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

strebor44

Delayed in both directions

Paid out
ZB229 Palma - Gatwick 18/5/2012 (just over 3 hours got £108 each)

Havent paid out (but I havent given up)
ZB228 Gatwick to Palma 11/5/12 (just over 5 hours delay) - reason fault in engine control system withdrew plane and put on next available.

The sceptic in my thinks they paid the lesser delay in the hope I would then go away.

I have found legal case studies from EU courts where the ruling was that Airlines could NOT claim exceptional circumstances for mechanical faults/failures as this was part and parcel of running an airline so was not exceptionla circumstances.

Vauban

Centipede100 wrote: »

Why did you only receive £108 for your delay on the return flight from PMI-LGW?

You were entitled to 250 euros which equates to approx double what you have received!!!

This is presumably Monarch still paying out only half of what is owed for flights between 3-4 hours.

Are they misunderstanding the law, or deliberately banking on people like strebor not knowing to what they are actually entitled?

friendofbillw2

A brief update.

Monarch have acknowledged service of my claim and now have until mid-May to file their defence.

I can't wait. Bring it on!

wytangel

Vauban wrote: »

This is the key paragraph. It is also a joke.

So basically, there was a problem with a flight two flights before yours, and as a result the airline decided to use your plane - for which there was no technical problem - to carry those passengers instead.

The only thing "extraordinary" about this is Monarch's chutzpah - I cannot see how their defence would stand up in Court.

alibythesea wrote: »

Re: Flight ZB743 Malaga to London Gatwick on 14th October 2012

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 on 13th October 2012 an aircraft within the Monarch fleet developed an air bleed leak in the left hand side wing duct, between the engine and fuselage, which rendered the aircraft inoperable and requiring unscheduled maintenance in the aircraft hangar. Engineers were able to rectify the fault in order for the aircraft to operate the London Gatwick to Sharm El Sheik flight on 13th October, albeit with a delay.

However upon arrival in Sharm El Sheik the operating crew exceeded their legal flying hours as a result of the technical fault and consequent engineering work and were required to have the requisite hours of minimum rest. This led to a delay in the scheduled departure time of the inbound Sharm El Sheik to London Gatwick flight, which operated at the earliest opportunity the following day, 14th October. This in turn meant that the aircraft was not in position to operate the subsequent flight from London Gatwick.

In order to reduce further delay times and recover the operating schedule, the decision was made to operate this flight on the aircraft originally scheduled to operate your flight from Malaga to London Gatwick. As a result, this unfortunately led to a delay to your flight which was then operated on the first available aircraft within the Monarch fleet.

It was also unfortunate that despite Monarch’s best efforts there was no availability to transfer passengers to an aircraft chartered from a third party operator.

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.


Yours sincerely,

EU Claim Team
Monarch Airlines

This is the email that I received a few minutes ago. At the time we were told that a larger plane was needed because of overbooking and that this was the norm for a weekend Malaga to Gatwick flight at that time! Not sure what to do now. Any advice appreciated. It doesn't look like EC to me.

Vauban is right, this is a joke. The sequence of events is:
1. ZB246 LGW/SSH 13Oct2012 delayed 4+ hours by a defect, which Monarch claim is an EC (disputable).
2. ZB247 SSH/LGW 13Oct2012 therefor delayed to 14Oct2012 as the crew exceed legal flying hours (predictable when ZB246 departed).
3. ZB248 LGW/SSH 14Oct2012 therefor had no plane/crew to service it, so Monarch co-opted the plane/crew intended for ZB742 below (an entirely operational decision).
4. ZB742 LGW/AGP 14Oct2012 therefor delayed by 4+ hours (waiting for a substitute plane/crew).
5. ZB743 AGP/LGW 14Oct2012 (alibythesea's flight) therefore delayed - to 15Oct2012?.
I've just submitted a N1 claim (after the usual claim/deny/NBA process) for 3 adults on ZB742 (ie. 4 above) - suggest you do so on ZB743.

BfP

Hi all

Anyone any experience with a claim in relation to ZB1377, Venice to Manchester on Sunday 6th January 2013?

suelees1

BfP wrote: »

Hi all

Anyone any experience with a claim in relation to ZB1377, Venice to Manchester on Sunday 6th January 2013?

check first page for all flights discussed on here

BfP

Thanks, its not on that list so just trying to find out if anyone has claimed.

Vauban

BfP wrote: »

Thanks, its not on that list so just trying to find out if anyone has claimed.

The chances are slim. There have been only a few instances of folk on here from the sane flight running into each other.

Mark2spark

Mattyc1977 wrote: »

Our records show that on the day of your flight, the aircraft scheduled to operate your inbound flight landed in Sharm El Sheikh on schedule after having completed the outbound sector. Prior to its departure back to the UK, the crew reported that the right hand wing deflector panel had detached at hinge line. We arranged for an engineer to be flown out to Sharm El Sheikh to rectify the fault. Upon arrival, he established that the hinge pin had sheared during flap operation and he advised that this fault is not detectable until failure. It was unfortunate that as a result of the time required to investigate and resolve this problem, your flight was subject to an unavoidable overnight delay.

I believe this flight is already listed in the OP

suelees1

Vauban wrote: »

There have been only a few instances of folk on here from the sane flight.....

Freudian slip Vauban?