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 114
    • yelyahm91
    • By yelyahm91 24th Apr 17, 5:58 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    yelyahm91
    Hi everyone, I wonder if I could get some advice on how to respond to the defence Easyjet has submitted to my CEDR case? I was delayed overnight and rerouted to Bologna on a trip to Venice from Gatwick and Easyjet is saying that the inbound flight from Milan to Gatwick, due to be the plane to take us from Gatwick to Venice, was delayed by bad weather and ATC restrictions and therefore had to be cancelled. I understand ATC restrictions count as exceptional circumstances but as these restrictions caused a knock on effect and weren't actually imposed on my flight I'm not really sure where I stand.

    "Particulars of claim
    12. The aircraft which the Respondent originally assigned to operate the Flight was an Airbus A319 bearing registration number G-EZTR (the Aircraft).
    13. On the Flight Date, prior to the operation of the Flight, the Aircraft was also scheduled to
    operate flight EZY 5296 (the Outbound Flight) from Milan Malpensa Airport (MXP) to LGW.
    14. The Aircraft departed at 15:06 UTC on the Flight Date to operate the Outbound Flight, however, due to adverse weather conditions in the form of thunderstorms at LGW that would have prevented the Aircraft from arriving there safely and resultant ATC slot restrictions, the Aircraft was required to divert to London Southend Airport (SEN) [annex, pages 6 - 7].
    15. Owing to the continued adverse weather conditions at LGW, and the closure of air space in the London area as a result of the thunderstorms at LGW, the Respondent was unable to operate a positioning flight from SEN - LGW to operate the Flight.
    16. The Respondent reviewed the possibility of sourcing a replacement aircraft from LGW to
    operate the Flight, but owing to the earlier diversion to SEN, the crew scheduled to operate the Flight had reached their maximum hours of permissible continuous duty. At the material time, there was no replacement crew available at LGW to re-crew the flight on another aircraft. As a result the respondent was required to cancel the flight.
    17. The Defendant has no control over the weather, ATC or the decisions of ATC themselves.
    18. The Respondent offered all passengers the option of a full refund of the original ticket price or re-routing on the next available flight from LGW to VCE in accordance with their obligations under Article 8 of the Regulation.
    19. The cancellation of the Flight as a result of the adverse weather conditions was not within the actual control of the carrier and cannot possibly be anticipated.
    20. Accordingly, the Flight was cancelled due to extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken for the purposes of Article 5(3) of the Regulation.
    Reasonable Measures
    21. The cancellation could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken, within the meaning of Article 5(3).
    22. The Defendant will rely on the guidance provided by the CJEU to say that "all reasonable
    measures" means:
    "...measures appropriate to the situation, that is to say measures which, at the time those
    extraordinary circumstances arose, met, inter alia, conditions which were technically and
    economically viable for the air carrier concerned...That party must establish that, even if it had
    deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would clearly not have been able - unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time - to prevent the extraordinary circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight". (Wallentin-Hermann (above) at §§ 40 and 43).
    23. The Defendant took all reasonable measures and/or employed all resources at its disposal to avoid the cancellation of the Flight including attempting to source a replacement aircraft and a replacement crew to operate the flight. There was no other reasonable and/or technically and/or economically viable option available to the Defendant that would have enabled it to operate the Flight."


    If you need any more information please let me know and thanks in advance for your help
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 25th Apr 17, 11:05 AM
    • 864 Posts
    • 450 Thanks
    Tyzap
    Hi yelyahm91,

    My thoughts on the problem and some possible points to raise with CEDR.

    Gatwick is EJ's largest base, by quite some margin, with something like 60 based aircraft and associated flight crew. Therefore, they should have standby or spare resources available to deal with this sort of problem. Whether there were many others on that day, which outstripped their resources is unknown and may be a possibility. This is unlikely however as this was not mentioned in their defence.

    The main point is that this was a knock on from a delay to a previous flight, your flight could not depart due to an earlier problem. This means the delay to your flight was not an extraordinary circumstance and does not let them off the compensation hook.

    Another area to scrutinise would be, did they do all that they could to prevent the cancelled flight? Given the size of their LGW base and the massive resources available to them, probably not. Did they attempt to put you on another flight, could they have got you there earlier?

    Without knowing the date, the weather conditions on that day, your flight details and how long ATC restrictions were in place, it's hard to say. Perhaps Google can help you here.

    Why did they re route you and still not get you to your destination? Were you left to make your own way from Bologna? Make this point to CEDR.

    Something which does not make any sense to me is that EJ state...

    "EZY 5296 (the Outbound Flight) from Milan Malpensa Airport (MXP) to LGW"

    This was diverted to SEN and EJ suggested that this was the prior flight to your own. However, if that was an outbound flight (from Milan) it follows that it should then return to Milan as the inbound flight and not become the aircraft to operate your flight. This could just be a typo or mistake on their behalf but it requires further investigation to be able to follow the reason given and the timeline.

