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

Mark2spark

Great post grey lib, wishing you every success :T

Mark2spark

Green eyed lad, I wish I had something constructive to offer you regarding the final landing time. How about your mobile phone records? Do they show you not logging on until after arrival, +3 hrs late?
Really, this should be a CAA thing. But as they are useless I don't know what to suggest. How about other passengers, did you exchange details with any? You could get an afidavit from them, if so.

The_Wingco

Having studied contributions on this forum for 6 months (thanks everyone), I'm about to submit Form N1 to my local County Court. This Form, of necessity, only provides for brief details of the claim, so at what point in the subsequent procedure would I be able to put foward a detailed argument quoting ECJ rulings, the precise circumstances surrounding my delay, and quoting law extracts that have helpfully been supplied by contributors to this thread? Would it be in response to Monarch's defence pre-Court appearance, or in Court itself? Just need to get my head around the protocols so that I can have a clear strategy and attack line well in advance of Court appearance. Many thanks once again to helpful contributors.

Vauban

Wingco: Not for ages! After your N1 or MCOL submission, the airlines will have a fortnight to acknowledge the claim, and then another 14 days to reply with a preliminary defence (usually about 2 sides). The court will then send you - a few weeks later - the so-called allocation questionnaire, which allows you to a) request the case is allocated to the small claims track; b) request it be dealt with by your local court; c) agree to mediation; d) ask the other side for specific information (though the airlines tend not to respond to the request, and majority advice seems to be to keep your powder dry.

You will then, several weeks later, receive notice of allocation. You may also be given a date for mediation. And then, several weeks after that, you will be given a hearing date, with an order from the court with a timescale for the production of your documents. This is the "bundle" that people talk about, and should contain your legal argument/witness statement, plus all the documents that you intend to rely on. So this is the moment for your detailed argument - not before.

To give you an example of timescales, I started proceedings in early Feb and have my hearing in early October. The judge asked for the bundle six weeks before that. (Though typically Monarch missed that deadline by three and a half weeks!)

Hope that's helpful.

delayed_2

I have it on good authority (current Monarch employee with first hand knowledge of the claims process) that Monarchs claims procedure is as follows.

1. When a claim comes in send out Monarch specific claim form or acknowledge the claim if submitted on the correct form.

2. 3 to 4 weeks after claim send a reject compensation letter claiming 'extraordinary circumstance' unless they have been specifically told not to by the legal team. This counts as a claim 'resolved' for reporting.

3. Wait and see who is determined enough to lodge a small claims court proceeding.

Very simple very cynical very unprofessional

Mark2spark

Well thanks for that delayed, but we sort of managed to work that one out about a year ago :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

111KAB

delayed wrote: »

I have it on good authority (current Monarch employee with first hand knowledge of the claims process) that Monarchs claims procedure is .....

I have read posts on here purporting to be from current or past Monarch employees (Amadeus I think) and from people who know current employees (such as delayed) but from my own experience - 'paddle your own canoe' - read the thread and do your own research. Not suggesting either of the mentioned posters are dishonest - in any way - but Monarch did not tell me the truth and therefore make up your own mind how to progress a claim.

Mark987123

Here's the latest from Monarch. As before, really appreciate people's views. I've never been to court before by I think I'm up for it!

Me:
Dear Sir or Madam,

[FONT=&quot]Under Regulation (EC) 261/2004 Article 5 and following the judgment in the [FONT=&quot]TUI v CAA[/FONT] case, I would like to pursue my claim for compensation. The Regulation that covers passengers' rights when their flights are delayed or cancelled gives the following examples as such circumstances:[/FONT]
· Political instability
· Bad weather
· Security risks
· Unexpected flight safety shortcomings
· Strikes that affect the operation of an air carrier
· Air traffic management decisions
Extraordinary circumstances are judged to be something unexpected and out of an airline's control, and Monarch should be prepared for mechanical problems as a matter of course and the circumstances you have described below are not extraordinary.

Please reconsider my claim as I am unable to let the matter rest at this point.

Monarch:
[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your further correspondence.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We do understand your disappointment by the outcome of your claim. We can assure you that your claim was thoroughly investigated in line with the applicable legalisation. However, as the European Commission’s (EC) have now issued guidelines regarding extraordinary circumstances we have reviewed your claim again in line with these. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]For your reference the fault which occurred was not caused by a failure to maintain the aircraft. The component which failed is considered ‘on condition’ which refers to parts which should not require unscheduled maintenance or replacement during normal operational service. When parts such as this fail during normal operation when maintained in accordance with the relevant maintenance programme this is an unpredictable event. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In direct reference to the recently released EC guidelines regarding extraordinary circumstances you will note that failure of on-condition monitored parts when they have been correctly maintained in addition to any technical defect which becomes apparent immediately prior to departure or in-flight which require investigation and/or repair before the aircraft is airworthy for the intended flight are considered an extraordinary circumstance.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Following this review we are satisfied that our [/FONT][FONT=&quot]initial assessment of your claim was correct and delay compensation will not be paid. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]For your information please find attached the link for the EC guidelines we have referred to. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]http /ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/passengers/air/doc/neb-extraordinary-circumstances-list.pdf[/FONT]

111KAB

Mark987123 - document Monarch quote is not law just a list dreamt up by the airlines to (try and) put claimants off. Court is your only way to resolve this I'm afraid.

klint

Also I recognise the exact sentences in their letter. This is a copy & paste job. "Thoroughly investigated" my foot.