Flight delay help needed.

poet123

malkie76 wrote: »

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.



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.

As I said before I had monies included for "loss of enjoyment" in a previous travel related small claims court case which I conducted on behalf of my mother approx 11 years ago, so it can and does happen.

The delay impacted the break and so the two events are related. It also goes to prove that we placed a great deal of importance on the break that we were prepared to make those changes at our own expense with no guarantee of reimbursement.

As you say, we will see. The case may well be stayed in any event.

richardw

poet123 wrote: »

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.

BTW 27.14 (g) http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/courts/procedure-rules/civil/contents/parts/part27.htm#IDAOBFT

Be very careful.

melb

As it says in that link from RichardW claims initially started in the Small Claims Court can be allocated to other courts if the case is thought be complicated in law even though the amounts being claimed may be minimal so that could be a risk in terms of costs - haven't read the whole thread but Richard's link broght back horrible memories of our boundary dispute court case years ago

poet123

richardw wrote: »

BTW 27.14 (g) http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/courts/procedure-rules/civil/contents/parts/part27.htm#IDAOBFT

Be very careful.

I am au fait with the rules. The reasonable issue referred to pertains to the acceptance of an offer, I suspect it is unlikely that Ryanair will make an offer, if they do the case would not proceed.

melb wrote: »

As it says in that link from RichardW claims initially started in the Small Claims Court can be allocated to other courts if the case is thought be complicated in law even though the amounts being claimed may be minimal so that could be a risk in terms of costs - haven't read the whole thread but Richard's link broght back horrible memories of our boundary dispute court case years ago

The points of law in dispute are not complicated, and would not fit on any other track for the sums involved.

bevanuk

I don't really know why you came on here asking for advice. Every point anyone has made you have countered - I don't see one that has been taken on board. You already knew what you were doing.

poet123

bevanuk wrote: »

I don't really know why you came on here asking for advice. Every point anyone has made you have countered - I don't see one that has been taken on board. You already knew what you were doing.

Not really true. I initially considered that the associated costs could be recoverable under the EU regs,( if and when they are implemented as I was unaware of the Sturgeon ruling) but having been told by those who know that this was not the case I then looked at alternative avenues to recoup my out of pocket expenses. It would seem that court action is the only way I can attempt this.

The fact that others do not think this is the way forward is where the countering of points has arisen.

gingerdad

You don't say if your claim 11 years ago was against a LCC or tour operator

And having worked in the industry abit a while ago I doubt you'll be successful

poet123

gingerdad wrote: »

You don't say if your claim 11 years ago was against a LCC or tour operator

And having worked in the industry abit a while ago I doubt you'll be successful

It was against a hotel. And you may be right, but I think it is worth a punt.

richardw

An airline is likely to say 'extraordinary circumstances' how will you respond?

poet123

richardw wrote: »

An airline is likely to say 'extraordinary circumstances' how will you respond?

That according to the EU regs mechanical issues are not categorised thus.