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

jamiet_2

Vauban wrote: »

I've no idea - why not ask them? Regardless, the Bott flight checker doesn't lie.

Spoke with Monarch earlier. They have informed me that they measure the time based on touchdown to the runway and not when you disembark the aircraft. (thought I'd place in bold, in case it was of use to anyone else). When mentioned this is in violation of a recent EU ruling, he seemed aware of it and just asked me to raise a complaint with the Portuguese CAA equivalent. He even offered to e-mail their contact details which he has done.

Is it worth progressing with the Portuguese CAA equivalent or should I go down a different route?

For reference; this is a follow conversation related to my previous post on 19-04-2015 3:50 PM

Vauban

The Portuguese can't make Monarch pay - and if Monarch know they're in breach of EU law, what do they need you to write to the Portuguese for? Or could they just be giving you the run around in the expectation that you give up eventually?

jamiet_2

Thanks for the clarification Vauban, I did suspect that maybe the case. Will call them again and state my intention to pursue legal action via the Small Claims Courts should they not resolve the matter.

Might even attempt to add the cost of my time too after the run arounds I've had to go through.

NoviceAngel

jamiet wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification Vauban, I did suspect that maybe the case. Will call them again and state my intention to pursue legal action via the Small Claims Courts should they not resolve the matter.

Might even attempt to add the cost of my time too after the run arounds I've had to go through.

I would personally skip the phone call and issue the NBA, if you win your case in with the Portuguese CAA, Monarch will only say that they have no authority in the UK. Which of course is true. The DJ in Court would most likely ignore any of their findings, so it really would be a pointless exercise.

NBA, see if they pay, if not Court.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

jamiet_2

Thanks NoviceAngel - don't mean to sound stupid - but what is an NBA? Also are you suggesting I issue this via email rather than phone call?

NoviceAngel

jamiet wrote: »

Thanks NoviceAngel - don't mean to sound stupid - but what is an NBA? Also are you suggesting I issue this via email rather than phone call?

Have a read of Vaubans excellent guide, it will explain all about an NBA, and a whole lot more.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

Mark2spark

jamiet wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification Vauban, I did suspect that maybe the case. Will call them again and state my intention to pursue legal action via the Small Claims Courts should they not resolve the matter.

Contrary to NA's recommendation, I'd go with making the phone call again, but this time I'd RECORD it, see if you can get them to concede that they know the law but are ignoring it, not only will it go down well in court (or the threat of it) but it would be useful if we can collectively ever find a way to bring the CAA to some sort of court to account for their (lack of) actions.
The CAA are the next in my sights after the airlines :mad:

NoviceAngel

Mark2spark wrote: »

Contrary to NA's recommendation, I'd go with making the phone call again........

OMG!!you mean I'm not right ALL the time ;)

:A

Mark2spark

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

:T:T:T

Maybe not, but you give an honest opinion and that's what a forum is all about, a selection of opinions for a poster to choose a course of action from

CaringLazz

I was contacted by Monarch yesterday saying they "...envisage being in a position to respond to our claim in full, within the next six weeks." Our flight was on 29th May 2009, and if we have to wait for the 6 weeks, we will be over the 6 years statute of limitations for claiming! Any suggestions as to our best course of action? Should we send an NBA and include in the letter that we are doing this because of the time limitation?


We started our claim about 18 months ago, but had been put on hold because it was classed as 'extraordinary circumstances'.