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

rubybloo

Mark2spark wrote: »

A poster has received compo on the named flight, but it's recorded as being a week before yours?

No, I'm the same poster.

I was outbound MON6072 on the 22/12/12 (delayed around 23 hours) and returned on MON6073 on the 29/12/12 (delayed 4.5 hours).

The first flight goes from Gatwick to Grenoble and the second is between Grenoble and Gatwick. Monarch has agreed to pay me 250 Euros for each flight (500 Euros in total) in compensation.

Thanks everyone for your help, this board is a very useful resource :beer:

joe50

Centipede100 wrote: »

Agree totally with your assertion that this seems to have been a problem with another aircraft rather than the one tasked with your flight. Absolutely not extraordinary circumstances in that case. So I would say good news for you rather than bad!

This appears to be word for word the same letter I received this week - mine referred to ZB870 Luton to Palma on July 30, 2011 (almost 10 hour delay).

jc_hnp

I claimed compensation from Monarch after a 5 hour delay (Flight No ZB742) to Malaga on 19 September 2012, I arrived at midnight with no accommodation. They have taken 5 months to reach the decision that a small problem with a trim on the door was an 'extraordinary circumstance' and that they therefore don't have to pay compensation. I want to appeal this decision and don't know where to go - any suggestions???

afish51

Shameonthem wrote: »

Hi
I too was on this flight and recieved the same reply today, 4 times. They seem to be suggesting that it was our flight that was delayed but as I recall, it was the flight coming in that was delayed.

You are right - the inbound plane had not even left Gatwick when we checked in. The letter implies that it was "your plane" that developed a fault - which is technically true as it was a turnaround flight. I dont think Monarch are too bothered about 'small details' like this though as they seem to be applying a blanket approach of EC to 99% of claims (that is up until the threat of court action).

This is clearly (allegedly!) a premediated strategy to put people off from making claims.

The LBA will be in the post today!

HitAndMiss

Yesterday I received an E Mail from Monarch Airlines informing me that my claim of 400 euros per person (2 people travelling) had been reduced to 200 Euros per person because the delay was between 3 and 4 hours. They said they would be sending a cheque for the equivalent of 200 per person through the post in the next 7 to 14 days.The good news is they did not quote any extraordinary circumstances. However they quoted me EU261/2004 as the reason for the reduction of the amount of my claim. Amazingly I have managed to speak to someone at the Monarch EU claims desk this morning and they insisted the 50% reduction was in line with EU261/2004 and even suggested I sought legal advise.They would tell me exactly where this clause was located in this document!! My flight was from the Canaries to UK in September 2011. I have read the comments on this forum about the CAA link about this issue and would agree. Is there something hidden in the small print in EU261/2004 that allows them to to reduce my claim. As the flight is from the Canaries I believe it is only Spanish authorities and not the CAA would may be able to arbitrate on this issue. What should I do?. Maybe wait until a get the cheque from Monarch then take up the issue but will that mean if I bank the cheque then it is considered I have accepted the lower sum. Any advise will appreciated. I have this fear that somewhere in very small print there is a well hidden clause that allows Monarch to reduce my claim, Surely by quoting this fact in writing there is a legal issue if what they are quoting is incorrect.

blondmark

HitAndMiss wrote: »

What should I do?. Maybe wait until a get the cheque from Monarch then take up the issue but will that mean if I bank the cheque then it is considered I have accepted the lower sum. Any advise will appreciated.

The payment of a lesser sum than that owing is not good consideration for the sum actually owing, meaning you can still come back for the balance provided it was due to you. (Foakes v Beer (1884)).

Mark2spark

HitAndMiss wrote: »

Yesterday I received an E Mail from Monarch Airlines informing me that my claim of 400 euros per person (2 people travelling) had been reduced to 200 Euros per person because the delay was between 3 and 4 hours. They said they would be sending a cheque for the equivalent of 200 per person through the post in the next 7 to 14 days.The good news is they did not quote any extraordinary circumstances. However they quoted me EU261/2004 as the reason for the reduction of the amount of my claim. Amazingly I have managed to speak to someone at the Monarch EU claims desk this morning and they insisted the 50% reduction was in line with EU261/2004 and even suggested I sought legal advise.They would tell me exactly where this clause was located in this document!! My flight was from the Canaries to UK in September 2011. I have read the comments on this forum about the CAA link about this issue and would agree. Is there something hidden in the small print in EU261/2004 that allows them to to reduce my claim. As the flight is from the Canaries I believe it is only Spanish authorities and not the CAA would may be able to arbitrate on this issue. What should I do?. Maybe wait until a get the cheque from Monarch then take up the issue but will that mean if I bank the cheque then it is considered I have accepted the lower sum. Any advise will appreciated. I have this fear that somewhere in very small print there is a well hidden clause that allows Monarch to reduce my claim, Surely by quoting this fact in writing there is a legal issue if what they are quoting is incorrect.

Read the EU 261/2004 document for yourself.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2004/l_046/l_04620040217en00010007.pdf

ONLY if you are re-routed on your distance of flight can the 50% reduction be applied.

Mark2spark

jc_hnp wrote: »

I claimed compensation from Monarch after a 5 hour delay (Flight No ZB742) to Malaga on 19 September 2012, I arrived at midnight with no accommodation. They have taken 5 months to reach the decision that a small problem with a trim on the door was an 'extraordinary circumstance' and that they therefore don't have to pay compensation. I want to appeal this decision and don't know where to go - any suggestions???

See the FAQ's:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4421185
You now write a NBA letter and in 14 days after the date of that letter you begin a court claim.

blondmark

Eve4ever wrote: »

Well folks, you could knock me down with a feather! I got the following email today. Just to remind you, I started court proceedings on the 26th feb for two flights, I'm entitled for 600 euros for each. The even better news is, back in the summer last year they wrote a letter to me stating the reason for both delays was the same, they had re-organised their operating program so, if they reject the other flight, its going to be an interesting day in court ! :-)

I plan to leave the court case open and no doubt I'll get a phone call from their solicitor at some point. Once I have got my court fees, interest and other 600 euros back, then I'll cease action :-)))

Well knock me down with a feather and call me Susan. Proof, if it were needed, that litigation is the only language these crooked airlines understand. Don't jump through their hoops for months, just sue.

Mark2spark

It will certainly be an interesting observation if Monarch start settling out of court at the last minute, rather than have a judge rule that their EC excuses are invalid.
A few defended cases, and rulings, are what we need though.