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

LBD

Centipede100 wrote: »

But the law states you don't have to prove delivery just proof of posting so recorded delivery is unnecessary and costs more (which cannot be reclaimed)....!

Being able to reclaim the cost is not my main concern or objective, I really appreciate the point you are making and am aware of it, but as I have previously stated, my personal preference is belt and braces and it not only proves posting it also proves receipt...which might be useful at some point..

Mark2spark

PIP1966 wrote: »

Morning Mark
Have sent my claim form off via email and they have sent the automated acknowledgement. Can I let you know how I get on? I do really appreciate your help and hope I've not been too much of a pain :-)
Regards
PIP (Becky)

Please do. You might have to wait about 12 weeks for a reply accepting or denying your claim given Monarchs previous form.
Although there's quite a list building up in the OP of denied claims, I believe it's the tip of the iceberg, there must be hundreds more from people that don't use MSE.
Hopefully someone else will have already claimed for your flight, therefore the answer to your claim will be more speedily replied to from Monarch.
If you read my FAQ's thread there's some further info in there as it's likely that you'll have to take a small claims out against Monarch, so it might be prudent for you to start getting genned up on the process.
Best wishes,
Mark

Mark2spark

I've reworked the FAQ's sticky, so that items are more in order, and have added a few more little lines to explain what the links are. I've also added the recent Folkerts judgement, which confirms that a short delay on an intial flight that causes you to miss a connecting flight, still qualifies for compensation if the arrival time is more than 3 hours.
IMO it reads much better now. Almost every question can now be referred to the FAQ's.

Eve4ever

Can I suggest we do a quick head count of those who have started court proceedings, this type of detail gets lost in threads this long.

I'll start:

Eve4ever- claim submitted online 26/2/2013

Vauban

clarkysrt8 wrote: »

ZB264 London Gatwick to Alicante 16th July 2011 rejected Cracked windscreen

ZB252 London Gatwick to Alicante on 10th October 2012 rejected unofficial Strike in Hassi Messaoud, Algeria!!

I have responded to them both disputing that they have sufficient grounds for refusal.

Mark: do these need adding to the (ever growing) list?

I note that there are already four separate cracked windscreen incidents reported in 2012 alone! (That's incidents, btw, not single flights affected.) I think Monarch claimed that there were only two.

Feels ever less "extraordinary", unsurprisingly.

Aidy1972

You can add on to your list the above flight MAN to MXP on the 14th June 2012. No claim due to the EC reasons given:
Technical problems within the Monarch fleet and the peak season time of year. Insufficient aircraft to operate the flight on time.

Maybe i'm reading too much into this flight, as we had to fly to LGW to go and collect their passengers en-route to MXP. Although it was the same size aircraft that was scheduled to fly this route the same size aircraft that was now unsafe to fly turned up at MAN with only half a load boarded at MAN and then collected from LGW and the flight still wasn't full. Also, Monarch have pulled this route from MAN as it was a "low revenue" flight.

Coincedence?

I will take this up with the CAA and see what they say.

p.s. to get this this far it has taken approx 14weeks.

blondmark

Mark2spark wrote: »

Hopefully someone else will have already claimed for your flight, therefore the answer to your claim will be more speedily replied to from Monarch.

Erm ... I think you may find that the nice lady at Monarch can tell you in 30 seconds flat from the screen in front of her why your flight was delayed. However they have adopted a deliberate policy of putting as many obstacles as possible in the way of legitimate claims.

A lot of the problem stems from the culture of blind obedience amongst potential claimants. There seems to be no end of ridiculous hoops people are prepared to jump through as soon as they're asked to.

Stop behaving like sheep. Give them 14 days notice of the service of proceedings and then sue them. If everyone did this, the games playing would screech to an immediate halt because being sued is much more expensive than paying your bills on time.

NikA

Hi all - my wife and I were delayed last July.

MON1484
Gatwick to Dalaman
9th July 2012.

There was a fault with the plane and it took 9 hours for them to provide a replacement. We lost the first afternoon / evening of our holiday, arriving in Turkey at midnight instead of 3pm.

I filed my claim last October and have finally heard back with a letter today. Monarch claim the delay was caused by a left wing bleed leak which left the plane unserviceable according to safety engineers. They claim this can be considered extraordinary circumstances and have stated we will receive no compensation.

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread - seems like 99.9% of us are getting the same response. I'll now decide whether to pursue my claim legally. I have been in contact with the CAA throughout and so will wait to hear from them first.

sharon366

I have had letter from monarch today stating extraordinary circumstances, the aircraft suffered a brake unit failure and required a new unit.

That to me is mechanical failure not extraordinary at all.


Should we pursue our claim?

suelees1

Mark2Spark In the list of delayed flights it states

"ZB532 Manchester - Palma 09/04/11 Previous Sharm flight wing damage Knock on EC".

I've just had Monarch's refusal letter re this outbound flight ZB532 and they claim it was EC in that the aircraft developed rudder problems and that they transferred passengers to the first available aircraft (it was >5hour delay).

Rudder problems have also been given by them for the reasons they've given for the delayed inbound flight 533.

Where did you get the info about it being wing damage on a previous Sharm flight please?

I'm assuming I write to ask for the technical report now?

I owe you a couple of pints