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

AUDLEY_RESIDENT

I won my case - MCOL was used - very efficient and easy to use. Flight ZB655 Malaga to Manchester 14-07-2012. Monarch said the flight was delayed due to a heart attack patient and the previous plane to ours was diverted which gave a knock on effect to our flight and as such we would not be able to claim. I raised a MCOL for £70 and Monarch contested the claim - they have 28 days to give evidence. They didn't and I raised a CCJ against them last week. They are now sending a cheque for £1095 this week. I have also taken out a MCOL for Jet2 flight LS810 Malaga to Manchester 6-4-12. There excuse is a flap problem on the plane. They have 14 days to give evidence then I will again raise a CCJ if they don't respond. Then go to the Sherrifs to collect the money if they don't pay but first tell them what you will do. It pays to be tenacious. Don't pay a solicitor to do it - it is easy to do yourself.

JPears

AUDLEY_RESIDENT wrote: »

I won my case - MCOL was used - very efficient and easy to use. Flight ZB655 Malaga to Manchester 14-07-2012. Monarch said the flight was delayed due to a heart attack patient and the previous plane to ours was diverted which gave a knock on effect to our flight and as such we would not be able to claim. I raised a MCOL for £70 and Monarch contested the claim - they have 28 days to give evidence. They didn't and I raised a CCJ against them last week. They are now sending a cheque for £1095 this week. I have also taken out a MCOL for Jet2 flight LS810 Malaga to Manchester 6-4-12. There excuse is a flap problem on the plane. They have 14 days to give evidence then I will again raise a CCJ if they don't respond. Then go to the Sherrifs to collect the money if they don't pay but first tell them what you will do. It pays to be tenacious. Don't pay a solicitor to do it - it is easy to do yourself.

Audley
1. Congrats with Monarch
2. It won't be so easy with Jet2 - they play hardball avec les deux oiseaux

Vauban

AUDLEY_RESIDENT wrote: »

I won my case - MCOL was used - very efficient and easy to use. Flight ZB655 Malaga to Manchester 14-07-2012. Monarch said the flight was delayed due to a heart attack patient and the previous plane to ours was diverted which gave a knock on effect to our flight and as such we would not be able to claim. I raised a MCOL for £70 and Monarch contested the claim - they have 28 days to give evidence. They didn't and I raised a CCJ against them last week. They are now sending a cheque for £1095 this week. I have also taken out a MCOL for Jet2 flight LS810 Malaga to Manchester 6-4-12. There excuse is a flap problem on the plane. They have 14 days to give evidence then I will again raise a CCJ if they don't respond. Then go to the Sherrifs to collect the money if they don't pay but first tell them what you will do. It pays to be tenacious. Don't pay a solicitor to do it - it is easy to do yourself.

AR: Well done; I'm really pleased you had the conviction to chase this down.

I have heard of two other claims with Monarch that - like yours - we're won by default in December. In all three cases, Monarch simply failed to provide a defence within the 28 days. (One of these relates to the flight that caused my own delay - ZB248 -, and which Monarch have otherwise fought tooth n nail to defend, including by employing two days worth of London barristers).

This leads me to speculate whether Monarch are struggling to process their legal claims at the moment, and are consequently missing deadlines. Or whether they are having to ration the battles they fight, and are therefore letting some of the claims through. I don't know. But it is interesting.

Without detracting from your welcome victory in any way - because they all count - can I gently dissent (partly) from something you wrote? You say "it is easy to do yourself", and it's definitely right that starting a claim is quite straightforward really, especially with the templates on here. And you were fortunate that this was all you had to do. You won by default.

But if Monarch had defended the claim, you'd have had a much more complex task as you pull together all the documents for your bundle and then submit your written legal argument, based on the Regulation, Sturgeon, Wallentin and the rest. Most people can still do this, if they have the time and competence. But I can say, speaking personally, that I have found it hard work. Perhaps it's me, but I wouldn't describe it as "easy" - and that's before you have to argue your case in front of a judge and opposition barrister!

I do agree with your main point though: which is be brave, stand up for your rights, and take the devils on!

AUDLEY_RESIDENT

You are probably right in all that you say. The legal battle, had they taken it further would probably have been beyond me and maybe then I would have had to employ a no win no fee solicitor. Thanks for your points, which I will have to think about should the Jet2 case go further.

JPears

AUDLEY_RESIDENT wrote: »

You are probably right in all that you say. The legal battle, had they taken it further would probably have been beyond me and maybe then I would have had to employ a no win no fee solicitor. Thanks for your points, which I will have to think about should the Jet2 case go further.

Jet2 will almost certainly refute your claim (their default setting since all their delays/cancellations/DBs, not surprisingly, appear to be ECs) and seek a stay, post Huzar (and Dawson depending on your dates)

Casanoble

Hi Fellow Sufferers
My above flight was delayed over 9 hours due to a loss of power to no. 2 engine just before take off (pilot suddenly slammed on the brakes just as the plane was about to lift off the ground - very, very scary!) I have claimed for compensation under EU regs and, of course, Monarch have claimed 'extraordinary circumstances'. I want to dispute this and have sent a claim to the EU regulator in Madrid (CAA said not their jurisdiction as flight did not depart from the UK). Do I wait for their reply before I send Monarch the 28 day notification for court proceedings?
Anyway help/advice would be most appreciated.
ps. what does 'MCOL' mean/stand for?

Vauban

Casanoble wrote: »

Hi Fellow Sufferers
My above flight was delayed over 9 hours due to a loss of power to no. 2 engine just before take off (pilot suddenly slammed on the brakes just as the plane was about to lift off the ground - very, very scary!) I have claimed for compensation under EU regs and, of course, Monarch have claimed 'extraordinary circumstances'. I want to dispute this and have sent a claim to the EU regulator in Madrid (CAA said not their jurisdiction as flight did not depart from the UK). Do I wait for their reply before I send Monarch the 28 day notification for court proceedings?
Anyway help/advice would be most appreciated.
ps. what does 'MCOL' mean/stand for?

You can choose to wait for a Spanish Regulator letter, or not. Up to you. Personally, I would write Monarch a Notice Before Action letter now - giving 14 days to settle, and then start the process. In the meantime, write to AESA and see what they say (Monarch are unlikely to respond to them).

MCOL = MoneyClaim OnLine, which can really only be used for single claimants. See the Taking the Airlines to Court thread for more info.

brenuk

Does anyone have any info on flight zb660 08 July 2012 Manchester to Malaga which was delayed 5 hours

CobyBenson

brenuk wrote: »

Does anyone have any info on flight zb660 08 July 2012 Manchester to Malaga which was delayed 5 hours

According to Monarch it was delayed due to "an electronic engine control defect [that] required immediate rectification work in order for the aircraft to be declared serviceable and safe to fly."

brenuk

CobyBenson wrote: »

According to Monarch it was delayed due to "an electronic engine control defect [that] required immediate rectification work in order for the aircraft to be declared serviceable and safe to fly."

does engine control defect qualify as exceptional as monarch have refused our claim