Monarch delays & Compensations. Listed flights denied in O.P.

klint

4poc wrote: »

wasn't sure of the difference between the N1 and online MCOL, ease-wise and cost-wise.

Others have previously mentioned that you need to name all passengers as claimants but there is not enough room on the online form to name multiple claimants, therefore it's best to use the N1 form if claiming for more than just yourself.

richardw

klint wrote: »

Others have previously mentioned that you need to name all passengers as claimants but there is not enough room on the online form to name multiple claimants, therefore it's best to use the N1 form if claiming for more than just yourself.

Claimants must be listed in the claimants box, if the MCOL box isn't big enough, use N1.

This is one of the first things their lawyers look for.

NorthumberlandLady

stephaniehuddy wrote: »

Hi was anyone on a flight from goa to Manchester on 26 01 2008 which was delayed for 23 hours due to a bird flying into one of the engines. Im pretty sure it was a Monach flight as it stopped in Bahrain, or how can I find out the flight number.

Hi!
We were on a delayed flight MAN - GOI with monarch in December 2008. The outbound flight was MON4502 and the inbound flight was MON4503 - not sure if this is of any help to you? This was the flight which stopped in Bahrain but as the flights were 11 months after yours it is possible the flight numbers changed.
FYI the outbound flights were on a Saturday and the return flights were on a Sunday.

The_Wingco

I too hadn't retained a flight booking ref, but was able to dig out a bank statement detailing payment for air fares, in addition to timed debit card transactions made during our 10-hour delay at Gatwick and again at our destination the following day. Monarch, in their letter refusing me compensation, IMO have acknowledged our presence on the flight. If they refuse to recognise your claim just because you can't provide evidence of booking/boarding, you could ask them to prove that you weren't on your flight. In my case, I'm off to court now. Good luck to you, keep pushing.

Purplepenguin

Purplepenguin wrote: »

Does anyone have any information of Flight Mon 5764 Gatwick to Sharm el Sheikh 09/07/2009 it was delayed for around 5 hours if I recall. I looked for it on Flightstats but it doesn't recognize the flight number stating that no Monarch flights landed that day!! I only have my booking confirmation from Cosmos no boarding passes!

As no-one has replied I assume no-one has put a claim in regarding this flight! Flightstats doesn't seem to give information on certain charter flights so none the nearer as to why this flight was delayed (I can't remember)! Any advice would be very welcome.

Purplepenguin

Thanks Centipede100 for the advice I'll contact the airline.

Vauban

Purplepenguin wrote: »

Thanks Centipede100 for the advice I'll contact the airline.

PP,

Just put in the claim - Monarch will tell you the reason you were delayed, and either pay up (very unlikely) or tell you that this was "extraordinary circumstances".

Vauban

Purplepenguin

Cheers Vauban after reading some of the posts regarding Monarch I think I have my work cut out but will give it a go!

HitAndMiss

I received a reply from Paul Keithley Head of Customer Services about the reduction of my claim by 50% for my flight from Fuerteventura. He stated
"The original wording of EC261/2004 seemed to apply to situations where a passengers's flight was cancelled. The European Court of Justice in the "Sturgeon" case equated clearly to cancellations and thus made it possible for compensation to be paid in respect of flight delays as determined by the distance travelled, the route and length of delay. However the court has also stipulated that compensation could be halved provided was less than 4 hours in duration. I trust that clarifys our position regarding settlement of your claim"

Is this correct, has anyone else received a similar response and is worth persuing my claim

lisafoster

HitAndMiss wrote: »

I received a reply from Paul Keithley Head of Customer Services about the reduction of my claim by 50% for my flight from Fuerteventura. He stated
"The original wording of EC261/2004 seemed to apply to situations where a passengers's flight was cancelled. The European Court of Justice in the "Sturgeon" case equated clearly to cancellations and thus made it possible for compensation to be paid in respect of flight delays as determined by the distance travelled, the route and length of delay. However the court has also stipulated that compensation could be halved provided was less than 4 hours in duration. I trust that clarifys our position regarding settlement of your claim"

Is this correct, has anyone else received a similar response and is worth persuing my claim

The 50% compensation rule only relates to flights that were a distance of more than 3500km and where the delay was more than 3 hours but less than 4 hours. Full compensation is due on flights of less than 3500km