    Good luck.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide.
    • razorsedge
    • By razorsedge 25th Apr 17, 12:31 PM
    • 343 Posts
    • 145 Thanks
    razorsedge

    20. Accordingly, the Flight was cancelled due to extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken for the purposes of Article 5(3) of the Regulation.
    Reasonable Measures
    21. The cancellation could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken, within the meaning of Article 5(3).
    22. The Defendant will rely on the guidance provided by the CJEU to say that "all reasonable
    measures" means:
    "...measures appropriate to the situation, that is to say measures which, at the time those
    extraordinary circumstances arose, met, inter alia, conditions which were technically and
    economically viable for the air carrier concerned...That party must establish that, even if it had
    deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would clearly not have been able - unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time
    - to prevent the extraordinary circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight". (Wallentin-Hermann (above) at §§ 40 and 43).
    23. The Defendant took all reasonable measures and/or employed all resources at its disposal to avoid the cancellation of the Flight including attempting to source a replacement aircraft and a replacement crew to operate the flight. There was no other reasonable and/or technically and/or economically viable option available to the Defendant that would have enabled it to operate the Flight."
    Originally posted by yelyahm91
    Section 22 states that they must establish that they could do nothing about the situation and section 23 states that they did, but, have they provided any actual proof that they took all reasonable measures?
    Last edited by razorsedge; 25-04-2017 at 12:33 PM. Reason: Tryping error
    The above is just my opinon - which counts for nowt! You must make up your own mind.
    • yelyahm91
    • By yelyahm91 26th Apr 17, 1:01 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    yelyahm91
    Hi guys, thanks so much for your thoughts they're really helpful already. Here's a link to the full document I've received from Easyjet goo.gl/OseY9V if you'd like to have a proper look. They've attached screenshots of their system logs as their evidence which state the inbound flight was diverted to Southend due to the ATC restrictions and needing to refuel followed by no crew being available for our flight.

    The flight was due to depart at 17:50 on 10th October 2014, the weather wasn't great and there were delays but as far as I can remember ours was one of, if not the only, flight cancelled. I looked up the weather report for that evening and there was a thunderstorm at around the time we were due to depart which I have mentioned in my correspondence with Easyjet but they managed to operate another flight to a different destination departing at exactly the same time.

    As for rerouting to Bologna, they offered us a flight to Venice departing extremely late from Gatwick or the option to go to Bologna on a much earlier flight and make our own way there which we chose as we didn't want to waste the entire trip. I have had a full refund already for the expense to get from Bologna to Venice which went through really quickly surprisingly.

    Thanks again for your help
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 26th Apr 17, 3:57 PM
    • 864 Posts
    • 450 Thanks
    Tyzap
    Hi yelyahm91,

    To double check your eligibility for compensation you could enter your details into a couple of online flight delay checkers such as this one at Botts...

    https://www.bottonline.co.uk/flight-delay-compensation/calculator

    Others are available.

    I cannot fathom your link to the EJ doc, but that may be just me!

    Good luck.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide.
    • Del123001
    • By Del123001 26th Apr 17, 4:39 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Del123001
    Hi,

    My mum and I fell foul of Easyjet's overbooking policy a couple of weeks ago. We were on stand by at the gate and after everyone else had boarding the gate staff told us there was one seat available and asked if one of us wanted to fly. At this point we did not know when the other of us would be able to fly so declined as we didn't really want to holiday on our own! Later they informed us that as one of us could have boarded, Easyjet will only pay compensation to one person.
    In my view this is wrong as I made the booking for two people together and Easyjet were not able to fulfil that booking so should pay compensation for both people.
    I have filled out their online claim form and put down that I was claiming for both of us and am now waiting for them to get back to me, however I already know that they will refuse to pay.
    Has anyone had any experience of this please?

    Also I should have added - Easyjet state on their website that in the case of overbooking they follow EU regulations and ask for volunteers not to fly in the first instance. This did not happen as we just told when we arrived at the airport to check in (online check in wouldn't work) that we didn't have a seat. Is this any kind of come back to them?

    Thanks
    Last edited by Del123001; 26-04-2017 at 4:44 PM. Reason: Additional information
    • JPears
    • By JPears 26th Apr 17, 4:45 PM
    • 2,898 Posts
    • 820 Thanks
    JPears
    Del - agree with you entirely. When you make a booking with an airline for 2 people, it is invariably because those 2 people (or more) want and indeed, need to travel together.
    Why had they chosen you to be on stand by? Were you actually booked previously, or purchased the tickets on a "standby basis"?
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • CarlBateman
    • By CarlBateman 26th Apr 17, 10:02 PM
    • 9 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    CarlBateman
    Claim unsuccessful, appeal?
    We used Bott & Co on a no-win, no-fee basis.

