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

Vauban

The_rev wrote: »

The scheduled flight from Cardiff to Orlando broke down in Cardiff (engine failure) so never arrived in America to take us home. We were told that Monarch had to fly a repair crew to Cardiff to fix the plane, then fly that plane to Orlando, rest the cabin crew for at least 8 hours, and then fly us home - hence the 3 days delay.

This was no hardship for us as we had 3 extra days holiday in Florida, and now we've got (I hope) the extra bonus of a large sum of money. Double result!

My sister and brother-in-law also travelled with us, so I've told them to submit a claim as well.

PS: Slight typo in my original post its £510 each not £515, but as you say its still an excellent result.

Thanks Rev - that's very interesting to know. It's similar in many ways to my own claim - whereby we were waiting to return from Egypt but the plane in the UK developed a fault (a cracked windscreen) so it never left London. Our delay was just over 24 hours, but the principle seems broadly similar.

I'd guess that Monarch didn't feel comfortable explaining how a three day delay squares with their legal obligation to get people back as quickly as possible - given three hours, not days, is the stipulation!

I feel sorry for the people waiting to get to Orlando - presumably they lost three days of their holiday? Shocking.

The_rev

Vauban wrote: »

Thanks Rev - that's very interesting to know. It's similar in many ways to my own claim - whereby we were waiting to return from Egypt but the plane in the UK developed a fault (a cracked windscreen) so it never left London. Our delay was just over 24 hours, but the principle seems broadly similar.

I'd guess that Monarch didn't feel comfortable explaining how a three day delay squares with their legal obligation to get people back as quickly as possible - given three hours, not days, is the stipulation!

I feel sorry for the people waiting to get to Orlando - presumably they lost three days of their holiday? Shocking.

Hi Vauban,

"I feel sorry for the people waiting to get to Orlando"

We said the same to the holiday rep at the time - we did feel sorry for the people stuck in Cardiff for three days. It must have been such a disappointment for them.

Good luck with your claim.

What_todo

What_todo wrote: »

Is anyone else pursuing ZB 516 Manchester to Barcelona or ZB 517 Barcelona to Manchester on the 3rd September 2012. I believe that the plane that was operating this run was delayed from Larnaca (ZB 648) and diverted to Birmingham. It would appear that that flight was compensated but not the Barcelona flights. I would appreciate any information about any of those flights.
Many thanks

Forgot to mention that I am also interested in the Manchester to Larnaca flight ZB 647 on the 2nd September 2012.
Thank you

PIP1966_2

Mark2spark wrote: »

It doesn't appear that you've yet sent your NBA letter (see FAQ's for a draft)
I would word it:

Thank you for your reply.
However, there appears to be a misprint. You have confirmed that the delay was caused by a simple technical issue, the likes of which are expressly not covered as extraordinary circumstances, by the rulings in Wallentin-Hermann & Sturgeon ECJ cases, yet you then state that you consider this to be an extraordinary circumstance.
I therefore put you on notice that should you not settle my claim in full within 14 days, then I will proceed to court action without giving you further notice.

Mark - you are absolutely amazing!! If I was successful, I'd definitely buy you a drink:beer:

dantopofsnowdon

Hi, I too have received a letter from Monarch re: MON1829 - Corfu to Manchester 4/6/12 (delay of 5 hours) claiming technical fault was an extraordinary circumstance. Looks like I will have to walk away or go to small claims court. Just thought I would let others know, I did write to the Civil Aviation Authority about my compensation claim against Monarch (including copies of all relevant papers). They replied with the following:
I would like to explain that, as your flight involves EC Regulation 261/2004 and you departed from another European country or from an airport outside Europe to an airport in another European country, I am afraid that we are not in a position to assist. This is because every Member State is required to have a body to receive complaints that fall under the Regulation. These bodies deal with complaints about flights from airports within their country and within their jurisdiction. You should therefore address your complaint directly to the relevant National Enforcement Body (NEB).
??? This appears to me to be in conflict with information within this site. Am I missing something? PLEASE be kind !

111KAB

No CAA are correct you have to write to the NEB in the Country where your flight was departing from. DO NOT WALK AWAY! Either pursue via small claims or if you do not feel confident go to no win no fee firm.

