercar and thanks to everyone who gave me advice - I wouldn't have the refund without you all!

    Good luck everyone :-)
  • bigadaj
    bigadaj Posts: 11,531
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    N4t4lie wrote: »
    Was each flight over £100? If it was I'd stick to Section 75, but if each flight was under £100 even though the total comes to more then Section 75 doesn't apply and it would have to be done by chargeback. If it does qualify and they refuse get it in writing and go to the Financial Ombudsmen.

    Seems odd to ask you to waive your right to S75. In the end if they are willing to assure you in writing that a chargeback will be successful (and there is no reason to think it wouldn't be) then take it. I assume that chargeback costs them nothing where as a S75 does.

    We don't know they are asking for the waiv it's just a generic statement from current understanding so not necessarily a section 75 issue.

    A chargeback isn't necessarily going to be successful when the company involved has gone bust.
  • I have a question about the 'S75 for purchases over £100' issue. We were booked to fly with Monarch on 5th October (returning on 12th) and the total cost for 2 flights plus hold luggage was £305.

    However, this was made up of 2 x return flights of about £80 each plus 3 hold bags in total for 2 people (taking sporting equipment plus clothes etc) so our booking was made up of several individual items of under £100 each. Is this more than £100 pp and therefore a S75 claim or not? Does it matter? I'm just happy to get my moneyback and not particularly bothered about the technicalities of how it arrives.

    I paid by Tesco credit card and have emailed them making my claim including consequential losses (on hearing the news last Monday morning I had the foresight to book replacement flights with another airline before they sold out/massively increased in price and was fortunate to be able to book new flights for the same dates and from the same airport as the original booking but obviously was a bit more expensive as very short notice - cost for new booking was about £500 so £200 more). I didn't mention the cost of the individual flights or luggage on the booking or whether or not I was claiming under S75 or as a chargeback as I assume that Tesco will make their own decision on that.

    So hopefully getting a refund of the £305 from Tesco will be fairly straightforward, whether it will be a S75 incl consequential losses or as a straight chargeback of the £305.

    Our travel insurance was with Columbus Direct and included Scheduled Airline Failure with no excess as standard via https://www.ipplondon.co.uk and I'm currently unsure as to whether it will pay the extra £200 if I don't get it from Tesco as it says it will be pay for replacement flights if an airline fails after your outward journey but it doesn't say it will do this for failures between the time of booking and time of outward travel. But it doesn't list this as an exclusion either and the policy information on the website does say 'This protects you if your scheduled airline goes into insolvency enabling you to book equivalent flight(s) with another airline at no additional cost to yourself as we will fully reimburse you up to £5,000 per person in your party'. The policy wording instructs me to claim via my credit card first as they only pay out what isn't refunded that way, so if Tesco treat it as a chargeback and don't refund my consequential losses, I will try for the extra £200 that the new flights cost via the insurer because the information on the website appears to suggest that I was covered in the event that I couldn't claim in full via the credit card route.

    Apologies if this has ended up a bit waffly, but hope the information is useful for someone and would be interested if anyone has a definitive answer to the point about whether the purchase was above or below £100 pp.
  • A chargeback isn't necessarily going to be successful when the company involved has gone bust.

    I wondered about that- my understanding of the 'chargeback' procedure was that the credit cards take back money from the supplier, but if the supplier is insolvent, is there any money to take back?

    Where do the credit cards sit in the pecking order of creditors in this case? Will the credit card companies end up bearing a large portion of the losses due to Monarch's failure by paying out for refunds whether via S75 or chargebacks where it can't recover the money from Monarch?
  • bigadaj
    bigadaj Posts: 11,531
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    catwoman73 wrote: »
    A chargeback isn't necessarily going to be successful when the company involved has gone bust.

    I wondered about that- my understanding of the 'chargeback' procedure was that the credit cards take back money from the supplier, but if the supplier is insolvent, is there any money to take back?

    Where do the credit cards sit in the pecking order of creditors in this case? Will the credit card companies end up bearing a large portion of the losses due to Monarch's failure by paying out for refunds whether via S75 or chargebacks where it can't recover the money from Monarch?

    Card providers prefer chargebacks because they don't cost them any money, however if there is no solvent company to claim back from then they won't work.

    Section 75 is a risk or business cost of the card provider, it's a legal liability imposed by legislation, so they have to pay out whether they receive the money back or not. In fact a deposit on a credit card of a few pennies or pounds can open up tens of thousands of liability for that contract or goods.
  • After posting in here and getting the idea generally that HSBC appeared to be really dragging their heels I HAVE RECEIVED MY REFUND. Thought this may help someone else, timeline was as below....

    2/10 received e-mail with claim form attached had to return snail mail with copies of Administrators certificate and Monarch booking confirmation.
    4/10 returned to HSBC by signed for post
    12/10 contacted them via live chat but told to speak to specialist Disputes Team between 8am and 6pm.
    13/10 phoned the Disputes Team (0345 6039 952) answered straightaway! Had to go thru details of booking eg departure, return, no of pax, booking ref and total £s. (Even though he had it on my record) 😕 he put me on hold for about 10 mins as sure to the sum over £4k he had to get approval. Said he would process refund and would be on my account in 24 to 48 hours. As at 10am this morning it was showing as credited :j:j:j:j:j:j:j

    GOOD LUCK TO EVERYONE!
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards