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

dxc_chappie

Kidson wrote: »

I would like to throw open for discussion when compensation may still be due where bad weather has been involved.

If we start with an example of an aircraft flying from point A to B; The aircraft takes off on time at 7.30AM but is unable to land at point B due to bad weather and is diverted to point C.

The aircraft was scheduled to land at point B at 10.30AM but due to bad weather the airport had been closed all morning and as already advised was diverted to point C:

However other aircraft commenced landing at point airport B from 12.30PM onwards

The aircraft that was diverted to point C finally arrived back at point A for its scheduled departure to point D – However the flight was now well over 3 hrs delayed and arrived at point E once again well over 3 hours behind schedule

The passengers at point E returned to point A and as to be expected they were well over 3 hrs delayed.

Question: Do you feel that passengers on flight E to A are due compensation as bad weather had not affected their aircraft at either airports point A and E?

I have in mind the case of Jager v EasyJet

Regulation EC261 allows for extraordinary circumstances from meteorological conditions incompatible with the flight concerned. So subsequent flights scheduled to use the same plane cannot use the knock-on effects of weather to avoid compo. Jager v EasyJet supports this, but as it's a County Court judgement it doesn't set precedent. If you want to use this in your own court claim you'll have to obtain a transcript from a transcript company.

Also read Vauban's guide.

kelou

So after several knock backs, then just being ignored I asked Bott & co to instigate proceedings and heard yesterday that Monarch have finally agreed to settle our claim! A bit of good news before Xmas although they said payment could be up to 42 days. Would have been nice though if they didn't make the process as difficult as possible and generally behave in such on obnoxious manner.


Flight no ZB214 8/6/2013.

kelou wrote: »

Hi,

If someone could give me some advice that would be great, I have just tried to call Monarch customer services but they shut at 1.30!

We were on flight ZB 214 (or should have been) which was due to take off from Gatwick at 6.10 on friday the 8th June. We finally landed in faro about 9pm that night so the flight was horribly delayed.

This was our first holiday in many years so I am very naive with this, but some of the other passengers said that we should apply for compensation for the delay. My husband tried to talk to one lady about it at the monarch desk at Gatwick but she refused to discuss it and just gave him a card with a phone number on. When we landed in Faro we saw another lady who had a letter that she said we ought to have been given to apply for compensation but the lady my husband spoke to refused to do anything but give him the card. One lady I tried to talk to actually just walked away when I was still talking to her, and was curt to the point of rudeness.

I guess I am just really frustrated, not just with the delay but with their service. There was no information at all for ages, and had it no been for another passenger telling us we would have had no idea about the drinks vouchers they were giving out, they seemed very unwilling to help anyone. I have a poorly son, nothing life threatening thank goodness but his condition was made so much worse by being in the airport for so long and we only had hand luggage medication as the rest was checked in the hold.

The problem I guess is I have not a clue where to even start, what I should expect from the process, and what we would even be entitled to. I know many of the passengers on the plane told me to come here and find a template letter but I have not yet found it. I am really surprised there are not more messages from those on that flight as so many told me this was the best place to come! I expected a long list of queries!

Thanks in advance, Kelly.

Kidson

dxc_chappie wrote: »

Regulation EC261 allows for extraordinary circumstances from meteorological conditions incompatible with the flight concerned. So subsequent flights scheduled to use the same plane cannot use the knock-on effects of weather to avoid compo. Jager v EasyJet supports this, but as it's a County Court judgement it doesn't set precedent. If you want to use this in your own court claim you'll have to obtain a transcript from a transcript company.

Also read Vauban's guide.

Any idea from whom I can obtain a full transcript of the Jager v EasyJet case?

I have read Vauban guide

Would you care to speculate as to my likely success or otherwise if I went to court?

JPears

kelou wrote: »

So after several knock backs, then just being ignored I asked Bott & co to instigate proceedings and heard yesterday that Monarch have finally agreed to settle our claim! A bit of good news before Xmas although they said payment could be up to 42 days. Would have been nice though if they didn't make the process as difficult as possible and generally behave in such on obnoxious manner.


Flight no ZB214 8/6/2013.

Ah kelou, if only that were the case. But it is more likely pigs would fly (or indeed airlines punctually) or you win the lottery.
One can dream...

staceben1

ours has been paid in full today flight mon1287 from sharm to manchester 12 june 2008, great just before xmas

Tyzap

staceben1 wrote: »

ours has been paid in full today flight mon1287 from sharm to manchester 12 june 2008, great just before xmas

Congratulations and well done, another happy bunny with an extra Christmas pressie this year.:T

111KAB

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/revealed-the-best-and-worst-airlines-for-delays-9946596.html

Harrys_gran

globetrotteranonymous wrote: »

Am new to this forum but wanted to tell you about my experiences with my claim to Monarch over a delayed flight from Palma to Manchester on 28/9/2014. Claim was rejected by Monarch on 28/10/2014 stating 'exceptional circumstances' even though the cause was a technical fault. As advised on this site, contacted the CAA, but because flight was from Palma, advised to contact the European Consumer Centre in Spain (difficult because most of the online info is in Spanish!) They referred me to the UK dept of the EEC, who in turn referred me to AESA in Spain, and so it goes on being passed from pillar to post. Has anyone else had this problem when their delay was from a Spanish airport to the UK?

We were also on this flight and made a claim to Monarch the response stated:

'During a pre-flight safety inspection just prior to departure, it was found that the nose landing gear had suffered a sheared door rod. As a result of the damage this unfortunately led to unavoidable delay to the departure of your flight.

Having considered the factual background of this case with the published guidelines, we are satisfied that the disruption was caused by an extraordinary circumstance that could not have been reasonably been prevented by Monarch'.

I wrote back to Monarch on October 31st 2014 suggesting that regular maintainance checks should have identified a potential problem but have yet to have a further response.

Having taken a good look at Vaubans guide on this forum I am today sending off a NBA to Monarch.

Sedge123

Just after some clarification please. Have read the guide and the relevant legislation but no joy.

We have initiated a claim against monarch but the flight was part of a package holiday booked through Thomas Cook travel agents. Do we pursue with monarch or should we claim through Thomas Cook?

Thanks for any help.

Vauban

Sedge123 wrote: »

Just after some clarification please. Have read the guide and the relevant legislation but no joy.

We have initiated a claim against monarch but the flight was part of a package holiday booked through Thomas Cook travel agents. Do we pursue with monarch or should we claim through Thomas Cook?

Thanks for any help.

The operating airline.