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

Mark2spark

klint wrote: »

I guess you are all getting bored hearing about Monarch's "extraordinary circumstances" excuses.

Well, I've just received a rejection with a difference!

As usual, it starts:
Re: Flight ZB492 Birmingham to Alicante on 18th September 2012
So far it's the standard Monarch excuse, except... that wasn't my flight! They got me mixed up with someone else!

Presumably they gave details of my flight to the person who took flight ZB492. Has anyone got a letter about my flight ZB743 Malaga to Gatwick scheduled for 2 August 2012?

Not for that date, but the route and flight number occurs many times in the list in the OP.

Mark2spark

tall_paul68 wrote: »

Flight ZB677 Alicante to Manchester 29/10/12

Our records show that the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight developed a fault with the left hand side translating sleeve in the right hand side engine, less than an hour prior to the scheduled departure time of the outbound flight from Manchester to Alicante. The aircraft was declared unserviceable and the required replacement component was moved from the Monarch base in Luton to Manchester for fitting. Unfortunately this led to a delay in the scheduled departure time of your flight later that day. As a consequence and in order to reduce the length of your delay, your flight was operated on the first available aircraft from within the Monarch fleet.

Extraordinary circumstances no compensation!!!

What should I do next??

Give them 14 days notice to settle as per the template (NBA) and then off to court.

Zoe16_2

Hi,

We were delayed by 5 hours travelling from Manchester to Preveza on 19th September 2010.

The problem we have is on the day of travel there was a problem with our plane and the flight was split into 2 groups however we both kept the same flight number. The first group left only 65 minutes delayed - and this is the the flight information on Flightstat and on the Monarch records.

HOWEVER, we seem to have been lost in the system! We arrived at our destination at 1730 instead of 1230 - we got an free in flight meal due to our delay and our Thomas Cook rep brought us all water and a leaflet on who to complain to. BUT CONVENIENTLY NONE OF THIS IS ON THEIR RECORDS.

So how do we prove it???

Was anybody else on this flight also so we can assist each other's claims?

Thanks

Zoe

111KAB

Zoe16 wrote: »

Hi,
We were delayed by 5 hours travelling from Manchester to Preveza on 19th September 2010.
The problem we have is on the day of travel there was a problem with our plane and the flight was split into 2 groups however we both kept the same flight number. The first group left only 65 minutes delayed - and this is the the flight information on Flightstat and on the Monarch records.
HOWEVER, we seem to have been lost in the system! We arrived at our destination at 1730 instead of 1230 - we got an free in flight meal due to our delay and our Thomas Cook rep brought us all water and a leaflet on who to complain to. BUT CONVENIENTLY NONE OF THIS IS ON THEIR RECORDS.
Zoe

Not doubting your comment however the flights should not have had the same numbering on the day in question. Monarch's tactic is normally to add a suffix letter to the original flight number so the first flight for example would be 123A and the second 123B thus it will not get picked up on flight stats. If the TC rep gave you a leaflet this should be your starting point as you have written confirmation.

Zoe16_2

111KAB wrote: »

Not doubting your comment however the flights should not have had the same numbering on the day in question. Monarch's tactic is normally to add a suffix letter to the original flight number so the first flight for example would be 123A and the second 123B thus it will not get picked up on flight stats. If the TC rep gave you a leaflet this should be your starting point as you have written confirmation.

I know, but don't still have it as was 2010 and didn't expect this to happen! Frustrating!

ginger_turnip

add flight ZB737 from Malaga to Gatwick on 14/07/2012 to the long list of claims denied due to exceptional circumstances.On the day we were told by staff at Malaga that it was due to bad weather over the south of England.When we disputed this as all other airlines were taking off we were then told it was problems within the fleet.We wre delayed for 7 1/2 hours which was no fun with two kids under 2.They have told us it was a cracked windscreen and pane was diverted to Gatwick.Ihave noticed on this forum that another flight that day and one the following day also had problems.This seems to me to be a servicing issue and that surely is Monarchs fault.Anyone know if its worth complaining to CAA.We have never had a problem with Monarch before and we are flying with them later this year.Just feel very dissapointed.

Chewitt73

Another flight to be added to the list of denied for ECs. In this case we were delayed by 24 hours:

Our records show that the aircraft that was originally scheduled to operate your flight developed an electronic management system fault, which rendered the aircraft unserviceable and unsafe to fly. Despite exploring all conceivable options, there was no immediate availability within our own fleet to transfer your flight to another Monarch aircraft, or indeed to transfer passengers to an aircraft chartered from a third party operator. As a consequence, the fight departed as soon as an aircraft became available.

lisafoster

Just had the following EC response from Monarch
Re: ZB970 Birmingham to Malaga on 22nd August 2012

"Our records show that due to an aircraft experiencing an auxiliary power unit fault which rendered the aircraft unserviceable and unsafe to operate, there were insufficient aircraft from within our fleet to operate your flight on time. As a consequence your flight was unavoidably delayed. However, in order to reduce the delay, we transferred passengers from your flight on to the first available aircraft from within the Monarch fleet.

Having considered the factual background of this case, we are satisfied that the disruption was caused by an extraordinary circumstance that could not have reasonably been prevented by Monarch Airlines. We are, therefore, unable to accept your claim for compensation for the reasons given."


What a load of rubbish, there was an initial delay of 1 hr 40 mins, then, whilst we were at the boarding gate, a lady with a disabled passenger came to the front of the queue as they had not pre booked their seats or any disabled assistance (surely this should have been arranged by Monarch at check in). This then caused the further delay whilst they helped her on board (which caused us to miss our flight slot). As a result of missing the original flight slot we had to re-fuel and wait for a new flight slot (over 2 hours sat on the tarmac with no food or drinks from Monarch). The pilot stated that the delay was due to 'loading problems'. We eventually arrived in Malaga 3 hours & 50 minutes late. Would any of this be defined as EC?

keftin

ZB533 Palma - Manchester 9th April 2011

Today received a refusal on EC grounds.
...aircraft developed a rudder defect that rendered the aircraft unserviceable and unsafe to fly etc etc etc...

For the record I have not made any contact with Monarch (nor they with me) since I submitted my claim in mid-December 2012.

I think it quite reasonable that if they think they have an arguable defence, then it should be encumbent upon me to rebut such a defence in a claims action. Additionally, if the faults being given by Monarch are genuine faults resulting in delay, it demonstrates a sound approach to passenger safety regardless of whether it exonerates them of being liable for compensation claims.

As a point of clarification: Does the EC apply to the circumstances that existed in relation to a planned flight or the aircraft itself?

ie a fault on flight A causes its delay. The fault is fixed but the knock-on effect is that the return flight B on the same aircraft is delayed. In my view the return flight is a different flight with a different reference number which must pass a sepearte safety check?

111KAB

ginger_turnip wrote: »

add flight ZB737 from Malaga to Gatwick on 14/07/2012 .Anyone know if its worth complaining to CAA..

CAA only deal with flights from UK. Spanish NEB deal with flights from Malaga. Problem is you write to NEB ..... they then reply to say you will have your response within 30 days and they write to Monarch. Monarch do not reply so NEB write to you telling you this and often suggest the only way to clarify is to take Monarch to court.