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

russetred

Sorry for the delay didn't mean to keep you all in suspense but it has been a very strange day.
I turned up for court only to be told that Monarch emailed the court last night after they had closed to ask for a continuance. That did not go down well in court! Apparently they are really keen to settle rather than going to court according to the clerk. The other odd thing was Monarch said they did not have contact details for me and were unable to reach me other than by post so how they managed to email me earlier in the year is a mystery to all. Anyhoo I spoke briefly in court and the sheriff asked me if I was willing to allow a 4 week continuance to allow for a settlement to be reached. Since the clerk had told me I had to phone the monarch lawyer as soon as I left court to discuss a settlement I agreed.
So I phoned, but the lawyer was unavailable and so far has not been back in touch. Oh well the saga goes on....

111KAB

russetred wrote: »

I turned up for court only to be told that Monarch emailed the court last night after they had closed to ask for a continuance. That did not go down well in court! Apparently they are really keen to settle rather than going to court according to the clerk. The other odd thing was Monarch said they did not have contact details for me and were unable to reach me other than by post so how they managed to email me earlier in the year is a mystery to all. Anyhoo I spoke briefly in court and the sheriff asked me if I was willing to allow a 4 week continuance to allow for a settlement to be reached. Since the clerk had told me I had to phone the monarch lawyer as soon as I left court to discuss a settlement I agreed.
So I phoned, but the lawyer was unavailable and so far has not been back in touch. Oh well the saga goes on....

Virtually the same as they did to me. So everyone when you get your date in Court don't expect Monarch to be there!

JPears

Maybe Jet2 will do the same. Would save a lot of hassle, but has cost me half a day off work already (self employed)

4poc

russetred wrote: »

Sorry for the delay didn't mean to keep you all in suspense but it has been a very strange day.

Well, i was in suspense & probably lots more following this thread. My case is very similar to yours, 26 July 2008, 7.5 hours delay due to plane going tech on 3rd flight sector prior to our flight (at least!). But if that whole previous week was in disarray, then the knock ons have no end...
In my case, Monarch have until end of tomorrow to send to court their defence.

You have done well & i hope all will end splendidly for you!

LBD

Consequently we will not be providing any further information or documentation unless requested by the Courts or relevant Aviation Enforcement Body"...

I was given this reply also when I asked them to explain how it was Ec's and if they were aware of the Tim Lassoy v Finnair and the other cases....so it is another tactic....

good luck with your claim

statictom

Just putting the final touches to my very lengthy statement before Monarch file their defence. Have used many useful snippets from this forum and most of the valuable evidence in Wallentin.
I`m hoping Monarch do leave things to the last minute to file as I will be away on holiday in Spain for 2 weeks and the last day for them is around 21st June and I`m not back till the 30th, so hopefully still have time to post things off.

Just a final question for when I`m finishing off my statement:

I`d like to mention the fact that airlines and indeed Monarch have very quick change round of flights, in our case about 1 hr from the plane landing, passengers getting off, luggage unloaded, plane cleaned and boarding to commence. This leaves very little time if a problem arises, ie Tech Fault for this to be fixed. Also some of the facts I have on Monarch, ie size and age of their fleet and their very, very poor punctuality record. Also airlines like FlyBe, Easyjet, Ryanair, etc have far more planes, are actually in profit and seem to cope better with EC`s than Monarch who lost £500m this year.
I`m of the opinion that EC 261 is there for the protection of passengers travelling by air and gives common rules on comp and assistance. If airlines are allowed to keep claiming that everything is a Tech problem and therefore EC`s - then indeed these regulations are worthless. I believe that ordinary technical malfunctions in a plane could be argued as standard fare for airlines, it happens all the time, and can be distinguished from completely unforseeable events. Also what might be an intolerable sacrifice for Monarch Airlines, might not be for the likes of Easyjet, who have more planes/staff and resources at its disposal.
Or am I just waffling?. Feel so frustrated wanting to point out so much info.

JPears

statictom wrote: »

Just putting the final touches to my very lengthy statement before Monarch file their defence. Have used many useful snippets from this forum and most of the valuable evidence in Wallentin.
I`m hoping Monarch do leave things to the last minute to file as I will be away on holiday in Spain for 2 weeks and the last day for them is around 21st June and I`m not back till the 30th, so hopefully still have time to post things off.

