Care and assistance for airline passengers

mikey72

But are they a "Community carrier" with ""a valid operating licence granted by a Member State in accordance with the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 of 23 July 1992 on licensing of air carriers(5);"
or do they have a swiss licence.

*j*

Wish I knew!!

jammin_2

Cityboy wrote: »

Switzerland also signed up to these regs so any Swiss airline is also bound by the rules.

A non-EU Member State signed up voluntarily to an EU regulation?

It would seem that Swiss claim they are not, in fact, a "Community carrier":

We would like to point out, for good order’s sake, that SWISS is not liable for any further claims, such as overnight accommodation or any compensatory damage amounts. This is because the flights concerned have had to be cancelled for force majeure reasons, and not through any fault on SWISS’s part.
SWISS is, however, voluntarily striving to offer overnight accommodation to customers who are currently away from home wherever possible. This offer is presently limited to one night. Here, too, we would like to emphasise that SWISS is taking this action voluntarily to assist its customers, and there is no automatic entitlement to accommodation of this kind.

http://www.swiss.com/web/EN/various/Pages/Breaking_news.aspx

*j*

Cityboy wrote: »

Switzerland also signed up to these regs so any Swiss airline is also bound by the rules.

Brilliant, Cityboy. Thanks very much. *j*

mikey72

Be aware, although this may be a law, there are european court cases ongoing, and minutes from the 2008 review show it it widely ignored, and the eu have not taken action. So either a lot of claims will be coming up in court, or maybe a class action somewhere.
It may take quite a while to get money back, so try to spend like it's your money in the mean time.

[FONT=Verdana,Bold][FONT=Verdana,Bold]

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/passengers/air/doc/neb/2008_12_02_minutes.pdf

[/FONT][/FONT]

poet123

Great info.

C_Mababejive

What is there to know...?

A natural occurrence in Iceland is causing an ongoing spewing of volcanic ash into the upper atmosphere which is being circulated by the prevailing weather over much of Western Europe.

Very expensive Aero engines dont like it. they are very simple devices which only like to suck in great volumes of air and wont tolerate volcanic ash.

As a result,airlines wont fly their planes becuase expensive damage and/or death may result.

Thats it.....so live with it.

jammin_2

C_Mababejive wrote: »

What is there to know...?

A natural occurrence in Iceland is causing an ongoing spewing of volcanic ash into the upper atmosphere which is being circulated by the prevailing weather over much of Western Europe.

Very expensive Aero engines dont like it. they are very simple devices which only like to suck in great volumes of air and wont tolerate volcanic ash.

As a result,airlines wont fly their planes becuase expensive damage and/or death may result.

Thats it.....so live with it.

Jesus, thanks for telling us that.

C_Mababejive

Well it does seem like the obvious is ..erm..not so obvious..hence all the mindless threads on the same story.

mikey72

Bit of further reading (UK NEB is the CAA)

"6. ENFORCEMENT BY THE NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT BODIES (NEB)
As the Regulation does not define in detail the competences and tasks to be accomplished by the NEB, passengers are faced with inconsistent application and enforcement of their rights. Passengers filing a complaint often have to wait a very long time before receiving any feedback or they are confronted with a language problem when submitting a claim in another Member State where the flight disruption took place.
Passengers bring cases to the attention of the Commission where the NEB confirm that the air carrier is in breach of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, but that they will not take any further action to enforce the law or sanction the airline.
The Commission has initiated infringement proceedings[12] against the United Kingdom on the basis of Articles 16(1) and 16(2) with a background of Article 12 of the Treaty[13]. The Air Transport Users Council (AUC), the designated complaints handling body, prioritises complaints of UK citizens and/or flights contracted on UK territory.
In the meantime, because progress through the enforcement authorities can be slow, the first cases of private legal actions have been launched"
and
"6.2 . Independence of National Enforcement Bodies
In almost all cases, NEB state that they are independent from the aviation industry. The powers NEB have to take action on individual complaints are variable. Although NEB may have the power to fine an airline, they rarely have the power to impose payment of compensation in individual cases."

this was from a 2007 report,
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007DC0168:EN:HTML:NOT

reviewed in the 2008 one quoted earlier

the 2009 one had nothing new either (but they did agree to update the complaint form)
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/passengers/air/doc/neb/2009_05_14_minutes.pdf