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

amc1

thanks Centipede, so is the next step the MCOL forms ? Or do I go the CAA first ?

Aedus

amc1 wrote: »

All, the response (for ZB685, Sharm-Man, 28/10/12, 6 hrs delay) I have had received is as follows. Do you think it is worthing pursuing :-

---
An aircraft on a flight the previous day to Malaga suffered a "bird strike" as it took off. The flight returned to the airport for safety checks - 3 fan blades were found be damaged / aircraft declared as unserviceable. Passengers/crew transferred to next available aircraft which was the next day (28/10/12).

On arrival at malaga, the crew had exceeded their legal flying hours so the crew had to 'night stop' to operate the flight the next day. Your flight was thus displaced from the planned operational schedule resulting in the delay. No other Monarch aircraft were available at this time and use of a 3rd party aircraft would have increased the delay.

Therefore, EC....
---

Many thanks for your views.

A bird strike can be an EC in its own rights, however the bird strike did not occur on the aircraft you were meant to be travelling on, nor on the flight or the previous sector of your flight, so it can't be an EC.

It's basically operational changes which caused your delay, not even a technical fault.

111KAB

amc1 wrote: »

thanks Centipede, so is the next step the MCOL forms ? Or do I go the CAA first ?

Cut out the useless middle man go direct to MCOL after issuing 14 day NBA to Monarch.

amc1

What's 'NBA' and do I send this to them by letter ?

Vauban

AMC: Maybe have a read of the forum first, especially the FAQs on page one. All the answers are there.

Benw15

ZB252 Gatwick to Alicante on 26th December 2010. - This was a 5+ hour delay

Sent off all the initial claim forms etc, and after two months got a standard fob off reply from Monarch

"Our records show that the aircraft that operated your flight experienced delays on its previous flights due to a baggage belt failure at Gatwick on the morning of your date of departure. This was also exacerbated by the lack of availability of aircraft tugs which are supplied and operated by a third party company. This was very much beyond Monarch’s control. As a consequence, the departure of your flight was unavoidably delayed."

Whilst I accept that the reasons stated are out of their control, I have checked the departures from South Terminal on that day expecting to see mayhem, and there isnt. The worse delay I can find is an easy jet one for 2h55min.

Even the other monarch departures around that time are not delayed for more than an hour. Is it likely they are not being completely honest here.

Is it worth pursuing? Any advice gratefully received

amc1

Vauban wrote: »

AMC: Maybe have a read of the forum first, especially the FAQs on page one. All the answers are there.

Hi Vauban, I did have a quick look at the FAQs but couldn't (certainly initially) find any reference to NBA and how it's done. Could you point me to the thread pls. Thanks, Andy

fbsm41

I've just received a reply from Monarch to my letter giving them 14 days to send further info regarding our delay. We (4 of us) were delayed 23 hours on MON347 MAN-SFB in July 2008. I just wondered if there was a link on the site that I could use as a guide to help me through the small claims process, as I havent a clue what I would have to prepare to take it there.

Thanks

Aedus

Benw15 wrote: »

ZB252 Gatwick to Alicante on 26th December 2010. - This was a 5+ hour delay

Sent off all the initial claim forms etc, and after two months got a standard fob off reply from Monarch

"Our records show that the aircraft that operated your flight experienced delays on its previous flights due to a baggage belt failure at Gatwick on the morning of your date of departure. This was also exacerbated by the lack of availability of aircraft tugs which are supplied and operated by a third party company. This was very much beyond Monarch’s control. As a consequence, the departure of your flight was unavoidably delayed."

Whilst I accept that the reasons stated are out of their control, I have checked the departures from South Terminal on that day expecting to see mayhem, and there isnt. The worse delay I can find is an easy jet one for 2h55min.

Even the other monarch departures around that time are not delayed for more than an hour. Is it likely they are not being completely honest here.

Is it worth pursuing? Any advice gratefully received

It's up to you, as you say it's not something which was in their control. One thing I will say about Monarch, is the reasons they give you are truthful, they don't lie about claims, so the reasons you've been given are the real reasons behind the delay.

There's two standpoints, compensation wise it is worth pursing because it was a knock-on delay, so a decision for compensation should go in your favour (Key word here is "should"). Morally it's your choice, as you say, it wasn't their fault, so do you feel that you should claim compensation from them? A lot of cases come down to a moral view, you have to think about the effect on the Airline industry if everyone pursues claims when in some cases, it wasn't the Airlines fault. Only you can really decide where to take your claim from here.

111KAB

Aedus wrote: »

A lot of cases come down to a moral view, you have to think about the effect on the Airline industry if everyone pursues claims when in some cases, it wasn't the Airlines fault.

Totally agree with this sentiment however ....
1) The law is the law and Monarch are hell bent on not recognising it in the majority of claims and
2) In my case, Monarch, (stupidly) decided to defend a case with solicitors, barristers, two Court sessions, award to me including time off work etc etc which must have cost them thousands when I was prepared to settle for 400€. So the effect on the Airline industry is also down to the airlines themselves (in my case Monarch) not just claimants.
3) In addition they are now threatening an appeal so on top of the thousands more thousands.