Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

maz08

I was wondering if any one has had a successful claim for Flight 6977 on 17th Septmeber 2012, Bodrum - Newcastle this flight was 6 hours late and as Thomas Cook used a leased airline (Smary Lynx) they decided to recall the flight for there own programme this was the reason for the delay apparently!

Was anyone else on this flight?

Any additional info would be grateful.

Thanks

Superhorn

supermum4 wrote: »

Hi all just received tcook defendants defence today and after loads of jargon they say the delay was caused by an unforeseen technical issue to be regarded as an unexpected flight safety shortcoming (smoking engine previous day ) they also say I have no private law civil cause of action against them (tcook) it say any complaint or compensation claim must be referred to the CAA in this case.
now I am claiming 600 euros pp as my flight was delayed over 3 hours but they have also said that as my flight was under 3,500km it clearly falls into the bracket of 400euros and should I indeed be seeking to persue 600 euros I am put to strict proof of the amount claimed. sorry for all the waffle but my question is are they right and can I change the amount i'm claiming through the courts??
cheers guys

Wallentin Judgement :

However, it is not ruled out that technical problems are covered by ‘exceptional
circumstances’ to the extent that they stem from events which are not inherent in the normal
exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control. That
would be the case, for example, in the situation where it was revealed by the manufacturer
of the aircraft comprising the fleet of the air carrier concerned, or by a competent authority,
that those aircraft, although already in service, are affected by a hidden manufacturing
defect which impinges on flight safety.

The recent grounding of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner would fall under unexpected safety shortcomings due to a faulty battery, A good recent example for you to use.

The same would hold for damage to aircraft caused
by acts of sabotage or terrorism.
The Court states that, since not all extraordinary circumstances confer exemption, the onus
is on the party seeking to rely on them to establish that, even if it had deployed all its
resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would
clearly not have been able – unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the
capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time – to prevent the extraordinary

circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight.

However, it is not ruled out that technical problems are covered by ‘exceptional
circumstances’ to the extent that they stem from events which are not inherent in the normal
exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control. That
would be the case, for example, in the situation where it was revealed by the manufacturer
of the aircraft comprising the fleet of the air carrier concerned, or by a competent authority,
that those aircraft, although already in service, are affected by a hidden manufacturing
defect which impinges on flight safety.

The recent Boeing 787 Dreamliner with the affected battery would be unexpected safety shortcomings as the fleet were grounded.

The same would hold for damage to aircraft caused
by acts of sabotage or terrorism.
The Court states that, since not all extraordinary circumstances confer exemption, the onus
is on the party seeking to rely on them to establish that, even if it had deployed all its
resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would
clearly not have been able – unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the
capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time – to prevent the extraordinary

circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight.

jacksback

Sent an email to the mediation service and explained time was running out, I cc'd this to TC's lawyer who replied with an email saying payment in full will be made!! It's finally over and I never did find out the reason for the delay!!

Vauban

jacksback wrote: »

Sent an email to the mediation service and explained time was running out, I cc'd this to TC's lawyer who replied with an email saying payment in full will be made!! It's finally over and I never did find out the reason for the delay!!

Fantastic news - another success for the court process!! Well done!

I know how concerned you were about going down this route, so hope you are feeling vindicated and self-satisfied. You deserve to!

cawman45

Great news; well done. Gives us all encouragement and confidence to push on.

cawman45

Vauban wrote: »

It really couldn't be clearer could it?

No Vauban it couldn't; thanks to you and centipede for this - just about to complete my 'pre-action conduct ' and will use this as one of my essential supporting documents. Have noticed several references here to Graham & anor v Thomas cook mentioned in TC defence arguments so will use this as pre-emptive strike in expectation that I will get similar.

Vauban

cawman45 wrote: »

Vauban wrote: »

It really couldn't be clearer could it?

No Vauban it couldn't; thanks to you and centipede for this - just about to complete my 'pre-action conduct ' and will use this as one of my essential supporting documents. Have noticed several references here to Graham & anor v Thomas cook mentioned in TC defence arguments so will use this as pre-emptive strike in expectation that I will get similar.

I think the Graham thing is a complete red herring. Perhaps others know better, but when I read the judgement it seems that Ms. Graham was suing the airlines for millions of pounds - not just her 600 Euros! - for failure to adhere to the Regulation. The judge said that it was for the CAA to take the airline to court for generic failure to comply, not individuals. This of course does not mean you cannot sue for your compensation - it would be astonishing if it were so.

sging1

jacksback wrote: »

Sent an email to the mediation service and explained time was running out, I cc'd this to TC's lawyer who replied with an email saying payment in full will be made!! It's finally over and I never did find out the reason for the delay!!

Congratulations that is excellent news for you. I am at the pre-court stage so I know how you felt.:T

cawman45

Google 'Graham & Anor v Thomas Cook Group UK Limited [2012] EWCA Civ 1355' pick the second result; see pg 265 of the PDF (sorry can't post links) it seems to be a journal where travel lawyers exchange notes to keep us at bay! I think, although as you say others may know better, you're right; it's all about damages and a huge red herring.

Apologies if you have seen this already

Superhorn

jacksback wrote: »

Sent an email to the mediation service and explained time was running out, I cc'd this to TC's lawyer who replied with an email saying payment in full will be made!! It's finally over and I never did find out the reason for the delay!!

Excellent news. Don't forget to include other costs that you have incurred to get to the stage of court.