    Despite the captain stating that we would be entitled to compensation at the time of the flight cancellation, Bott & Co determined it unlikely that they would be successful in recovering compensation as the flight was affected by an Air Traffic Management Decision and in their opinion a court is likely to consider this to be an extraordinary circumstance.

    Would it be worthwhile making an appeal to the CAA/other body?

    TIA
    Carl Bateman
    • Vauban
    • By Vauban 26th Apr 17, 10:57 PM
    • 4,611 Posts
    • 2,039 Thanks
    Vauban
    We used Bott & Co on a no-win, no-fee basis.

    Despite the captain stating that we would be entitled to compensation at the time of the flight cancellation, Bott & Co determined it unlikely that they would be successful in recovering compensation as the flight was affected by an Air Traffic Management Decision and in their opinion a court is likely to consider this to be an extraordinary circumstance.

    Would it be worthwhile making an appeal to the CAA/other body?

    TIA
    Carl Bateman
    Originally posted by CarlBateman
    You're not "appealing" - all that's happened is that a (good) NWNF lawyer has said that they don't want to take the risk of your claim on. This might be because you don't really have a case or because your case is 50/50 - or just too difficult for the relatively small fee the lawyer will make. I've no idea.

    Options? Write to the CAA by all means, but they can only offer a non binding opinion. Or take it to court yourself - plenty of people do it successfully, if you put in the effort. Or see if another NWNF lawyer company will take it on. Or chalk up to experience and walk away.
    • 227Glenshane
    • By 227Glenshane 27th Apr 17, 10:46 AM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    227Glenshane
    Easyjet medical emergency
    Hi Guys,
    Was on a flight with Easyjet which was delayed due to a medical emergency on a flight earlier that day around 8am I think - because of that there was a knock on effect and my flight at 3pm was delayed until 7pm
    Filled in the easyjet compensation form and they sent back the following - as you can see the first line and the rest of the response are at odds!!
    "We’ve reviewed your claim and are pleased to say that you are eligible for EU261 Compensation.

    We can confirm that your flight from Liverpool (LPL) to Belfast Intl (BFS) was delayed by 3hours and 55minutes due to a Medical Emergency.

    Compensation is only payable when the delay is within our control, a technical fault with an aircraft would be an example.

    When delays are not within our control they’re classified under EU law as ‘extraordinary circumstances’. An example of this would be air traffic control strikes or bad weather.

    As your flight delay was caused by a Medical Emergency, this is an extraordinary circumstance, so unfortunately you are not eligible for compensation under article 7 of EU261/2004.

    Once again we’re sorry for the delay of your flight but hope to welcome you on board again soon."
    Any advice please??
    Thank you
    • bspm
    • By bspm 27th Apr 17, 11:02 AM
    • 372 Posts
    • 557 Thanks
    bspm
    Hi Guys,
    Was on a flight with Easyjet which was delayed due to a medical emergency on a flight earlier that day around 8am I think - because of that there was a knock on effect and my flight at 3pm was delayed until 7pm
    Filled in the easyjet compensation form and they sent back the following - as you can see the first line and the rest of the response are at odds!!
    "We’ve reviewed your claim and are pleased to say that you are eligible for EU261 Compensation.

    We can confirm that your flight from Liverpool (LPL) to Belfast Intl (BFS) was delayed by 3hours and 55minutes due to a Medical Emergency.

    Compensation is only payable when the delay is within our control, a technical fault with an aircraft would be an example.

    When delays are not within our control they’re classified under EU law as ‘extraordinary circumstances’. An example of this would be air traffic control strikes or bad weather.

    As your flight delay was caused by a Medical Emergency, this is an extraordinary circumstance, so unfortunately you are not eligible for compensation under article 7 of EU261/2004.

    Once again we’re sorry for the delay of your flight but hope to welcome you on board again soon."
    Any advice please??
    Thank you
    Originally posted by 227Glenshane
    What the first line is saying is, yes, you are entitled to compensation as your flight was indeed delayed over the required time to justify a compensation payment.

    They then go on to explain why your flight was delayed, even though you knew why.

    Airlines don't have to accept every claim and they can turn them down if 'extraordinary circumstances' apply. However if this is the case, the airline still has a duty of care to passengers.

    The rules state that airlines must provide passengers with accommodation, meals and refreshments and transport between the airport and accommodation. Airlines are breaking the rules if they shirk this obligation, this does not appear to be the case with you as the delay did not mean you incurred any extra charges at point of travel? If the delay caused you more costs on arrival, late landing extra parking etc then you might be able to ask them to address those costs.