Just a final question for when I`m finishing off my statement:

I`d like to mention the fact that airlines and indeed Monarch have very quick change round of flights, in our case about 1 hr from the plane landing, passengers getting off, luggage unloaded, plane cleaned and boarding to commence. This leaves very little time if a problem arises, ie Tech Fault for this to be fixed. Also some of the facts I have on Monarch, ie size and age of their fleet and their very, very poor punctuality record. Also airlines like FlyBe, Easyjet, Ryanair, etc have far more planes, are actually in profit and seem to cope better with EC`s than Monarch who lost £500m this year.
I`m of the opinion that EC 261 is there for the protection of passengers travelling by air and gives common rules on comp and assistance. If airlines are allowed to keep claiming that everything is a Tech problem and therefore EC`s - then indeed these regulations are worthless. I believe that ordinary technical malfunctions in a plane could be argued as standard fare for airlines, it happens all the time, and can be distinguished from completely unforseeable events. Also what might be an intolerable sacrifice for Monarch Airlines, might not be for the likes of Easyjet, who have more planes/staff and resources at its disposal.
Or am I just waffling?. Feel so frustrated wanting to point out so much info.

You are correct in your assumptions - tech does NOT necessarily= EC
Techs are inherent part of airline operation and indeed, the quick turnaround some airlines try to make leaves no redundancy to fix problems as they inevitably arise.

friendofbillw2

coffdrops wrote: »

Consequently we will not be providing any further information or documentation unless requested by the Courts or relevant Aviation Enforcement Body

This is absolutely shameful - the customer service equivalent of "come and have a go if you think you're hard enough".

Well, the fact is that the vast majority of cases where they claim exceptional circumstances are not at all exceptional and couldn't be more routine.

If we must go to the Courts to enforce our RIGHTS under EC261/2004, we will!

So forgive me if I come and have a go. And take some pleasure in doing so.

friendofbillw2

statictom wrote: »

Just putting the final touches to my very lengthy statement before Monarch file their defence.
~snip~
Or am I just waffling?. Feel so frustrated wanting to point out so much info.

Couple of things...

I don't know what statement it is you are putting the final touches to, or what part of the process you are at as there are mixed messages in what you have posted, but...

Please remember you are not going to get several days' trial time in the High Court, or be able (at all, probably) to argue and labour your points building tension and drama like the courtroom scenes in the movies. This is only ever going before a District Judge on the small claims track.

Keep it very simple in your written submissions to the defendant and to the court. Your rights under EC261 and Wallentin, their ignoring this and fobbing you off with lame excuses despite your repeated requests they step up to the mark.

If they don't fold before it gets to the denouement - I still think they will under the weight of pressure and the sheer number of cases coming at them - the judge SHOULD be able, from what you submit as clear and concise evidence, to decide and rule in your favour in seconds.

Keep the judge's job simple. He will like you for it. Don't argue any more points than you have to - that just gives Monarch opportunities to cloud the issues. They will need no invitation.

dstainer

Monarch are stooping to new levels of incompetence with my case now.....
After filling out all of the claim forms in January, I received a response stating that I couldn't claim because my flight wasn't over 3 hours delayed....I pointed out to them that the flight they'd given me the response to was, in fact, not my flight - the right date, but the wrong flight number and exactly a year later than my 8 hour delayed flight!
They eventually got back to me with a response to the correct flight and my claim, like many, was rejected because of the laughable EC that "[FONT=&quot]Our records show that due to technical faults within the fleet there were insufficient aircraft to operate your flight on time[/FONT]"
With this response, I thought I wouldn't !!!!!-foot around and sent an immediate NBA letter stating that I was going to go to the small claims court.
That was just over 2 weeks ago - today I got a letter from Monarch saying thanks for the letter, blah, blah....could I please fill out the enclosed claims forms so that they can assess my claim. They've given me a new claims reference and made no reference to any previous correspondence!

I really don't know whether it's deliberate stalling/confusion tactics or they are just incompetent and don't know their !!!!! from their elbow.

I think I'll try a phone call on Monday followed by immediate MCOL submission as my patience has been exhausted.