Diverted flight taxi fare refund

bagand96

Also, seeing that Thomson 'don't recognise EC261/2004', it seems unfair to keep people waiting as they can't even claim compensation under the EC regulation in this instance!

I think you are holding on to this very small point far too much. You were told this by a call centre operative, who I'd wager probably didn't even know what it is. Granted, poor customer service/staff training. Thomson clearly do recognise it though, as:

a) They laid on the onward transportation
b) They are one of the main parties involved in appealing a big part of EC261/2004 at the high court.

You originally stated there was no information on whether you would have accomodation or onward transport. Then you have later stated that you were informed twice they were seeking coaches? I'm not out and out defending Thomson, and I'm not replying just to be difficult. But if you put your own time, effort, and even money into proceeding this by legal channels, I'd wager Thomson will have a pretty good defence, and they will be able to present all this and pick apart your arguments far better than anyone on this forum.

Gert_Lush

bagand96 wrote: »

I think you are holding on to this very small point far too much. You were told this by a call centre operative, who I'd wager probably didn't even know what it is. Granted, poor customer service/staff training. Thomson clearly do recognise it though, as:

a) They laid on the onward transportation
b) They are one of the main parties involved in appealing a big part of EC261/2004 at the high court.

You originally stated there was no information on whether you would have accomodation or onward transport. Then you have later stated that you were informed twice they were seeking coaches. I'm not out and out defending Thomson, and I'm not replying just to be difficult. But if you put your own time, effort, and even money into proceeding this by legal channels, I'd wager Thomson will have a pretty good defence, and they will be able to present all this and pick apart your arguments far better than anyone on this forum.

I'm just repeating what Thomson said to me regarding EC261/04 - I'm just the messenger. Thomson told me this.

I was told twice that they didn't know what was happening with coaches or accommodation.

bagand96

I was told twice that they didn't know what was happening with coaches or accommodation.

I hate to quote you:

We were told twice that they were trying to get coaches or accommodate us.

Cityboy has very strong advice in the first reply to this thread saying that you will need to have a very convincing story to win this case. Thomson will surely just point out:

- You chose to take a taxi. Thomson are not responsible for any arrangements (such as your hotel) outwith their contract with you
- Coaches were provided as per Thomson's EC261/2004 obligations. We can assume your fellow passengers used these coaches. You chose your taxi.

Your whole case hinges on your opinion that:

a) The lack of information was not acceptable
b) The timescale in getting transport was not acceptable

Thomson will claim the extraordinary circumstances caused by the weather in defence to both of the above. What will go in their favour is that the troubles with the snow were so well reported and documented. All of London's airports were closed, and all of Thomson's (as well as other airlines) aircraft were diving into the first available tarmac they could. They probably didn't want to be at Robin Hood Airport either.

Your whole case rests on you convincing someone that the delay wasn't acceptable. If you got a taxi, yet the other passengers waited for, and travelled on coaches provided by Thomson, then you have one hell of a case to make.

Gert_Lush

bagand96 wrote: »

I hate to quote you:




Cityboy has very strong advice in the first reply to this thread saying that you will need to have a very convincing story to win this case. Thomson will surely just point out:

- You chose to take a taxi. Thomson are not responsible for any arrangements (such as your hotel) outwith their contract with you
- Coaches were provided as per Thomson's EC261/2004 obligations. We can assume your fellow passengers used these coaches. You chose your taxi.

Your whole case hinges on your opinion that:

a) The lack of information was not acceptable
b) The timescale in getting transport was not acceptable

Thomson will claim the extraordinary circumstances caused by the weather in defence to both of the above. What will go in their favour is that the troubles with the snow were so well reported and documented. All of London's airports were closed, and all of Thomson's (as well as other airlines) aircraft were diving into the first available tarmac they could. They probably didn't want to be at Robin Hood Airport either.

Your whole case rests on you convincing someone that the delay wasn't acceptable. If you got a taxi, yet the other passengers waited for, and travelled on coaches provided by Thomson, then you have one hell of a case to make.

Thanks very much for your input - much appreciated. I'll let you know how I get on.

bagand96

Gert_Lush wrote: »

Thanks very much for your input - much appreciated. I'll let you know how I get on.

Please do let us know. Like I said before I'm not trying to be difficult; nor am I blindly defending Thomson. Just trying to illustrate from the point of view of an outsider what you may be up against.

By the same token it's easy to look at it in black and White but I'm sure it was a nightmare scenario that none if us would have liked to be in. All the best trying to get your money back.