    The crucial part of this is that it says 'which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken'. I don't see how they could have possibly known there was going to be a medical emergency.
    • richardw
    • By richardw 27th Apr 17, 11:13 AM
    • 17,881 Posts
    • 7,296 Thanks
    richardw
    Please re-post on the easyJet thread, where you may get more interesting responses.
    Last edited by richardw; 27-04-2017 at 11:23 AM.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
    • yelyahm91
    • By yelyahm91 27th Apr 17, 3:22 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    yelyahm91
    Hi Tyzap

    Thanks for your suggestion, I had already checked with Bott before discussing my claim with easyjet customer services but if I don't get anywhere I think I'll have to use them as a last resort.

    Sorry about the link you should be able to copy and paste it into your browser to take you to dropbox. I had to shorten it as it was so long lol
    • fifeken
    • By fifeken 28th Apr 17, 5:22 PM
    • 2,136 Posts
    • 1,097 Thanks
    fifeken
    I cannot fathom your link to the EJ doc, but that may be just me!
    Originally posted by Tyzap
    Try this:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zw7i11rkf1m1w2e/CEDR%20No.%20521755%20-%20May%20v%20easyJet%20Airline%20Company%20Limited .%20Respondent%27s%20submissions.pdf?dl=0
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 29th Apr 17, 8:50 AM
    • 864 Posts
    • 450 Thanks
    Tyzap
    yelyahm91,

    I have sent you some info via PM.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide.
    • Del123001
    • By Del123001 29th Apr 17, 3:17 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Del123001
    Overbooking
    Del - agree with you entirely. When you make a booking with an airline for 2 people, it is invariably because those 2 people (or more) want and indeed, need to travel together.
    Why had they chosen you to be on stand by? Were you actually booked previously, or purchased the tickets on a "standby basis"?
    Originally posted by JPears

    Thank for your reply JPears.

    We were put on standby by Easyjet. When I was trying to check in online the night before the flight it wasn't working, and said that we needed to go to the check in desk at the airport. When we got there they explained that they had oversold the flight by 2 seats and claimed that we were the last to check in and therefore we were placed on standby.
    • Caz3121
    • By Caz3121 29th Apr 17, 4:39 PM
    • 10,600 Posts
    • 6,934 Thanks
    Caz3121
    We were put on standby by Easyjet. When I was trying to check in online the night before the flight it wasn't working, and said that we needed to go to the check in desk at the airport. When we got there they explained that they had oversold the flight by 2 seats and claimed that we were the last to check in and therefore we were placed on standby.
    Originally posted by Del123001
    You were very possibly last to check in...checkin for Easyjet flights open 30 days before the flight (unlike some airlines which is 24 hours) so it is likely if you waited till the night before there would have been no seats left to allocate hence being unable to complete
    • JPears
    • By JPears 1st May 17, 12:55 PM
    • 2,898 Posts
    • 820 Thanks
    JPears
    Either way, its a case of denied boarding (they have admitted overbooked by 2?) so compensation due for 2 people.
    You will probably have to escalte to NBA then file court papers to make them see sense.
    In fact I would be also claiming additional expenses as EJ knew the day before that you didn't have seats, yet still instructed you to go to the airport!
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • Vauban
    • By Vauban 1st May 17, 1:16 PM
    • 4,611 Posts
    • 2,039 Thanks
    Vauban
    Either way, its a case of denied boarding (they have admitted overbooked by 2?) so compensation due for 2 people.
    You will probably have to escalte to NBA then file court papers to make them see sense.
    In fact I would be also claiming additional expenses as EJ knew the day before that you didn't have seats, yet still instructed you to go to the airport!
    Originally posted by JPears
    I'm not so sure.

    Whilst it seems right that Easyjet originally said that both passengers might not be able to fly, in the event only one of these was denied boarding (unless I've misunderstood).

    The issue is that one of the passengers (not unreasonably) didn't want to fly without their companion. But the airline's argument is that this was out of choice, not because they didn't have a seat.

    It seems pretty cruddy to me that an airline would seek to withhold compensation in these circumstances, but I'm not as confident as you JP that a court would rule for the OP.
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 1st May 17, 4:57 PM
    • 864 Posts
    • 450 Thanks
    Tyzap
    I'm not so sure.

    Whilst it seems right that Easyjet originally said that both passengers might not be able to fly, in the event only one of these was denied boarding (unless I've misunderstood).

    The issue is that one of the passengers (not unreasonably) didn't want to fly without their companion. But the airline's argument is that this was out of choice, not because they didn't have a seat.

    It seems pretty cruddy to me that an airline would seek to withhold compensation in these circumstances, but I'm not as confident as you JP that a court would rule for the OP.
    Originally posted by Vauban
    I tend to agree with Vauban.

    EJ and CEDR would probably have to follow the 'letter of the regs' but I do feel that a judge, who has a little more discretion, may be more sympathetic.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide.
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

177Posts Today

1,317Users 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