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

Heidspide

Our flight was delayed 7 hours due to crew illness - surprise, surprise Monarch are claiming extraordinary circumstances. Here's what they have said:

Our records show that the aircraft operating your flight was forced to divert to Gatwick on an earlier flight after the First Officer became ill. As a consequence, a new crew had to be sourced before the aircraft could continue its flying programme. Unfortunately, these events meant that the aircraft was subsequently unable to be in position at Birmingham in order for your flight to depart on schedule and a delay was therefore unavoidable.

This doesn't sound "extraordinary" to me - do you think I have a case to take to small claims? I know lots of people mention "technical" but are there any cases with crew illness?

Ich_2

should have standby crew available to prevent the kind of long delay you suffered.

As I mentioned on another thread, what if they have used them all on previous flights and the number they normally have is sufficient for 99% of the time?

tracy1209

tracy1209 wrote: »

Hi we were due to depart 20.10 arrive 12.30
but did not depart till 23.30 ish and landed 4.50 but how do I prove it was a drill ?

they will not admit it !

Vauban wrote: »

How delayed were you? Does it take three hours to do a bomb scare drill? Security threats would be an extraordinary circumstance, in my opinion. A decision to do a drill would not.

dajean

I AM TRYING TO FIND A FLIGHT NUMBER FOR A MONARCH FLIGHT FROM MANCHESTER TO GOA 27THNOV 2007 DELAYED FOR 24HRS i HAVE REGISTERED ON THE SITE BUT DONT KNOW HOW TO USE IT CAN ANYONE HELP PLEASE ACCORDING TO THE MONEY EXPERT SITE i AM STILL WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT TO CLAIM AS IT GOES BACK TO 2005

Caz3121

dajean wrote: »

I AM TRYING TO FIND A FLIGHT NUMBER FOR A MONARCH FLIGHT FROM MANCHESTER TO GOA 27THNOV 2007 DELAYED FOR 24HRS i HAVE REGISTERED ON THE SITE BUT DONT KNOW HOW TO USE IT CAN ANYONE HELP PLEASE ACCORDING TO THE MONEY EXPERT SITE i AM STILL WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT TO CLAIM AS IT GOES BACK TO 2005

Route: Manchester to Goa Departure Date: Tue 27-Nov-2007 Departure Time: All day No flights were found departing from Manchester Airport and arriving in Dabolim Airport at the given time period.

Your other thread gave the date as 27th January which is why you would have been out of time as per item 3 here >>
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/travel/flight-delays

If it is November you are within the 6 years but flightstats does not have any information on your flight

klint

After many months of waiting without response from Monarch, I received an email reply from their EU Claim Team the day after I sent an NBA by post to John Marray, Company Secretary. The content of their email was the typical fob-off with exceptional circumstances, which was quite predictable, even though the speed with which they sent it was not.

<quote>Our records show that during pre-departure checks, the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight was found to have developed a technical problem with the left rudder, which rendered the aircraft unserviceable and unsafe to operate. Despite Monarch’s best efforts, we were unable to transfer passengers on to another aircraft from within our fleet and therefore, a delay in the departure of your flight was unavoidable. Consequently, your flight departed at the earliest opportunity once the aircraft was declared serviceable.</quote>

The rest of the email was the same template that was used for everybody else's reply.

So one more NBA and then off to court.

Vauban

Centipede100 wrote: »

Having sent a NBA (stating you will take legal action if they neither respond with a valid defence nor settle your claim in full) already you don't need to send another...

No, no, just one more NBA - it's bound to work ...;)

Centipede is of course right. The NBA is a clear declaration of intent that you will take it to court: once it's issued you can only follow-through or walk away. Further NBAs would simply lack credibility.

klint

Thanks for the advice, Centipede and Vauban. The reason I was intending to send a further NBA was that my initial one said I was going to issue legal proceedings because they had failed to reply to me with the reason for the delay. Now that they have just replied with a reason, albeit an invalid one, shouldn't I tell them that I don't accept it and reaffirm my intention to take them to court? If I just go ahead with a court application, isn't there a risk that the court would see this as not giving them a chance to state their defence, and thus refuse to make Monarch pay me the court fees?

4poc

Hi all,
have been sweating over filling in N1 form but finally got it finished, would anyone be willing to cast a glance over it for me before i take it to local court? If so may i pm you?

suelees1

klint wrote: »

....Our records show that during pre-departure checks, the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight was found to have developed a technical problem with the left rudder, which rendered the aircraft unserviceable and unsafe to operate. Despite Monarch’s best efforts, we were unable to transfer passengers on to another aircraft from within our fleet and therefore, a delay in the departure of your flight was unavoidable. Consequently, your flight departed at the earliest opportunity once the aircraft was declared serviceable.</quote>

The rest of the email was the same template that was used for everybody else's reply.

So one more NBA and then off to court.

Almost identical to our letter....the more rudder excuses the better