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

111KAB

sanddmc wrote: »

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Do you think it is worth pursuing? If so what are our next steps?[/FONT]

Worth pursuing as a technical problem such as this is not extraordinary, delay is excessive (presume delay was 13.5 hours not flight), there has to be a question mark over the quality of previous pre-flight inspections and your delay was a 'knock-on'.

NBA then court application.

LBD

Vauban wrote: »

You really couldn't make it up!!:rotfl:

I'll be honest I'm Totally stunned!!!:eek::eek::eek: it's a whole new level of arrogance!!!!

Just who do they think they are canceling MY Warrant!!!!!!!!!:mad::mad:

LBD

Centipede100 wrote: »

Monarch, an airline where the right wing has yet to be introduced to the left wing...!

lol yup :j

LBD

Star9272 wrote: »

So what happens now?

It's stillwith the bailiffs and they will make contact with monarch, in a way I'm hopign it drags on another couple ofmonths, and my sons will be added, he was on the same flight, that will then take to over the 600.........

at which point it goes tothe high court enforcement bailiffs, you knwo the ones you see on the TV, it has to be 600 or aboe for them tot ak eit........:D

Mark2spark

Evalina1 wrote: »

hey

I see someone (who?) has received compensation for this flight - anyone able to help? ive just been given the 'extraordinary circumstances' knock back and want to go back and reapply...

ZB227 was my flight number, as detailed in the O.P.

What date was your flight?

Mark2spark

LBD wrote: »

I'll be honest I'm Totally stunned!!!:eek::eek::eek: it's a whole new level of arrogance!!!!

Just who do they think they are canceling MY Warrant!!!!!!!!!:mad::mad:

Shaking my head in disbelief here LBD :undecided

LBD

Mark2spark wrote: »

Shaking my head in disbelief here LBD :undecided

lol no wonder I am still in shock!!!!!!!. dont suppose its worth telling the CAA, not that they are likely to do anything...

derby4ever

absolutely gutted as I lost my case today.Judge decided both knock on flights prior to mine were extraordinary including an hydraulic leak that monarch themselves in defence said were in top 3 issues that delay there flights.
Even all my arguments for reasonable measures were declined including lack of parts like the hydraulic pipe repair kit that was needed even though some parts took 6 hours in a taxi from Luton to Manchester.Judge said it was not possible for airlines to keep all spares at all airports.My argument for lack of re-routing and Monarch dry leasing was rejected saying Monarch were in height of holiday season and they could not be expected to offer this to a full plane of passengers.Very disappointed as my first Judge in original case seemed quite on side of the passenger and todays case had new Judge who,well we know the out come.
Want to say big thanks Vauban,Mark2spark and 111KAB all especially and everyone else who contributes to this forum.
I would still encourage people to take on the airlines and believe with my recent experiences we are starting to have an impact on making the airlines think twice before messing passengers about.
From my experience its all down to the Judge on the day with which direction they want to go and side they sway for.
NEBs was big part of there defence and engineers report.Judge said he would use NEBs but only as guidance after I had highlighted was not law and European court removal from website,etc.
Keep fighting everybody and don't be deterred by there objections the tide will turn in our favour especially when the NEBs guidance is readdressed.
Disappointed but content I took on Monarch

Lyngilly

Flight ZB 641 Larnaca to manchester on 02-10-13 was due out at 17.20 actual departed 01.35 am 03-10-13 has anyone else made a claim for this flight?
Thanks

Vauban

derby4ever wrote: »

absolutely gutted as I lost my case today.Judge decided both knock on flights prior to mine were extraordinary including an hydraulic leak that monarch themselves in defence said were in top 3 issues that delay there flights.
Even all my arguments for reasonable measures were declined including lack of parts like the hydraulic pipe repair kit that was needed even though some parts took 6 hours in a taxi from Luton to Manchester.Judge said it was not possible for airlines to keep all spares at all airports.My argument for lack of re-routing and Monarch dry leasing was rejected saying Monarch were in height of holiday season and they could not be expected to offer this to a full plane of passengers.Very disappointed as my first Judge in original case seemed quite on side of the passenger and todays case had new Judge who,well we know the out come.
Want to say big thanks Vauban,Mark2spark and 111KAB all especially and everyone else who contributes to this forum.
I would still encourage people to take on the airlines and believe with my recent experiences we are starting to have an impact on making the airlines think twice before messing passengers about.
From my experience its all down to the Judge on the day with which direction they want to go and side they sway for.
NEBs was big part of there defence and engineers report.Judge said he would use NEBs but only as guidance after I had highlighted was not law and European court removal from website,etc.
Keep fighting everybody and don't be deterred by there objections the tide will turn in our favour especially when the NEBs guidance is readdressed.
Disappointed but content I took on Monarch

My commiserations D4E: rotten luck.