Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

poet123 · 17 February 2013 at 6:51PM

I wrote in early December and again two weeks ago. No response to either letter as yet.

JCB_Digger · 17 February 2013 at 8:23PM

We've just received a reply to our letter to Jet2 which is the same letter as NW1965's, apart from the 'Cabin Pressure' line having been changed to 'a technical fault' - we know the technical fault was actually a faulty onboard computer as the pilot told us on the runway as we were waiting for takeoff clearance after our 18 hour delay, although we've never had written confirmation from Jet2 about this.

As far as I understand it, an onboard computer failure is a maintenance issue and therefore isn't an EC.

Am I right about this?

I'm thinking we should just go ahead and serve as Jet2 are happy to play 'paperwork tennis' with us and are trying to fob us off.

Thanks in advance, John

JPears · 17 February 2013 at 9:15PM

In reply to JCB & NW1965. If you were flying on a 737, both cabin pressure and flight computer problems are common faults on this plane. Bear in mind that the AVERAGE fleet age of Jet2 is currently 22+ years and some planes are "only" 13 years old. Reliabilty is always going to be an issue on a fleet this age that is worked hard.
BAs fleet average 13 years and scourge of the airways Ryanair's fleet only averages 4.5 years, the oldest is actually newer than Jet2s "newest" aircraft.
Food for thought....

JPears · 17 February 2013 at 9:21PM

Indeed there have been several 737 fatal accident crashes due to cabin pressure issues, including a Greek airliner that ran out of fuel over Rhodes after the crew and passengers rendered dead/unconcious by faulty CP readings. I'd post the crash scene website but it is far to horrific (and has almost put me off flying....)

JPears · 17 February 2013 at 11:07PM

It looks as though Jet2 have been telling porkies - they claim that Chambery airport requires aircaraft with a minimum specified thrust rating because of the surrounding mountains so they were unable to source a suitable aircraft.
Guess what? All of Jet2 aircraft have the required thrust rating...

Weemac · 18 February 2013 at 10:24AM

Having previously received the standard "flight safety shortcoming" letter and our letter back to Jet2 requesting further details of this, we received this reply back -

I have noted your comments that you believe technical faults cannot constitute an ex circumstance under EU Reg 261 and your ref to case Wallentin v Alitalia. If I may clarify that the regulation does not define ex circumstances. However technical faults can, depending on the individual facts surrounding the delay, constitute ex circumstances. The Wallentin decision to which you refer to confirms this. Having completed a thorough investigation, the technical fault which resulted in a delay to your flight could not have been foreseen or prevented even though all reasonable measures were taken and therefore as the delay was due to extraordinary circumstances, no compensation is payable.

No exact reason was given for the technical fault so should I reply back again asking for further details?

I am going to forward a copy of this letter to CAA to go with my previous correspondence but as yet haven't heard from them but I assume they are very busy with dealing with all the complaints.

Mark2spark · 18 February 2013 at 11:49AM

Weemac wrote: »

No exact reason was given for the technical fault so should I reply back again asking for further details?

It's true that a tech fault can be part of the reasons for not paying compensation, but the tech issue must have arisen from an EC that was beyond the airlines control. Weather, terrorist attack, political instability, these type of things.

"Wow, we didn't expect that!" is not an extraordinary circumstance

Mark2spark · 18 February 2013 at 12:02PM

"On those grounds, the Court (Fourth Chamber) hereby rules:

1. Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, must be interpreted as meaning that a technical problem in an aircraft which leads to the cancellation of a flight is not covered by the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ within the meaning of that provision, unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control."

countdacash · 18 February 2013 at 1:58PM

I think I'm in the holding pattern, awaiting the standard response to the Wallentin-Hermann judgement letter.

It does seem to me that the crux of the Jet 2 argument is that as they 'take all reasonable measures' which presumably means they perform the scheduled maintenance on the aircraft, then any fault that occurs thereafter is an exceptional circumstance.

This ignores the points in the W-H judgement that paraphased state: -

technical faults are part and parcel of the airlines activity
scheduled maintenance alone is not sufficient to prove 'all reasonable measures'

For me, I would ask to define 'all reasonable measures' and how the fault cited is not part and parcel of the airline's activity. I'm sure I'll get the opportunity to put these to 'friendly' Jet 2 when my next standard letter arrives!

curlylox · 19 February 2013 at 12:32AM

Hi

I have just found out about this forum and have read through it with much interest. We were on a flight from Faro to Edin on 6 Sept that took off and then returned to faro with a technical fault - we had a total delay of 12 hours - is it worth trying to claim for this? Has anyone had a refund from Jet 2 - their customer service is sooooo bad! TIA

Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

Comments

Categories

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