Andrew_Clarkson

ZB565 has also been refused, a nine hour delay in Tenerife last year, because of a faulty nose wheel on the plane. (13/7/2012)

harveysimon

i have received acknowledement re my small claims case re my barcelona 5.5 hours delay
has anybody sufferered a delay on this flight 12/08/12 ZB519?
Why has the case been transeferred to Northampton instead of manchester where i issued proceedings from
thanks

Makela2009

friendofbillw2 wrote: »

Well, tonight I bit the bullet and filed my claim on MCOL.

Particulars as follows :

"The claimant has sought compensation under EC
Regulation 261/2004 for delayed flight number
ZB238 on 20/09/2011 from London Gatwick to
Arrecife Lanzarote with a scheduled arrival
time of 1210. This flight arrived 8 hours and
39 minutes late. The passengers in the party
were the claimant and Xxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxx
travelling under Monarch booking reference
XXXXXX. The scheduled flight length was 2,700
km therefore the claimant seeks EUR 400.00
per passenger. The total is EUR 800.00 and at
today’s Reuters exchange rate this converts
to GBP 683.63. Both passengers completed the
defendant’s standard EU compensation form
and, having had no response to 14 days’
notice before action given by email and post
on 25/03/2013 the claimant now claims GBP
683.63 plus costs."

Again, I'll update as I progress.

Thanks again to all contributors here.

Hi - you've just inspired me to complete my MCOL! Had teh usual letters from Monarch, sent them the NBA etc etc and no luck. Must admit my motication was slightly lacking cause i thought it would be a long drawn out process, but wasn't too bad at all. All systems go - claim has now gone!

thanks!

PeteG1

I've previously claimed with Monarch for flight MON3506, Manchester to Dalaman, 18/09/2010 09:00 from MAN. I used the standard letter that was on this forum at the time, pointing out all the judjements that had gone against the airlines, and asking them to advance any evidence to support their denial of a claim.

The flight was delayed due to technical issues with previous flight.
We were told when we attempted to check in told we could either wait at the airport or return home (we live just 5 miles from the airport), so we chose to return home. We were told to return to MAN at 20:00, for an alternative plane to carry us at 22:00. When were returned at 20:00 the replacement flight was expected to leave at 22:00.
At 00:30 we were told replacement crew had run out of hours, and flight would not leave till 09:00 on 19/10. We returned home and came back again next morning.
We ended up travelling on the original plane that we should have flown on, which arrived at MAN 25 hours late.

Our arrival delay therefore was 26 hours (or 13 hours from the time of the replacement flight).

I wrote to monarch when we returned from holiday, and claimed the 600 euro per passenger plus £208.86 in taxis, meals and drinks, which were incurred solely as a result of the delay.

Monarch replied at the time...

"As you may be already aware, the delay was due to technical problems with the aircarft that was scheduled to operate your flight and we therefore had to re-arrange our flying program in order to arrange for an alternative aircraft to operate your flight."
.......
"Unfortunately, sometime later we then experienced crewing problems and at this point we had to further delay the departure of the flight until the following day."
........
"However, I can see that from your correspondance, you returned home and we are happy to cover the costs incurred. We therefore are sending you a check for £143 to cover the taxi fares and £80 for meals."
........
"I'm afraid that carriers are not required to pay compensation under this regulation, nor are we required to refund any additional costs incurred by passengers."

I wrote back to them last month pointing out that the law had been clarified, and that they were liable for compensation, and that they owed us the amount claimed for compensation, plus the missing £65 of expenses that failed to pay, plus interest since the date of the original claim.

I have just received a reply from them, saying under certain circumatances that may be liable to pay compensation and they included 4 claim forms which they say now have to be filled in, and proof needs to be enclosed with each form.

So I have a few questions I'd like the forum's opinion on.

1) Do I have to complete the forms?, given that they've already accepted the flight was delayed and payed out some of our expenses. If I take it to court could not completing the form go against us?

2) Is there any reason why I should have to submit 4 separate claims, or should I just proceed with the existing claim?

3) Given that they "may" attempt to claim extraordinary circumstances due to a technical fault with the original inbound plane, would the fact that they then arranged an alternative flight, and then had the crew run out of hours, leading to a further 13 hour delay, mean that the could no longer claim EC? as crew running out of hours is definately not considered EC, even by monarchs rules.

4) Would a court be likely to uphold a claim for interest, given that the airline have be using delaying tactics to avoid paying out?

5) Is anyone else claiming against monarch for this flight?

Cheers
Pete