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

LBD

111KAB wrote: »

romanby1 wrote: »

Bailiff below £600 - Sheriffs over £600 ~ believe that to be the problem in the quoted case.

I thought that, but was told on the Monarch complaints site to contact them....

hace passed it to the court..:D:D:D

Vauban

LBD wrote: »

111KAB wrote: »

I thought that, but was told on the Monarch complaints site to contact them....

hace passed it to the court..:D:D:D

I have to say that it seems astonishing that Monarch have refused to adhere to the courts instructions and settle the claim as directed. Perhaps I am a bit old school, but isn't that contempt? What, if any, are the sanctions available to the court - let alone to LBD?

Lorraine30

I have recently been denied compensation for a 20 hour delayed flight home from tenerife to gatwick. I complained as soon as we got home and was denied on the grounds of "the stand by indicator and wing tip brake system failed" so was declared unserviceable. They therefore said was extraordinary circumstances. I then wrote to caa who in turn advised have to go back to country I was in and complain to them(Spain). Was anyone on this flight zb285a at 15.00 5/6/13 or has anyone else written to a different country to complain about this I'm unsure of what to write.

Vauban

Lorraine30 wrote: »

I have recently been denied compensation for a 20 hour delayed flight home from tenerife to gatwick. I complained as soon as we got home and was denied on the grounds of "the stand by indicator and wing tip brake system failed" so was declared unserviceable. They therefore said was extraordinary circumstances. I then wrote to caa who in turn advised have to go back to country I was in and complain to them(Spain). Was anyone on this flight zb285a at 15.00 5/6/13 or has anyone else written to a different country to complain about this I'm unsure of what to write.

Lots of people have written to the Spanish NEB (the Agencia Estatal de Seguridad A!rea - AESA). And everyone has the same experience: AESA are good, they write to Monarch, Monarch ignores them, and AESA writes you a letter to say that - as Monarch have not justfied EC's - the compensation should be paid. However ...

The AESA have no power in the UK, and courts here tend not to value their judgement. So it's a bit of a cul-de-sac.

There's only one way you will get your compensation, and it aint by writing to AESA.

VOB72

Lorraine30 wrote: »

I have recently been denied compensation for a 20 hour delayed flight home from tenerife to gatwick. I complained as soon as we got home and was denied on the grounds of "the stand by indicator and wing tip brake system failed" so was declared unserviceable. They therefore said was extraordinary circumstances. I then wrote to caa who in turn advised have to go back to country I was in and complain to them(Spain). Was anyone on this flight zb285a at 15.00 5/6/13 or has anyone else written to a different country to complain about this I'm unsure of what to write.

I wrote to Spanish CAA (AESA) and had a response within 4 weeks and a decision (in my favour) a further 8 weeks later. I also issued court proceedings via MCOL as I later learned the airlines (and some judges it would appear) say foreign NEB's have no jurisdiction in UK so have no regard to their decision anyway! By all means involve them as if it ends up in court it may help your defence a) if they come down on your side and b)if your judge will have regard to it but get on and make claim via MCOL as soon as possible.

CamelFish

Vauban wrote: »

Lots of people have written to the Spanish NEB (the Agencia Estatal de Seguridad A!rea - AESA). And everyone has the same experience: AESA are good, they write to Monarch, Monarch ignores them, and AESA writes you a letter to say that - as Monarch have not justfied EC's - the compensation should be paid. However ...

The AESA have no power in the UK, and courts here tend not to value their judgement. So it's a bit of a cul-de-sac.

There's only one way you will get your compensation, and it aint by writing to AESA.

Vauban et al,

I too wrote to the AESA and received a response stating that they had not received a response from Monarch, but considered that EC's did not apply.

When Monarch agreed compensation some months later, without the commencement of Court action (although advised I would take if necessary), they stated in their letter that their legal team had reviewed the matter following the AESA intervention and overturned their original decision denying compensation on the grounds of EC's.

So I think that whilst the AESA have no jurisdiction in the UK, at least by adopting the "belt and braces" approach and following the guidance the CAA publish, one can demonstrate before a Judge that they have done all they can to resolve matters amicably.

FYI, I was on flight ZB743 Malaga to Gatwick on 07/10/2012.

111KAB

CamelFish wrote: »

So I think that whilst the AESA have no jurisdiction in the UK, at least by adopting the "belt and braces" approach and following the guidance the CAA publish, one can demonstrate before a Judge that they have done all they can to resolve matters amicably.

In my case I 'demonstrated' to the Judge that I had tried and had 10 emails and 3 letters to AESA with regard to my approach. Whilst AESA sided with me the Judge indicated I had been wasting my time and a lot of effort and all the information I had in this respect was useless!

Worcester County Court June 2013.

klint

111KAB wrote: »

Bailiff below £600 - Sheriffs over £600 ~ believe that to be the problem in the quoted case.

Presumably, if you wait long enough, the 8% per annum interest (plus any number of unsuccessful bailiffs' fees) will eventually push the amount owed to over £600, and then you will be able to use the "sheriffs". It could be a long time, but the 8% interest could make it a good investment.

Lilster

My original claim for the delay of flight ZB535 Palma-Manchester on 9/10/13 was rejected by Monarch stating 'extraordinary circumstances' I requested a detailed explanation from them in order to escalate my complaint over a month ago. I have today received an email to advise that my claim has been reviewed by the legal team and that they have agreed to pay out and I will receive a cheque within 21 days. I was expecting a fight but it seems that Monarch have taken on board the new guidelines issued by European regulators in July 2013.

Vauban

Lilster wrote: »

My original claim for the delay of flight ZB535 Palma-Manchester on 9/10/13 was rejected by Monarch stating 'extraordinary circumstances' I requested a detailed explanation from them in order to escalate my complaint over a month ago. I have today received an email to advise that my claim has been reviewed by the legal team and that they have agreed to pay out and I will receive a cheque within 21 days. I was expecting a fight but it seems that Monarch have taken on board the new guidelines issued by European regulators in July 2013.

Interesting that we can claim for flights in the future ...

What was/will be the reason for your delay, Lilster?