We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Monarch delays & Compensations. Listed flights denied in O.P.
Comments
-
0
-
No - I don't think so. County Court judgements set no precedent - it would be legitimate for one court to award compensation and another to refuse it for the same flight.
I'm aware of that, and I wonder why, in my case, the court last month ordered Monarch to list all claims it has received from other customers on the same flight, and whether the claims were paid or taken to court and what the outcomes of those court cases were. The deadline for Monarch to respond has already lapsed. I have no idea whether they did respond or not.
Although such cases set no precedent, the judge looking at my claim might be thinking that it would be a good idea to be consistent with other judges. Or perhaps, do you think he may have made that order to show he's doing something while waiting for the results of the Huzar appeal?0 -
I'm aware of that, and I wonder why, in my case, the court last month ordered Monarch to list all claims it has received from other customers on the same flight, and whether the claims were paid or taken to court and what the outcomes of those court cases were. The deadline for Monarch to respond has already lapsed. I have no idea whether they did respond or not.
Although such cases set no precedent, the judge looking at my claim might be thinking that it would be a good idea to be consistent with other judges. Or perhaps, do you think he may have made that order to show he's doing something while waiting for the results of the Huzar appeal?
My personal view is that some DJ's like to take a line of least resistance, and if the matter has already gone before a colleague (and not been appealed) they might be content to take that as the default position.
I suspect too that some DJs are aware that the courts are being swamped by these claims and that airlines are not helping matters by continuing to fight those claims that have already been lost.
To be fair to the airlines though, I think they should have the right to fight. I would not want my claim prejudiced because a previous DJ decided - perhaps because the litigant in person was not very effective - that the flight delay was "extraordinary".
Rather, I would expect my claim to be dealt with on its own merits, and without prejudice to whatever other DJs had determined. It seems to me that claimants can't have it both ways ...0 -
Totally agree however I am aware of Monarch paying out on a flight (without Court action) to one party but refusing another couple who was on the same flight.
As Alfred Lord Tennyson (nearly) wrote:
"Our is not to reason why,
Ours is but to write an NBA and then begun Court proceedings accordingly".0 -
To be fair to the airlines though, I think they should have the right to fight.
I would agree in principle but it is abundantly clear that airlines are, in many cases, abusing the legal process by defending claims where there is simply no legal merit in their defence. If the likes of us many non-legally qualified posters on here can spot a cast iron claim, I am sure that the well remunerated professionals engaged by the airlines can too!
The 'right to fight' is not, in my view, the right to try it on!0 -
I'm aware of that, and I wonder why, in my case, the court last month ordered Monarch to list all claims it has received from other customers on the same flight, and whether the claims were paid or taken to court and what the outcomes of those court cases were. The deadline for Monarch to respond has already lapsed. I have no idea whether they did respond or not.
Although such cases set no precedent, the judge looking at my claim might be thinking that it would be a good idea to be consistent with other judges. Or perhaps, do you think he may have made that order to show he's doing something while waiting for the results of the Huzar appeal?
The judge in my case has asked the same questions of Monarch re details of previous claims. He went a little further in ordering a case management conference where Monarch should attend and give reason why the defence should not be struck out. My case is one of many due to be heard in Liverpool County Court on 28.2.14, with 3 District Judges listed as hearing these cases. I fully expect it to be stayed.0 -
Centipede100 wrote: »If you think the airlines are abusing the legal process then you clearly haven't read the private parking company forums either here on MSE or elsewhere!
My blood pressure wouldn't stand it! I had correspondence with our local MP and wrote to the then Transport Minister following a run in with some of those bandits. That was under the law as it was then, the changes to make their grubby trade even easier absolutely appal me!Centipede100 wrote: »However, I would defend claimants' or defendants' right to proceed with a claim or a defence, it is the courts' job to define and apply the law in a particular case.
Although it is not applicable in this case, there is a concept of "abuse of law" in some jurisdictions - ironically, including the EU. I believe it basically means that you shouldn't be able to rely on the law to gain an advantage that was manifestly never intended to be conferred by the provision you rely on.
In the context we are discussing, airlines are often using the court process not to put forward a defence in which they genuinely believe, but to discourage claimants. Is that legal? Yes, of course. Is it an abuse of the legal process? I think so.0 -
Summary
Flights:
5/5/12 - MAN - SSH ZB684 5 hours 25 mins delay
12/5/12 - SSH - MAN ZB685 4 hours 30 mins delay
Correspondence between June 2012 and Feb 2013. Sent several letters and 2 sets of claim forms (the first lot got "lost" in the post)and finally decided I was sick to death of being messed about by Monarch and started legal action to recover 1200 euros plus interest. A week later they sent me a cheque for £519 for one of the flights.
March - offer from Monarch of £200 plus costs - Turned down
May - further offer of £300 plus costs by letter - ignored
Last week - finally received notice of my court date and the hearing fee of £80 became payable. As this cost would be payable by Monarch, when I won, I thought it only fair to give them one last chance to settle in full. Rang Morgan and pointed out the extremely desperate attempt to claim tech issues as EC would never apply with my case as they admitted in their defence that it was a previous flight which suffered a break down not not my plane which completed another flight scheduled before mine. I also explained this is not a personal injury claim where the amount of compensation is variable, that the amount of fixed compensation has been set by an EU high court so Monarch are failing to meet their responsibilities by expecting me to accept less than the fixed amount.
Morgan gave up and agreed to pay the remaining amount of the MCOL claim by BACS before the the hearing fee was due.
Payment received Thursday !!! :beer:
Final note to Morgan as she told me I hurt her feelings by calling her nasty in this thread, if you want to be liked and respected at work, stop trying to defend the indefensible and get a job with a reputable company
I too have claimed for both these flights, one accepted (the going out flight) saying they will pay me £595 and one rejected (the return flight) saying they had to replace the engine on my plane so there was nothing they could do about that. I have just sent them an email back saying someone has been paid out for this exact same flight and you can't deny payment if you've paid someone else for it, so please pay or I'll also start the court proceedings. Lets see what happens!0 -
I too have claimed for both these flights, one accepted (the going out flight) saying they will pay me £595 and one rejected (the return flight) saying they had to replace the engine on my plane so there was nothing they could do about that. I have just sent them an email back saying someone has been paid out for this exact same flight and you can't deny payment if you've paid someone else for it, so please pay or I'll also start the court proceedings. Lets see what happens!
Well, they shouldn't but they almost certainly will. I had a similar instance to yours. Monarch simply said the following:
"I can confirm that all compensation settlements in regards to EU261 are paid on a “without prejudice” basis and the terms of the settlement remain private and confidential between the claimant and us as the defendant. Any payment made to alternative claimants may be the result of other extenuating factors which will not be disclosed to independent parties. As such the outcome of an individual claim does not bear relevance or set precedence for further claimants"
Not exactly a surprise really given their performance with other claims.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards