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

Mark2spark

If I'm reading it right (?) Thomson were only contracted (wet leased) to operate the flight *after* a delay of over 3 hours had occurred?
So Can't see how they'll be responsible for a delay that happened before they were (sub) contracted to operate the flight.

jocrad74

I don't know at what point Monarch gave the nod to Thomson, we were told at check in that "due to a technical problem within the Monarch fleet and to keep your delay to a minimum we have arrnaged for you to travel on a Thomson Airways Boeing 767 aircraft. The flight number will remain the same and your original tickets will be accepted at check in".

My point being, had there not been a problem with Monarch's aircraft, we wouldn't have flown Thomson anyway. The crew on the flight advised us that they were on standby and were called in from what they termed " a day off" to operate the flight. Understandably, these things would take time to arrange, but I still don't see how it can be Thomson who are put at fault.

Put it this way, no doubt they will have invoiced Monarch for the use of their time, aircraft and crew, but why would they, or anybody else, agree to help out another airline, if they knew it would render them liable for any complaints or compensation? I can't see why they would agree to do that, which is why I am questioning how they could then be deemed to be liable?

friendofbillw2

I'm pretty sure you should be claiming against Monarch. Your contract was with them so in simple terms they should be compensating you. Monarch should then be claiming from Thomson to the extent that the fault lies with them, but you are not party to the wet lease, so under privity of contract you have no claim at law against Thomson.

It would be interesting if they did try to pass the buck with a delegation or assignment type defence, but I don't think that would stand up.

BUT I am not a lawyer.

Alice_Band

Flight MON3403 Antalya to London Gatwick on 12th July 2009

I have just had my reply from Monarch, after months of waiting - not a left rudder this time....

"...Our records show that prior to departure of the outbound flight from London Gatwick, the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight was found to have developed an engine generator fault which rendered the aircraft unserviceable and unsafe to fly. Despite Monarch’s best efforts, a delay was caused to your flight. In order to reduce the length of your delay, passengers on your flight were transferred to the first available aircraft and departed once it had completed its previous scheduled flights.

Having considered the factual background of this incident, we are satisfied that the disruption in your case 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"

What do you reckon fellow forumites, next course of action?

111KAB

Alice_Band wrote: »

What do you reckon fellow forumites, next course of action?

Notice Before Action letter but worth writing to CAA as likely their response (once received!) will assist in Court action. So couple Court claim (as Monarch will not accept NBA) with letter to CAA and wait 5 months for Court hearing. In the meantime Monarch Airlines MAY come to their senses.

BassBunny

Helppppppppp. I have 2 claims in with Monarch for compensation and like a lot of you feel I am losing the will to live. Both are exactly the same flight number, ZB677 Alicante - Manchester, and are for 7.5 hrs and 4 hrs respectively.
One of them they steadfastly refuse to update me even though both were sent in on the same date, 28/01/13 and I have urged a response twice already.
The 2nd I recieved a rejection with a completely different story to that told by the captain of the plain that eventually picked us up. I challenged this and got this reply.
"Our Ref / 140217
Thank you for your e-mail.

I am sorry that you are disappointed by the outcome of your claim, we have procedures in place to ensure we are assessing such claims in accordance with the applicable legislation. Having reviewed your case we are satisfied that our initial assessment of your claim was correct.

If you remain unhappy with our decision you can refer the matter to the Civil Aviation Authority.".
There was a representative of the CAA on Watchdag last week saying you can refer to them so today I tried. I was directed to an online form

There was a representaive from the CAA on Watchdog last week telling you to refer claims like this to them so today I tried. I found the online form and just over half way through I get a message saying They cannot help as the delay originated from a European airport, Alicante in both cases, so I need to contact the equivalent Spanish Authority. I don’t recall this being mentioned on the show.
This I did, but it’s in SPANISH. So what next? After actually getting the feeling someone could help, now back to square 1 and a couple of hours of my life I won’t get back.
i am sure the answer is somewhere in the 94 pages of postings, but a quick "billy-do" would help.

