Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
Page 112
    • Caz3121
    • By Caz3121 12th May 17, 10:43 PM
    • 10,596 Posts
    • 6,934 Thanks
    Caz3121
    Hello can anyone advise please. I applied for compensation for an 8 hour delayed flight. I applied 2 months before the 6 year deadline and heard nothing back, even though I know it was definitely received by them. Then suddenly 1 week after the 6 year deadline they say my claim is unsuccessful as it's too late. Apparently if it's filed with the court after 6 years then it's too late. I feel like they have deliberately left it late. Thanks for any advice :-)
    Originally posted by Laurajoanne1979
    that is correct...you need to have commenced court proceedings within 6 years of the flight date. When you heard nothing back within a couple of weeks, you should have quickly issued a NBA, given a deadline for response and then started court proceedings. Having left it so late, most airlines would let it drag over the 6 years so it is timed out
    Shame you didn't post on here earlier
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 12th May 17, 10:51 PM
    • 856 Posts
    • 448 Thanks
    Tyzap
    Hello can anyone advise please. I applied for compensation for an 8 hour delayed flight. I applied 2 months before the 6 year deadline and heard nothing back, even though I know it was definitely received by them. Then suddenly 1 week after the 6 year deadline they say my claim is unsuccessful as it's too late. Apparently if it's filed with the court after 6 years then it's too late. I feel like they have deliberately left it late. Thanks for any advice :-)
    Originally posted by Laurajoanne1979
    Hi Laurajoanne1979,

    I'm sorry to say that in reality you left it 5 years and 10 months too late.

    Had you started your litigation within the 6 limitation period, in England, Wales and NI, then they would still have a case to answer. Unfortunately the airlines are masters of timing claimants out.

    There really isn't anything you can do now except remembering for the future.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide.
    • Ganga
    • By Ganga 13th May 17, 6:52 AM
    • 615 Posts
    • 289 Thanks
    Ganga
    Hello can anyone advise please. I applied for compensation for an 8 hour delayed flight. I applied 2 months before the 6 year deadline and heard nothing back, even though I know it was definitely received by them. Then suddenly 1 week after the 6 year deadline they say my claim is unsuccessful as it's too late. Apparently if it's filed with the court after 6 years then it's too late. I feel like they have deliberately left it late. Thanks for any advice :-)
    Originally posted by Laurajoanne1979
    You also left it late.
    ITS NOT EASY TO GET EVERYTHING WRONG ,I HAVE TO WORK HARD TO DO IT!
    • Laurajoanne1979
    • By Laurajoanne1979 13th May 17, 9:53 AM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Laurajoanne1979
    Not sure how to copy quotes into this thread. New to this :-).

    I know everyone has said I left it too late but I didn't even know that compensation for delayed flights was a 'thing'. It's only because I heard it advertised on the radio just before I applied. Also as a person with no legal knowledge of how any of this works, I thought as long as I made the initial application (through the Resolver website) before the 6 years, I thought I would be ok. Nowhere does it say that it has to be filed in court before this time. I think the whole thing is very unfair, and the fact that the airline has dragged this out to over the 6 year mark is very sneeky of them. We were stuck in Manchester airport for over 10 hours in total with a severely autistic child who got very stressed out, we lost the first day of our holiday and all we got was vouchers for lunch. We weren't even offered a room in the airport where we could take our child to get out of her wheelchair and have time out in a secure room. The whole process was awful :-(
    • legal magpie
    • By legal magpie 13th May 17, 10:35 AM
    • 679 Posts
    • 333 Thanks
    legal magpie
    The time limits have noting to with the airlines. They apply to all Court cases, not just airline claims. Some limits are less, especially personal injury claims which is 3 years.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 13th May 17, 12:42 PM
    • 2,897 Posts
    • 818 Thanks
    JPears
    LJ 79 - its statute of limitations, not the airlines. Yes they wil play you to run out of time, they are a business, they have no compassion other than to their shareholders.
    The fact that you were not aware of the compensation rules is irrelevant I'm afraid. Ignorance is not valid in law, alas.
    Maybe next time, as 12 years after the regulation came into effect, the airlines are still abusing passengers.
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • ycy0116
    • By ycy0116 17th May 17, 11:50 AM
    • 19 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    ycy0116
    Easyjet does not comply with CEDR's decision
    Hi, anyone can give me some suggestions? I don't know what to do now.
    CEDR has already ruled that I won the case, and Easyjet suppose to comply with their decision by mid-march, but so far Easyjet has not responded, nor pay the compensation, how can I chase up with the case? what should I do next? shoud I contact Easyjet directly?
    Many thanks.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 17th May 17, 12:31 PM
    • 2,897 Posts
    • 818 Thanks
    JPears
    Have you contacted CEDR to say that payment has not been made 2 months on?
    If so, then make a complaint to CEDR and make a complaint to CAA. It probably won't help in your individual case but the more that CAA are made aware of airline's refusal to abide with the law, the more likely they may do something about it.
    You will have to contact EJ with a Letter before Action (see Vauban's Guide) . The likelihood of indefensible court action may prompt EJ to pay up.
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • duckling07
    • By duckling07 30th May 17, 4:35 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    duckling07
    Hoping someone can help.

