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

skinnybloke

Hi - I originally posted this on the main forum and was advised to repost it here:

Eventually got an email reply from Monarch to a 2nd letter asking about the progress regarding this flight - Flight ZB955 Palma to Birmingham on 04th October 2012 which was delayed by about 8hrs. This is their reply:

Further to your claim for delay compensation, we are writing to advise the outcome of our investigation into your case.

Monarch Airlines aims as its first priority to provide its passengers with a safe and efficient service. We would like to reassure you that every reasonable effort is made to ensure that our flights depart on time and in the unlikely event we are unable to do so through disruption, we aim to provide a solution at the earliest opportunity.

As previously advised, in some circumstances passengers may be entitled to compensation for delay arising from such disruption under European Union laws. However, any monetary payments are subject to certain criteria being satisfied. Under these laws where the disruption is caused by an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ which the airline was reasonably unable to prevent, the carrier is not obliged to pay compensation. Extraordinary circumstances have been defined by the courts and the European Regulations themselves provide a non-exhaustive list of which circumstances can indeed be categorised as extraordinary.

Our records show that the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight was unavailable due to crew being unavailable after operating a previously delayed flight, this delay was caused by a medical emergency involving a passenger causing the aircraft to divert and incur and delay. Unfortunately these events led to a delay in the outbound flight to Palma, and consequently delayed scheduled departure time of your flight. As a consequence and in order to reduce the length of your delay, your flight was operated on the first available aircraft with a new crew from within the Monarch fleet.

Having considered the factual background of this case, we are satisfied that the disruption was caused by an extraordinary circumstance that could not have reasonably been prevented by Monarch Airlines. We are, therefore, unable to accept your claim for compensation for the reasons given.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can provide any further assistance or information.

Is there any way to get proof that this is the case?

At the airport they said that the problem was due to a luggage problem on a flight from Israel causing a knock on affect (cannot remember the details - need to double check with friends), not a medical emergency.

Can they do this?

Is this worth following up, and if so how do I follow it up?

Another point, funny how a company that does most of it's business online, will not accept emails regarding this issue but are quite happy using emails to reply!

HitAndMiss

Thank you Centipede100 for your advise. Does anyone know what the "Sturgeon" case says or where I can find details. Is it worth refeeing back tothe CAA about this specifice subject and if they confirm the Sturgeon case is not applicable then take Monarch to the Small Claims Court. Surely even Monartch's legal team would not quote tthis case without some justification

Caz3121

HitAndMiss wrote: »

T Does anyone know what the "Sturgeon" case says or where I can find details. Is it worth refeeing back tothe CAA about this specifice subject and if they confirm the Sturgeon case is not applicable then take Monarch to the Small Claims Court. Surely even Monartch's legal team would not quote tthis case without some justification

Links to Sturgeon are in the FAQs >>> https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4421185

Magic_Moments

What is the CAA viw on the "Sturgeon" case. Monarch using this case in their defence will hasve any have any bearing on the claim if it is taken to he Small Claim court. I cannot see exactly what the Stugeon case says on the specific point but am not too good with legal documents. Thank you

pb1968

Another rejected claim due to ECs.
ZB634, Manchester-Paphos 07-Aug-2011, delay 6hrs 20 mins.

Our records show that due to technical faults which rendered two aircraft within our fleet unserviceable and unable to fly, there were insufficient aircraft to operate your flight on time. One aircraft suffered fault with the air conditioning packs requiring a spare part to be flown from Hamburg in order for the problem to be rectified. A second aircraft suffered a problem with a heat sensor on the angle of attack which, again, required rectification. As a consequence and in order to minimise disruption, passengers on your flight were transferred to the first available aircraft.

Vauban

pb1968 wrote: »

Another rejected claim due to ECs.
ZB634, Manchester-Paphos 07-Aug-2011, delay 6hrs 20 mins.

Our records show that due to technical faults which rendered two aircraft within our fleet unserviceable and unable to fly, there were insufficient aircraft to operate your flight on time. One aircraft suffered fault with the air conditioning packs requiring a spare part to be flown from Hamburg in order for the problem to be rectified. A second aircraft suffered a problem with a heat sensor on the angle of attack which, again, required rectification. As a consequence and in order to minimise disruption, passengers on your flight were transferred to the first available aircraft.

The implication of their letter is that your plane was used elsewhere, because of two other planes' technical failures. If so, you would win a case hands down. Indeed, it pretty disgraceful that Monarch should have the temerity to refuse a claim in such circumstances. Write them a Letter Before Action giving them 14 days to settle - all the info and links are in the FAQs.

LucyLocket99

I sent my standard letter as taken from the website and had quite a prompt reply to fill out the claim forms. However this asks for copies of original booking information or boarding cards but I do not have any of this as it dates back to 2008. Does anyone know if I can still claim as it was a flight to Mexico which was over 6 hours late so could be worth quite a lot!
Thanks for your help.

Mark2spark

OP updated.

Mark2spark

LucyLocket99 wrote: »

I sent my standard letter as taken from the website and had quite a prompt reply to fill out the claim forms. However this asks for copies of original booking information or boarding cards but I do not have any of this as it dates back to 2008. Does anyone know if I can still claim as it was a flight to Mexico which was over 6 hours late so could be worth quite a lot!
Thanks for your help.

There's no legal requirement for you to produce these items, although some evidence of purchasing 'the service' will be required.
Passport entry stamps at Cancun is a good start.

LBD

Hi Mark,

Hope you had good holiday and nice to have you back...:)