The_Wingco

111KAB wrote: »

Notice Before Action letter but worth writing to CAA as likely their response (once received!) will assist in Court action. So couple Court claim (as Monarch will not accept NBA) with letter to CAA and wait 5 months for Court hearing. In the meantime Monarch Airlines MAY come to their senses.

I've been following this forum since Day 1 and am at the point of going to County Court following rejection of my claim (I've issued an NBA and Letter of Intent - both ignored). However, I note that the latest advice is to contact the CAA in parallel with Court action. Is there a pro forma referred to anywhere in these 94 pages advising what form a letter to them should say, and is it being suggested that Court action should be initiated in the meantime? What if the case comes before the beak before CAA have responded?

Mark2spark

BassBunny wrote: »

Helppppppppp. I have 2 claims in with Monarch for compensation and like a lot of you feel I am losing the will to live. Both are exactly the same flight number, ZB677 Alicante - Manchester, and are for 7.5 hrs and 4 hrs respectively.
One of them they steadfastly refuse to update me even though both were sent in on the same date, 28/01/13 and I have urged a response twice already.
The 2nd I recieved a rejection with a completely different story to that told by the captain of the plain that eventually picked us up. I challenged this and got this reply.
"Our Ref / 140217
Thank you for your e-mail.

I am sorry that you are disappointed by the outcome of your claim, we have procedures in place to ensure we are assessing such claims in accordance with the applicable legislation. Having reviewed your case we are satisfied that our initial assessment of your claim was correct.

If you remain unhappy with our decision you can refer the matter to the Civil Aviation Authority.".
There was a representative of the CAA on Watchdag last week saying you can refer to them so today I tried. I was directed to an online form

There was a representaive from the CAA on Watchdog last week telling you to refer claims like this to them so today I tried. I found the online form and just over half way through I get a message saying They cannot help as the delay originated from a European airport, Alicante in both cases, so I need to contact the equivalent Spanish Authority. I don’t recall this being mentioned on the show.
This I did, but it’s in SPANISH. So what next? After actually getting the feeling someone could help, now back to square 1 and a couple of hours of my life I won’t get back.
i am sure the answer is somewhere in the 94 pages of postings, but a quick "billy-do" would help.

You are wasting your time writing to the Spanish NEB, as they will write to Monarch, Monarch won't reply to them, after 30 days Spanish NEB will write back to you, saying that Monarch failed to prove EC's so they find in your favour.
NBA and court is your course of action. Unless you like to prolong the game by playing Monarchs games.

111KAB

The_Wingco wrote: »

However, I note that the latest advice is to contact the CAA in parallel with Court action. Is there a pro forma referred to anywhere in these 94 pages advising what form a letter to them should say, and is it being suggested that Court action should be initiated in the meantime? What if the case comes before the beak before CAA have responded?

The general point is that the CAA are not helping claimants. It is however, in my opinion, possibly worth having their response as it will hopefully show, if nothing else, that the airline failed to cooperate. A CAA reply along these lines will not win you the case and indeed the Judge may discount it anyway. In most of the cases I read about on here the crux is that technical problems DO NOT = extraordinary circumstances.
I am not aware of a standard letter to the CAA as you are asking them to look into your specific delay and the reasons for it.
If the case comes before a Judge prior to the CAA response well so be it as the CAA reply is a small part of a much larger jigsaw.

111KAB

Mark2spark wrote: »

You are wasting your time writing to the Spanish NEB, as they will write to Monarch, Monarch won't reply to them, after 30 days Spanish NEB will write back to you, saying that Monarch failed to prove EC's so they find in your favour.
NBA and court is your course of action. Unless you like to prolong the game by playing Monarchs games.

Mark in my case it took the Spanish NEB 132 days to find in my favour after they had written to Monarch.