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

legal_magpie

So long as the offer is expressed to be "without prejudice" you have nothing to worry about but if they made an open offer which included your court costs but not interest it would be sensible to accept rather than going to trial on the question of interest alone.

silversue_2

Thanks for the replies. I am sorry, maybe I wasn't clear enough. The airline had absolutely refused to compensate, hence the case is already before the court. The offer I received was some months after court proceedings had been commenced. The interest already amounts to £350+ since it's been a long time now. Considering they have let it come this far before offering the statutory compensation I didn't think I was being unreasonable asking for the full amount. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks

glentoran99

silversue wrote: »

Thanks for the replies. I am sorry, maybe I wasn't clear enough. The airline had absolutely refused to compensate, hence the case is already before the court. The offer I received was some months after court proceedings had been commenced. The interest already amounts to £350+ since it's been a long time now. Considering they have let it come this far before offering the statutory compensation I didn't think I was being unreasonable asking for the full amount. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks

You aren't guaranteed to be awarded interest by the court

Vauban

It's only £350 if calculated at 8% I'm guessing?

In practice some judges are awarding no interest at all, some at a reduced amount, and some at 8%. Up to you how strongly you feel about it. I can quite understand that, after messing you about, you'd like your day in court. And if you asked for the interest in your claim, it's entirely appropriate to ask the court to consider the request.

One other thought: if Monarch is offering to settle, it's because they know they can't win. So ultimately I think if you hold firm, you'll get a better offer.

silversue_2

I didn't know that Glentoran99, thanks for the info. Vauban, yes - 8%, it's what I asked for in my claim. I didn't realise the judges could vary it but I will hang on for my day in Court nevertheless.

Any idea what is meant by "upon the County Court at Liverpool not having judicial capacity to deal with all issues in airline delay cases beyond case management where there is no other nexus to Liverpool"?

Tyzap

silversue wrote: »

I didn't know that Glentoran99, thanks for the info. Vauban, yes - 8%, it's what I asked for in my claim. I didn't realise the judges could vary it but I will hang on for my day in Court nevertheless.

Any idea what is meant by "upon the County Court at Liverpool not having judicial capacity to deal with all issues in airline delay cases beyond case management where there is no other nexus to Liverpool"?

Hi silversue,

I believe it means they are very busy at Liverpool, and as there is no connection or link to the Liverpool court, other than case management, it has been transferred.

I'm sure Legal Magpie can give us a definitive answer tho.

I agree with Vauban, you will receive a better offer, but not at the full 8%. If you are willing to compromise at say 5 or 6% then that would be the end of your fight and a very good result imo. The court would not be impressed if you were to force a hearing for the sake of a relatively small amount. Remember that court time is valuable so be pragmatic and realistic.

Having read back through all your posts, I'm really impressed by the way you have dealt with the situation that Monarch forced upon you. You're very nearly there now, the champagne is on ice!

Good luck.

legal_magpie

Tyzap wrote: »

Hi silversue,

I believe it means they are very busy at Liverpool, and as there is no connection or link to the Liverpool court, other than case management, it has been transferred.

I'm sure Legal Magpie can give us a definitive answer tho.
.

Spot on. There is a general shortage of judges and several courts have had to cancel hearings. The money claims centre had been transferring airline cases to Liverpool because some of the judges there are specialists in them but there are so many cases that they can't cope.

Tyzap

Thanks Legal Magpie,

So another consequence of the airlines lack of compliance and the CAA's lack of enforcement is that the court system is becoming swamped by flight delay cases.

Perhaps some pressure will come to bare upon the CAA from the judicial system because of this, or perhaps it's just wishful thinking on my behalf.

Vauban

Tyzap wrote: »

Thanks Legal Magpie,

So another consequence of the airlines lack of compliance and the CAA's lack of enforcement is that the court system is becoming swamped by flight delay cases.

Perhaps some pressure will come to bare upon the CAA from the judicial system because of this, or perhaps it's just wishful thinking on my behalf.

I agree that it is an outrageous state of affairs - and am slightly surprised that the courts don't impose a greater sanction for when airlines are trying to defend the manifestly indefensible.

The other option I suppose is to encourage the greater use of ADRs. I have just seen another user post a link to AviationADR - who seem to cover a number of airlines (including Monarch who joined last week, apparently), and have a degree of CAA endorsement. I wonder if they deal with matters fairly, and if so whether they can induce the airlines to pay up?

unforeseen

Why does all that sound like the situation with private parking companies and BPA/IPC?