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

Vauban

The_Wingco wrote: »

Having just checked out the CAA's list of circumstances which are NOT Extraordinary, specifically paragraphs 21-26 (Unexpected flight safety shortcomings), it seems at first glance to give Monarch a perfect get-out. In my case the aircraft had actually left the stand for take-off when the captain announced that a fault had been detected and returned us to the terminal, where we festered for another 10 hours. How can the layman judge whether the failure of a component is down to negligence/lack of maintenance?
These new guidelines just seem to muddy the waters and instil doubt in the minds of those of us considering action.

The CAA's "guidelines" have no legal force. It's the Regulations and precedent case law that counts. But you're right that this shocking guidance may confuse the court - if you're not clear on the primacy of EU law over CAA pronouncements.

klint

Hi again. As you may remember from previous posts, the court advised me that Monarch hadn't replied to my claim and I therefore sent the court a request for judgement. (I even allowed Monarch an extra week after their deadline, just to be nice.) Now I've just received a letter from the court. I was expecting it to say that the court had made a judgement. Instead, it said: "This is now a defended claim. A copy of the defence has already been sent to you by the defendant. [...] You must by 15 August complete the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire (From N180)".

What should I do if I don't receive the defence from Monarch in the next couple of days? I only have two weeks to file form N180 with the court and can't do it without knowing what their defence is.

twistedmoosie

111KAB wrote: »

As a solicitor you should realise the CAA are about as useful as a chocolate teapot and you may as well commence your small claims application now.

True - but I like to have all my ducks in a row and showing you've referred to the CAA is a good documentation step if these newly issued 'guidelines' on exceptional circumstances are going to muddy the waters!

111KAB

klint wrote: »

What should I do if I don't receive the defence from Monarch in the next couple of days? I only have two weeks to file form N180 with the court and can't do it without knowing what their defence is.

You should point out to the Court (I 'phoned) to advise you have not been served with a copy of the Monarch defence. Normally it is only a few pages and the Court may well send you a copy.
If you don't think you have enough time (due to Monarch 'playing a game') you should ask for the hearing date to be changed explaining why in writing.

111KAB

twistedmoosie wrote: »

True - but I like to have all my ducks in a row and showing you've referred to the CAA is a good documentation step if these newly issued 'guidelines' on exceptional circumstances are going to muddy the waters!

As pointed out to me in Court by the Judge > a letter from the CAA or NEB is a total waste of time even if it supports your position. "These bodies have no jurisdiction over UK/EU law and as such I can take no account of their findings or comments."

LBD

433Barbara wrote: »

thanks for the advice LBD, we did exchange some PM's on 14 July which had details of my EC etc.

Yes we did, I was in Glasgow from the 15th till the 22nd......... and had family down as well, so not been hee a huge amount....... I will re-read them:):):j

LBD

I was lucky the judge in my case, pointed out at great length to the Barrister the new changes to the CPR rules and how tardy it was of them to attempt to exploit their position....

He was spot on with his knowledge..........basically said that both parties MUST abide by the courts instructions.....

Their defence not allowed for failing ot submit in time........served on me on the Saturday hearing ont he Monday and the same for the court....

4poc

klint wrote: »

Hi again. As you may remember from previous posts, the court advised me that Monarch hadn't replied to my claim and I therefore sent the court a request for judgement. (I even allowed Monarch an extra week after their deadline, just to be nice.) Now I've just received a letter from the court. I was expecting it to say that the court had made a judgement. Instead, it said: "This is now a defended claim. A copy of the defence has already been sent to you by the defendant. [...] You must by 15 August complete the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire (From N180)".

What should I do if I don't receive the defence from Monarch in the next couple of days? I only have two weeks to file form N180 with the court and can't do it without knowing what their defence is.

I may have mentioned before that court allows for 10 daysfrom due date of deadline. In my case Monarch did not file the Dir.Questionnaire at all. After 10 days, the court ordered Monarch to file within 2weeks which they did in the end. This wasted 1 month and of course they neverserve copy on claimants so I did not know they had filed it till I had a surprisecall from Mediation service…very poor! For their sake, I hope they will agreeto settlement at mediation. In the end I asked the court for Monarch’s copy ofthe directions questionnaire which was sent promptly.

In your case ask court to send you a copy of the defence (itshould have come together with the Dir. Quest. anyway). You don’t need to ask courtto postpone anything as these things will take a long time as it is and theN180 form is straight forward which you can fill without specifically having thedefence copy yet.

111KAB

In a recent Monarch defence I have picked up that they are now quoting another case to Judges to forward the idea that ...."cannot result in airlines being led to make intolerable sacrifices" and para 35 refers .....

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62010CJ0294:EN:HTML

In view of the fact that they may start introducing this on future defences I seek a response from 'those in the know' how this would stand up in court.

bazaar_2

111KAB wrote: »

In a recent Monarch defence I have picked up that they are now quoting another case to Judges to forward the idea that ...."cannot result in airlines being led to make intolerable sacrifices" and para 35 refers .....

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62010CJ0294:EN:HTML

In view of the fact that they may start introducing this on future defences I seek a response from 'those in the know' how this would stand up in court.

First glance looks like the court is expecting air carriers to ensure they make provisions in case of EC's. IE, resources to be made available to ensure the impact of EC is reduced so that they fall within the regulations time limits for compo to be paid.
I may be wrong, so yes lets discuss.