Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

mrscannon

Thanks maghater fingers crossed.
How long does it take for thomas cook to reply to everyones initial complaints? I havent received an acknolagement of my complaint used the customer relations complaint link on there website?
Thanks for any help given xx

maghater

mrscannon wrote: »

Thanks maghater fingers crossed.
How long does it take for thomas cook to reply to everyones initial complaints? I havent received an acknolagement of my complaint used the customer relations complaint link on there website?
Thanks for any help given xx

They tend to drag everything out as much as they can. If it goes over 28 days you can always quote the ABTA code of conduct at them

maghater

Mark2spark wrote: »

Nelson judgement here

The reason for quoting this is baffling. They've already lost that case.

I say, once again, to all potential claimants.

DON'T PLAY THEIR GAMES.

Follow the instructions in the sticky.
Write once and commence the claim.
Write again with NBA.
Then commence court action.

Bazaar quotes TC as blaming a bird strike as a cause, Nelson judgement airline can claim ecs for things "beyond the control of the airline", would that not include bird strike, and other things such as maintenance taking longer than expected, punctures, infact just about anything they want to. To me it looks like it gives the airline a lot more wriggle room than Wallentin judgement which includes a preamble to the ...............beyond the control of the airline?

Mrs_SB

Hi there

I am new to forums so bear with me!

I booked a holiday through a travel agent, on an Airtours package, travelling with Thomas Cook Airlines back in July last year. The flight was between 3 and 4 hours late and had to get diverted to Barcelona as Reus would have been closed when the plane would have landed - should I write to Thomas Cook, Airtours or the travel agent?

Also, as the tickets were posted, not e-mailed the only proof I have is my booking confirmation details - will this be enough proof?

Hope someone can help.

Thanks

Vauban

maghater wrote: »

Bazaar quotes TC as blaming a bird strike as a cause, Nelson judgement airline can claim ecs for things "beyond the control of the airline", would that not include bird strike, and other things such as maintenance taking longer than expected, punctures, infact just about anything they want to. To me it looks like it gives the airline a lot more wriggle room than Wallentin judgement which includes a preamble to the ...............beyond the control of the airline?

I can see why you'd say that: but I don't think it's a problem. The Nelson judgement says that "air carriers are not obliged to pay compensation if they can prove that the cancellation or long delay is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken, that is, circumstances which are beyond the air carrier’s actual control (see Sturgeon and Others, paragraph 67)."

Para 67 of Sturgeon repeats this formulation, but then goes on to clarify:

"Thus, the answer to the third question in Case C‑432/07 is that Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that a technical problem in an aircraft which leads to the cancellation or delay of a flight is not covered by the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ within the meaning of that provision, unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control."

Which is of course the Wallentin judgement - and why most technical faults can't be deemed extraordinary circumstances. IMHO, of course!

tinkerbellkirst

I am just about to send my NBA to Thomas Cook after much letters back and forth. I have posted off to the CAA but as our flight was delayed from Antalya to Manchester I don't think they will deal with it?

I am confused though as they said to us in response that the plane was delayed due to an engine fault. However I have googled my delay and on their website people have asked about the delay and the reply from an employee was this 'This flight is delayed due to technical issues which caused a knock on effect to the fleet, the flight is not reduced in priority but has had its schedule delayed due to the planes arrival time'.

So I am confused, another passenger has stated on there what we were told at the time, that the plane was grounded in Orlando due to storm Isaac. We did fly home on a different aircraft.

Am I right in thinking if it was grounded in Orlando we would still be entitled to Compensation as this was not directly our flight, just the aircraft that was meant for us. Also its not like storm Isaac exactly crept up, out flight was 27/08/12 Isaac began on 21/08/12. So no provisions must have been put in place for us.

What do I do with this info, should I write to Thomas cook querying the engine fault again and ask for specific reasons? ask what their employee meant online by his comment?

Thanks
Kirsty

maghater

By all means contact TC about details of the delay. I spent 6 months trying to get information from them, and it wasn't until I had filed my mcol that I got an explanation, and that only tells part of the storey.
Don't mention to them that what you have been told, or that you have had details from an employee on forum. Certainly knock on effects about weather conditions 6 days previously are not valid ecs, and you are correct the CAA will not get involved for an incident outside the uk. Write and email them and ask them to provide specific details.

harryhaster

Centipede100 wrote: »

Either quote their defence here in full (such as you have) or PM it to me for comment.

Otherwise you will have to wait for their witness statement as directed in the court directions.

I am claiming for the 4 and a half hour delay to our flight back from Kos 12th July 2012 which was caused by the same fault to the same aircraft leaving Manchester to Tunisia 11th July 2012 (your delay). Like you I am 8 months into exchanging dialogue with Thomas Cook and getting nowhere - I have written to ABTA and CAA and waiting for their response but Thomas Cook defense to both these delay is exactly the same stating that Extreme "technical difficulties" means that they refuse to pay up. Please, please advise me if you make any progress as if you are successful then I will be too ! many thanks

Shunter64

tinkerbellkirst wrote: »

I am just about to send my NBA to Thomas Cook after much letters back and forth. I have posted off to the CAA but as our flight was delayed from Antalya to Manchester I don't think they will deal with it?

I am confused though as they said to us in response that the plane was delayed due to an engine fault. However I have googled my delay and on their website people have asked about the delay and the reply from an employee was this 'This flight is delayed due to technical issues which caused a knock on effect to the fleet, the flight is not reduced in priority but has had its schedule delayed due to the planes arrival time'.

So I am confused, another passenger has stated on there what we were told at the time, that the plane was grounded in Orlando due to storm Isaac. We did fly home on a different aircraft.

Am I right in thinking if it was grounded in Orlando we would still be entitled to Compensation as this was not directly our flight, just the aircraft that was meant for us. Also its not like storm Isaac exactly crept up, out flight was 27/08/12 Isaac began on 21/08/12. So no provisions must have been put in place for us.

What do I do with this info, should I write to Thomas cook querying the engine fault again and ask for specific reasons? ask what their employee meant online by his comment?

Thanks
Kirsty

I don't know if its any help but post #8 on the "FAQ's to flight delay compensation queries" has the following:

"A question often asked is whether an EC [exceptional circumstance], that effects the flight previous to yours, is also an EC on your flight, as a knock on effect.

The answer is NO.

Point 37. Finnair Oyj v Timy Lassooy Case C-22/11"

Might be worth a read?

HTH

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...CJ0022:EN:HTML

bazaar_2

maghater wrote: »

Bazaar quotes TC as blaming a bird strike as a cause, Nelson judgement airline can claim ecs for things "beyond the control of the airline", would that not include bird strike, and other things such as maintenance taking longer than expected, punctures, infact just about anything they want to. To me it looks like it gives the airline a lot more wriggle room than Wallentin judgement which includes a preamble to the ...............beyond the control of the airline?

Maghater, I should clarify that TC claimed ( after checking their records) that it was a bird strike to a previous flight, nothing to do with our flight. Since Ive started the POC and my call for them to respond, they issued a statement that it was now ( after checking their records) due to a hard landing on a previous flight. Theve offered no evidence of this, I also pointed out that a check on All bird strikes did not get recorded for the day in question, so Obviously TC have changed their excuse because I had checked out their little ruse. Its all a stalling tactic. My POC is almost ready and I'll be trotting off to the local court in the next few days.