Flight delay help needed.

richardw

What will you do if Ryanair let this go to a full hearing and start muttering costs?

poet123

richardw wrote: »

What will you do if Ryanair let this go to a full hearing and start muttering costs?

Costs ( as in punitive legal representation costs) are not payable by either party in the SCC.

richardw

They may just throw the 'unreasonable behaviour' one in bringing this case and threaten costs because of unreasonable behaviour.

Don't underestimate how threatening these solicitors and barristers can be.

malkie76

So are you suggesting my claim would be a false one? I can assure you I have the documentation to back it all up. It is not for you (or anyone else) to judge the veracity of it, we experienced it.

No, of course I'm not. I'm 100% sure you were indeed delayed, and indeed suffered disappointment at the hands of an LCC.

Perhaps it's my lack of clarity, but from past experience of you, I very much doubt it.

edit

It's just a simple point I'm raising. Car insurance has been increased due to customers being tempted into claiming for injury (whether measurable or not).
Should precedent be set for compensation for 'disappointment' at the hands of an LCC they'd be receiving thousands of claims a day for very spurious reasons. The net result would be an increase in costs for every passenger.

Some injuries in car accidents are real. Some disappointments with airlines are real. I'd rather airlines didn't have to twist themselves into knots trying to measure 'disappointment'.

Personally I never leave myself in the position where I could get caught out, and always ensure I have a contigency plan. All airlines are subject to delay which can impact on your plans. However you are really stretching things to think you'll have a case of 'disappointment' for a few hours delay which impacted on your onward journey.

bevanuk

So if someone crashes into my car on the way for a 30th meal I can claim against them for "Loss of Enjoyment" if I miss that meal?

poet123

bevanuk wrote: »

So if someone crashes into my car on the way for a 30th meal I can claim against them for "Loss of Enjoyment" if I miss that meal?

A holiday has the enjoyment factor deemed.

richardw wrote: »

They may just throw the 'unreasonable behaviour' one in bringing this case and threaten costs because of unreasonable behaviour.

Don't underestimate how threatening these solicitors and barristers can be.

.
They would have no grounds for that, and their threats would be empty. I am not easily spooked.

malkie76 wrote: »

No, of course I'm not. I'm 100% sure you were indeed delayed, and indeed suffered disappointment at the hands of an LCC.

Perhaps it's my lack of clarity, but from past experience of you, I very much doubt it.

Not a lack of clarity, more the implication that my claim was not valid.

malkie76 wrote: »

It's just a simple point I'm raising. Car insurance has been increased due to customers being tempted into claiming for injury (whether measurable or not).
Should precedent be set for compensation for 'disappointment' at the hands of an LCC they'd be receiving thousands of claims a day for very spurious reasons. The net result would be an increase in costs for every passenger.

Some injuries in car accidents are real. Some disappointments with airlines are real. I'd rather airlines didn't have to twist themselves into knots trying to measure 'disappointment'.

Personally I never leave myself in the position where I could get caught out, and always ensure I have a contigency plan. All airlines are subject to delay which can impact on your plans. However you are really stretching things to think you'll have a case of 'disappointment' for a few hours delay which impacted on your onward journey.

We had a contingency plan, we paid for an extra night and changed our flights. That contingency cost us in excess of 400 euro, and if the 250pp compensation was forthcoming from the airline that would cover it, but it seems that at best that case will be decided mid 2012 and that all compensation cases are stayed till then.

However, by having the EU reg which deems that amount appropriate it appears the powers that be do recognise the impact of a 5 hour plus delay, even if you don't.

richardw

poet123 wrote: »

They would have no grounds for that, and their threats would be empty. I am not easily spooked.

You may need to take appropriate legal advice to ensure your case is reasonable.

malkie76

We had a contingency plan, we paid for an extra night and changed our flights. That contingency cost us in excess of 400 euro, and if the 250pp compensation was forthcoming from the airline that would cover it, but it seems that at best that case will be decided mid 2012 and that all compensation cases are stayed till then.

The two are completely unrelated events. Any money received will be for the delay to the outbound, not for your unforced changes to your inbound.

However, by having the EU reg which deems that amount appropriate it appears the powers that be do recognise the impact of a 5 hour plus delay, even if you don't.

Indeed, should the court rule against the airlines you will be entitled to delay compensation. This has absolutely no relevance to your changed plans. You are correct, the compensation is for a delay which could easily be interpreted as a disappointment.

You taking things into your own hands and changing your travel plans will be considered totally irrelevant in the view of the airline.

I genuinely hope the courts rule in favour of the airline and we can do away with this hopeless EU regulation. If you are stuck in an airport because the plane has gone tech I fully support the airline's responsibility to look after you (food, accomodation, communication). I do not support additional compensation, nor monies for lost work, or money for 'disappointment'.

I guess we'll find out next year.

Please return and post when you find out the outcome of your attempt for compensation for disappointment, I'd be very interested to learn the consequences.

poet123

richardw wrote: »

You may need to take appropriate legal advice to ensure your case is reasonable.

There is no test for that on the small claims track. Provided you
believe you have grounds, and provided you have given the other side an opportunity to respond and been unable to reach agreement you have met the criteria to raise a case. It is then for the District Judge to decide the merits of the case.

bevanuk

If you are successful with this claim it will open a huge can of worms with delays etc. Be interesting.