    Flight EZY8117 from Gatwick to Zurich on Fri 26 May was delayed 1.5 hours when we arrived at the airport. When we got to the boarding gate, we were waiting around again with no information. Finally we were told that the plane was late arriving due to a knock on from the baggage issues at Gatwick that morning, and the crew were over their flying hours so they were finding us a standby crew. Another hour passed, and they announced that we would be delayed overnight as there were no standby crew.

    We were put up overnight, and whilst waiting for a taxi to get to the hotel got a text from EasyJet saying our flight had been rescheduled to 1700 on Saturday, 23 hours later than it was supposed to depart.

    This caused a huge upset for us, as we were flying out for my cousins wedding - which started at 1400 on the Saturday. Myself, my partner and my sister were due to be flying home on the Sunday, so didn't take the rescheduled flight as we would have missed almost the whole wedding by the time we arrived. My parents did still fly as they were staying for longer, and made the last hour of the reception.

    I understand that as we didn't take the flight we can't claim the compensation under the EU directive - even though we would have missed the entire reason for our trip. Is that correct? It seems so wrong that such a severe delay should be dealt with in the same was as one for 3 hours...

    EasyJet have refunded us our flights, but will not pay any of the expenses claim that myself and my partner put in - the hotel in Switzerland was already paid for, as were the train tickets getting us from our home to the airport. We essentially wasted 2 days, travelling to the airport, staying in an airport hotel and travelling home, and are out of pocket over £300 - not including the time taken off work on the Friday (my partner is self-employed). Surely this isn't right? I have not only missed a really important family occasion but am now significantly out of pocket due to their lack of contingency planning.

    What's more frustrating is that my sister also received an email this morning to say that her expense claim for train travel has been paid! So, their procedures clearly aren't set in stone if her train fare to and from the airport was paid but mine and my partners wasn't. I can only think that it will be because her claim was much less money than ours as she lives much closer?

    I have escalated my complaint this morning. When I spoke to the customer services again they told me the delay was due to air traffic control. Is this so they can get out of paying EU compensation? Because it's untrue - we were told 3 times in the departure gate that it was due to the lack of standby crew.

    Any help with regards to what I can do would be much appreciated.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 30th May 17, 5:30 PM
    • 2,897 Posts
    • 818 Thanks
    JPears
    They are probably fobbing you off. You seem to have the facts of the delay cause ie there inability to have contingency at a main EHJ hub.
    You are due compensation under reg 261/2004 for your outbound flight and a refund of your out and home flights as you were delayed by more than 5 hours.
    Download Vaubans most excellent guide. All will be explained then ome back if any further questions.
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • duckling07
    • By duckling07 30th May 17, 9:50 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    duckling07
    They are probably fobbing you off. You seem to have the facts of the delay cause ie there inability to have contingency at a main EHJ hub.
    You are due compensation under reg 261/2004 for your outbound flight and a refund of your out and home flights as you were delayed by more than 5 hours.
    Download Vaubans most excellent guide. All will be explained then ome back if any further questions.
    Originally posted by JPears
    Thank you, I'll look at that now.
    Do I definitely still get compensation under 261/2004 even though I didn't actually take the rescheduled flight? They said that as I didn't take it and cancelled my seat on it, it was my decision and I'm not deemed to have been negatively affected by the delay... Y'know, apart from missing my cousins wedding and all that.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 30th May 17, 10:49 PM
    • 2,897 Posts
    • 818 Thanks
    JPears
    If your flight was delayed, or expected to be delayed more than 5 hours, you can claim both a refund in full, as the return part of your journey was pointless, and compensation.
    EJ will basically tell you untruths and misinformation to avoid paying out.
    google the regulation 261/2004 ( I think there is a link in Vauban's guide)
    Read thru you will find the relevant article.
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • Vauban
    • By Vauban 30th May 17, 11:24 PM
    • 4,610 Posts
    • 2,039 Thanks
    Vauban
    If your flight was delayed, or expected to be delayed more than 5 hours, you can claim both a refund in full, as the return part of your journey was pointless, and compensation.
    EJ will basically tell you untruths and misinformation to avoid paying out.
    google the regulation 261/2004 ( I think there is a link in Vauban's guide)
    Read thru you will find the relevant article.
    Originally posted by JPears
    Is this correct? I'm not sure it is.

    It would feel (to me) unjust not to give compensation to someone whose flight is delayed by over five hours, and who decide not to travel. But what does the Regulation and the binding case law say?

    The original regulation makes provision for a refund, but doesn't talk about compensation for delays - it only allows for compensation for denied boarding and cancellations. It was the Sturgeon judgement that said delays could also give rise to compensation payments, based on the regime outlined in the regulation for rerouted flights that were cancelled. And what was the condition laid down?

