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

LBD

nicka99 wrote: »

hi all,
Im looking for some advice - this thread is over 100 pages long so I was hoping someone could give me a short concise answer without having to wade through it all !

I took flight ZB227 from Palma Mallorca to London Gatwick this weekend with myself, wife and children aged 6 and 3.
scheduled arrival time was 19:10 on saturday evening (BST) but actually landed 00:18 Sunday morning, over 5 hours late.

we spent almost 8 hours in palma airport which was not a pleasant experience with bored and tired kids / toilets run out of paper / very hot / very expensive food and drink (we were given a €6 voucher each but this doesnt even get you a sandwich + water) etc etc.

we were informed of an estimated 4 hour delay at check-in but only after our hold baggage had gone down the conveyer so couldnt even take some extra clothes/toys etc out for the kids . Check-in staff cited 'mechanical problems' with the aircraft.

When we eventually boarded, the captain informed use there was a problem with one the flaps which had to be replaced and they had to get parts from germany then fit and test, hence the delay. This was presumably earlier in the day as I saw the plane arrive at the gate fully loaded so the repair was not done in Mallorca.

This morning I received an email from Monarch as follows:

[FONT=&quot]Dear xxx

Please accept Monarch's sincere apologies for the delay you experienced on your recent flight, booking reference: .....

Regrettably this was caused by technical difficulties within the Monarch fleet. Our aircraft are maintained to the highest standards, but as with all airlines, unexpected technical problems do occur from time to time, when this happens, safety is always our number one priority. Nevertheless we appreciate that this caused you some inconvenience and we are sorry for this.

If you have a travel insurance policy, you may be entitled to make a claim. Please forward the attached PDF document to your insurance company as proof of the delay details.

Kind regards,



MONARCH CUSTOMER RELATIONS TEAM[/FONT]

then attachment as follows:

Dear xxx,
Confirmation of Monarch flight delay for Insurance Claim:
Flight: ZB227 Palma to London Gatwick 27 July 2013
Scheduled departure time: 15.45 hours GMT on 27 July 2013
Actual departure time: 21.10 hours GMT on 27 July 2013
Total delay on the departure time: 05 hours 25 minutes
Scheduled arrival time: 18.10 hours GMT on 27 July 2013
Actual arrival time: 23.18 hours GMT on 27 July 2013
PLEASE NOTE: ALL TIMES QUOTED ARE GREENWICH MEANTIME (GMT) NOT LOCAL
Once again, I am sorry for the disruption this has caused and hope this information is of assistance to you.
Kind regards,
MONARCH CUSTOMER RELATIONS TEAM

do I have good grounds to make a claim for 4 x €250 ? will they fight it with all they have or do I have a good case ? Is it just a case of filling out the 4 page form ? if they do play hard-ball, is it worth appointing one of the 'no win no fee' specialist lawyers to save myself the hassle of potential court cases and so on ?

thanks in advance,
Nick

That is the basic standard reply....lol I got that 9 months ago.....

You request claim forms, fill them in and also ask for details of the "technical difficulty"...

I am sure you do not need to appoint one of those firms, I have just had a judgment onthe 8 july agains them and all the info was given on this thread, go to page 1 and read all the info..... print off the Wallentin report and read it........... your grounds are in there......

Any other help and pointers there are a few who will help on this forum, myself included, although not an expert.......:beer:

romanby1

LBD wrote: »

All these claims are on the small claims track and as with the original claim form you have to submit a copy to the court and one to the defendant and keep one for yourself, all standard......your own copy should have all the original docs in it... no need for an additional one.... mine was copies to the court and defendant....... my own bundle had all the original docs in it...

Personally I preferred to keep all the originals in a separate file.

LOBSTER22

Many thanks indeed Vauban - so you would suggest simply pushing on with the claim ?

Has anyone else had experience of Monarch rejecting a claim due to bad weather ?

Many thanks indeed.

Vauban

LOBSTER22 wrote: »

Many thanks indeed Vauban - so you would suggest simply pushing on with the claim ?

Has anyone else had experience of Monarch rejecting a claim due to bad weather ?

Many thanks indeed.

Yes. The defence they have offered is no defence at all, in my view. Have a look at the Regulation yourself and make your own mind up. (I should stress that I am not a lawyer!)

LBD

LOBSTER22 wrote: »

Many thanks indeed Vauban - so you would suggest simply pushing on with the claim ?

Has anyone else had experience of Monarch rejecting a claim due to bad weather ?

Many thanks indeed.

Go to the very first page of this thread and you will find lots of links to different information, all of which is important to read up on as of now, the sooner you start with the Wallentin report and the more often you read it the better..........

I read and read and re-read it for months, found it the best way, that way you get it ingrained in your brain and makes it much easier for court..... and the sections you need to rely on......:D:D

statictom

derby4ever wrote: »

Dear All,

Monarch want proof I was on actual flight?

I go to court end of August so have very little time to get this info together as I have no tickets

Any advice I can use to counter this defence

Any help appreciated

You can send them a Data Protection Act 1998, Subject Access Request. This is to ask them to provide you with details held on their records concerning you and your party. Send it to Morgan Mullay at Monarch and state if they fail to respond you will include this in your court file - it worked for me.

Martin85

There was an article in the Sunday Times Travel section (Page 3) yesterday with the headlines Airport Payout Loophole Closed. Basically it said the EU had issued new guidelines defining extraordinary circumstances which excludes technical breakdowns of crew shortages. Does this rule apply to all outstanding claims. Has anyone else read the article and what is your intruptaton of this ruling. Any feedback please.

klint

Martin85 wrote: »

There was an article in the Sunday Times Travel section (Page 3) yesterday with the headlines Airport Payout Loophole Closed. Basically it said the EU had issued new guidelines defining extraordinary circumstances which excludes technical breakdowns of crew shortages. Does this rule apply to all outstanding claims. Has anyone else read the article and what is your intruptaton of this ruling. Any feedback please.

I think the first sentence after the title of the guidelines says all you need to know:

"THIS DOCUMENT IS FOR INFORMATION AND GUIDANCE ONLY. THE CONTENT OF THIS DOCUMENT
DOES NOT REPRESENT A BINDING OPINION ON THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION"

LBD

statictom wrote: »

You can send them a Data Protection Act 1998, Subject Access Request. This is to ask them to provide you with details held on their records concerning you and your party. Send it to Morgan Mullay at Monarch and state if they fail to respond you will include this in your court file - it worked for me.

Morgan Mullay is in the legal team, not the Data Compliance Section.....the legal department do not deal with SAR's...

If you are making a SAR make it to the complaince team, it will bethe same address....

Prospect house
Prospect Way
London Luton Airport
Luton LU2 9NU.......

The_Wingco

Vauban wrote: »

You need to include them in your bundle, and should highlight the most relevant parts for the judge.

On your other point, I don't think it is true to say that the airline must prove you were not on the plane. The court must make an assessment about whether on the balance of probabilities you were. So you are likely to need some evidence, unless the flight was in the last couple of years (when you would expect the airline to keep a record). Credit card statements, passport stamps, or indeed anything else to corroborate your story.

I was in your situation (i.e. no proof of boarding), so I asked Monarch, via the Data Protection Act to confirm that I was on my flight. They replied that I indeed was, and wouldn't put any burden of proof on myself when the case comes to court.