travel insurance re flight delay

jhe

we recently holidayed in egypt, unfortunatley our flight home was cancelled. thomson put us up in a hotel. and we flew home the next day, almost 19 hours late. this meant i was unable to return to work as i was still in egypt and had to take a day off work without pay. my travel insurers have compensated me with £20 but will not cover loss of earnings. thomson say they will not compensate for loss of earnings.the flight was cancelled due to a technical problem on their plane, has anyone else had this problem? i would be grateful for any advice.

omelette451

Airlines don't have to cover loss of earnings but EU law states a level of compensation that must be paid if a flight is cancelled for reasons within the airline's control (currently €250). It's always been a grey area whether this applies to technical problems but it's now generally considered that it does, so it may be worth writing to Thomson and asking for it. There was a court ruling on this relatively recently, and if you can find a copy of a relevant news article to enclose with your letter (I think it was against Alitalia, but I'm not too sure) it will only help your case.

dacouch

Travel Insurers pay a small amount for delayed flights, the idea of the payment is to cover the extra costs of food and drinks etc at the airport when your flight is delayed. They do not cover consequential losses eg the wages you have lost as a result of the delay.

Martin has some advice on the EU laws Omellete451 mentions

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/travel/flight-delays#work

jhe

thanks for replies.my insurance is with the post office and doesnt cover for loss earnings.thomson classed the flight as cancelled,we were put into all inclusive hotel and told they would try and get us home next day but couldnt guarantee it!whatever the technical fault was,the plane didnt leave newcastle, a replacement plane had to be found to collect us.thomson say that it is not their fault the plane had a technical fault! or that the flight was cancelled, it was just one of those things in their words!!! then they tried to liken it to my own car if it broke down!!!! .thanks very much for replying and i will read martins posts.

omelette451

jhe wrote: »

thomson say that it is not their fault the plane had a technical fault! or that the flight was cancelled, it was just one of those things in their words!!! then they tried to liken it to my own car if it broke down!!!! .thanks very much for replying and i will read martins posts.

Airlines have got away with saying it's not their fault for years, but the ruling last December (thanks Martin for the date!) makes it clear that it has to be a really exceptional reason for it not to count under the law, so you stand a good chance of succeeding. Definitely make a claim. There's a Dutch law firm that will take on such cases, but there's a fee involved if you win so go direct first.

jhe

thanks omelette451. i will certainly be writing a letter and dont intend to let it drop after the attitude i got off thomsons today. i read martins tips but seems the air transport users council wont be able to help, as the flight was outside the e.u. as soon as i sort out my proof of loss of earnings from my company i will fire a letter off to thomson. as usual it seems certain tour companies dont want to know when things go wrong and complaints made. thanks again for taking the time to reply to me

omelette451

jhe wrote: »

thanks omelette451. i will certainly be writing a letter and dont intend to let it drop after the attitude i got off thomsons today. i read martins tips but seems the air transport users council wont be able to help, as the flight was outside the e.u. as soon as i sort out my proof of loss of earnings from my company i will fire a letter off to thomson. as usual it seems certain tour companies dont want to know when things go wrong and complaints made. thanks again for taking the time to reply to me

You're welcome. Just a hint though - don't specify on your letter that you want a specific amount for loss of earnings as the airline does not have to pay this. What you're claiming is for a specific statutory amount (usually €250, though see Martin's table) under EU Regulation 261/2004. By all means mention that you're out of pocket because you had to take an extra day off work, but the clearer you are that you're claiming what (and only what) you're entitled to under the law the more chance you have of succeeding. Certainly there's no need to send 'proof of loss of earnings' - it's irrelevant whether you have a job, the compensation law applies to everyone equally. Also make sure you specify the amount you're entitled to in euros - although as a British airline Thomson will probably pay out in pounds, the law only makes mention of euros (and therefore theoretically the airline could insist on paying you in euros) and, as I said, the more you seem to know your exact rights, the better your case will be.

jhe

thanks very much again omelette451 thats a great help, i have checked all the paper work i was given in egypt concerning the cancelled flight and it states it was a flight delay, the times are all written down eg scheduled flight times and actual flight time we left., does this make a difference to how i deal with the claim. we were told by the reps in egypt that the flight was cancelled.

omelette451

jhe wrote: »

it states it was a flight delay [...] does this make a difference to how i deal with the claim. we were told by the reps in egypt that the flight was cancelled.

I'm afraid to say I really don't know about this. As I understand it (and the disclaimer is that I may well be wrong!), 'delays' do not attract compensation, only accommodation (which you got) and re-routing at the earliest opportunity. You really need to work out the true status of the flight you were eventually put on; this will require some investigation work on your part. Would it have run anyway if you hadn't been stranded? If yes, that means yours did not run and you were put on a completely different flight. If no, and it ran exclusively for those people who were stranded, I think it does count as a delay not a cancellation. Obviously if the reps told you it was cancelled you could use this as the basis of your claim, though it's likely you'll just be told they shouldn't have said that. It's a simple enough letter to write though, so perhaps it's worth it. If it does turn out not to be eligible for compensation, you could always ask nicely for something to cover loss of earnings anyway. Whatever happens, good luck! Do let us know how you get on.

In case you want to refer to it, the full text of that EU law can be found at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32004R0261:EN:HTML. It's not easy for laymen to understand, but it's there if you want to have a go.

jhe

thanks again omelette451. i will try and decipher the eu law tomorrow. think the flight will be classed as a delay by what you explained.the flight crew landed late at night and stayed at same hotel as i did as they were out of flight time because the delay from uk was so long. but your help is greatly appreciated and i will let you know what the outcome is with thomson

bagand96

I think this will be a delay situation and not a cancellation, especially seeing as the communication from Thomson states delay. I assume that when you did fly back it was the same flight number as the flight you should have been on? (essentially you were on the flight you should have been on, just a different aircraft and much later than planned).

Charter flights very rarely get cancelled. Whereas scheduled airlines can just cancel a flight at the drop of a hat, tour operators and their charter airlines HAVE to get you back; it is part of the contract you sign for the holiday. They can't simply cancel a flight. This is why charter flights can sometimes have very lengthy delays, another airline may well just have cancelled.

As discussed above, under EU law, delays attract no compensation (the law was designed to mitigate against airlines cancelling flights when they feel like it and/or overbooking). It does specifiy that they should look after you; and it seems Thomson did by providing hotels etc... Its also difficult in that the crew would have legally needed that rest period, their duty hours are governed by law.

It seems here that unfortunately Thomson have fulfilled their obligations.