    "...Articles 5, 6 and 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that passengers whose flights are delayed may be treated, for the purposes of the application of the right to compensation, as passengers whose flights are cancelled and they may thus rely on the right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of the regulation where they suffer, on account of a flight delay, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is, where they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier."

    In other words, for the passenger to qualify for the compensation payment (not the refund or duty of care provision) they must travel and arrive three hours late. If this doesn't happen, I don't see there's a right to compensation.

    I would be delighted to be shown I am wrong on this point though.

    EDIT: Citizens Advice would appear to agree with this interpretation unfortunately:

    https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/holiday-cancellations-and-compensation/if-your-flights-delayed-or-cancelled/
    Last edited by Vauban; 30-05-2017 at 11:32 PM.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 31st May 17, 12:55 PM
    • 2,897 Posts
    • 818 Thanks
    JPears
    Again, in this case, I suspect the passenger's flight was actually cancelled, since their replacement flight was nearly 24 hours later ie placed on next day's flight.
    So your reasoned arguement above may not apply here
    To your reasoned arguements - the critical part would appear to be one's interpretation of :
    " laid down in Article 7 of the regulation where they suffer, on account of a flight delay, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is, where they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier."
    If the passenger were to be delayed by 3 hours ie remain at the airport, having presented themselves for travel, they have suffered that delay rrespective of whether or not they then actually travel or not?
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • antonove
    • By antonove 31st May 17, 7:11 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    antonove
    Madeira return flight 120617
    Our flight was cancelled because the plane steps put a hole in the plane fuselage. To be fair, we were put up in a good hotel for the night, and provided with a meal, a nice room and then breakfast in the morning. We were given the details of where to claim by the airport staff. In all, we were delayed from time of flight 2030hrs.on 12th., to take-off 1030hrs.approx. on 13th.
    Are we due compensation? We missed an important family engagement on 13th! Your help would be greatly appreciated.
    Regards
    Tony Overend
    • Vauban
    • By Vauban 31st May 17, 7:43 PM
    • 4,610 Posts
    • 2,039 Thanks
    Vauban
    Again, in this case, I suspect the passenger's flight was actually cancelled, since their replacement flight was nearly 24 hours later ie placed on next day's flight.
    So your reasoned arguement above may not apply here
    To your reasoned arguements - the critical part would appear to be one's interpretation of :
    " laid down in Article 7 of the regulation where they suffer, on account of a flight delay, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is, where they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier."
    If the passenger were to be delayed by 3 hours ie remain at the airport, having presented themselves for travel, they have suffered that delay rrespective of whether or not they then actually travel or not?
    Originally posted by JPears
    I'm not a lawyer, so my view is no more valid than yours. But my reading of the sentence you highlight is that the definition of a three hour delay is defined by the criteria of when the passenger arrives at the destination. The key phrase is "that is".
    • antonove
    • By antonove 1st Jun 17, 8:16 AM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    antonove
    Thanks for the prompt reply. There was no scheduled flight on the following day. A plane was flown in specially form Milan. Incidentally, there was no hot food on the plane, only crisps etc., and hot drinks.
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 1st Jun 17, 9:43 AM
    • 856 Posts
    • 448 Thanks
    Tyzap
    Our flight was cancelled because the plane steps put a hole in the plane fuselage. To be fair, we were put up in a good hotel for the night, and provided with a meal, a nice room and then breakfast in the morning. We were given the details of where to claim by the airport staff. In all, we were delayed from time of flight 2030hrs.on 12th., to take-off 1030hrs.approx. on 13th.
    Are we due compensation? We missed an important family engagement on 13th! Your help would be greatly appreciated.
    Regards
    Tony Overend
    Originally posted by antonove
    Hi Tony,

    Yes you are due EC261 compensation.

    Your situation has been tested in the courts and the airlines must pay. They, in turn, can claim from the 3rd party who caused the fault, if they want to.

    At least in this case you were well looked after so some credit to EJ.

    Good luck.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 1st Jun 17, 10:25 AM
    • 2,897 Posts
    • 818 Thanks
    JPears
    removed as incorrect and confused.
    Last edited by JPears; 01-06-2017 at 3:28 PM.
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • Vauban
    • By Vauban 1st Jun 17, 2:32 PM
    • 4,610 Posts
    • 2,039 Thanks
    Vauban
    I think this chain has got confused because Antonove thought I was responding to him. I wasn't. To be clear, Antonove's case seems clear cut and there's no need for further testing in court - there's already a binding ECJ case for this kind of incident.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,641Posts Today

8,959Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Byebye! I'm about to stop work & twitter, to instead spend glorious time with Mrs & mini MSE. Wishing u a lovely summer. See u in 10 days.

  • WARNING Did you start Uni in or after 2012? The interest's rising to 6.1%; yet it doesnt work like you think. See https://t.co/IQ8f0Vyetu RT

  • RT @JanaBeee: @MartinSLewis Boris is the anomaly (coffee), the others are versions of normal (beer). Lots of same candidates = vote share d?

  • Follow Martin