Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

Vauban

MarcMcr wrote: »

Hi guys,

We were delayed by over 10 hours on a return flight from Ibiza to Manchester with Thomas Cook in July.

We have written to Thomas Cook, but they have refused to pay out citing 'exceptional circumstances'. They have included a copy of the engineer's report, but I am not sure whether or not this would class as one one the technical problems which can no longer be considered an 'exceptional circumstance'.

I planned to take things on to the CAA, but on starting to complete their online form, it says that they won't consider the complaint as the flight originated outside of the UK.

Can anyone suggest who best to take it to next?

Thanks.

Did they really cite "exceptional circumstances" because there is no such thing in the regulation.

Curious to know why you thought taking your complaint to the CAA was going to help much. A 30 minutes read through of the posts on this thread would suggest otherwise, I think.

David_e

MarcMcr wrote: »

I planned to take things on to the CAA, but on starting to complete their online form, it says that they won't consider the complaint as the flight originated outside of the UK.

I think it is now widely accepted that involving the CAA serves no useful purpose and, at worst, might be marginally prejudicial.

Having said that, I was intrigued to see that "they won't consider the complaint as the flight originated outside of the UK". What has that got to do with it if it's a flight of a UK airline to a UK airport?

Vauban

David_e wrote: »

I think it is now widely accepted that involving the CAA serves no useful purpose and, at worst, might be marginally prejudicial.

Having said that, I was intrigued to see that "they won't consider the complaint as the flight originated outside of the UK". What has that got to do with it if it's a flight of a UK airline to a UK airport?

It was agreed some time ago that European NEBs would have responsibility for flights in their airspace. So if the flight is delayed in Spain, even if it's a UK plane, it's for the Spanish to pic up.

But frankly as the CAA have a) written to lots of folk saying basically that they're washing their hands of their case; and b) helped to compile that odd document on the European Commission website I wonder why anyone would consider them a helpful alternative to court action.

David_e

Vauban wrote: »

It was agreed some time ago that European NEBs would have responsibility for flights in their airspace. So if the flight is delayed in Spain, even if it's a UK plane, it's for the Spanish to pic up.

Ah, I see. Thanks

friendofbillw2

David_e wrote: »

at worst, might be marginally prejudicial.

I'd put it a bit more strongly than that David.

If you involve the CAA and they rule based on their airline-friendly 'guidelines' rather than the law and say you have no claim, that is going to be a bit more than 'marginally prejudicial' when the airline raises that, re-raises it and raises it again in front of the judge.

flymeaway

Just spoke with TC and they now say they won't be defending my claim for my outbound flight but will for the inbound - I was told on this call that the inbound journey was delayed due to a refuelling problem and a part was required to remedy this and they believe this warrants an extraordinary circumstance - I plan to continue with my action of course - does anyone have any advice/suggestions? Also, should I accept the money for the outbound flight now or wait till we go to court? I am inclined to wait but will respect anyone's views on this.

Mark2spark

David_e wrote: »

Having said that, I was intrigued to see that "they won't consider the complaint as the flight originated outside of the UK". What has that got to do with it if it's a flight of a UK airline to a UK airport?

Further to that, the course of events if you involve AESA (the Spanish NEB equivalent to the CAA) will be:

1)Aesa write to TC
2)TC don't reply
3)After 30 days, AESA rule in your favour as TC have not provided EC reasons

Then the 4th possibility is the judge rules that AESA don't have jurisdiction in a UK court so their submission is worthless.

So the whole thing becomes a charade. :undecided

Mark2spark

flymeaway wrote: »

Just spoke with TC and they now say they won't be defending my claim for my outbound flight but will for the inbound - I was told on this call that the inbound journey was delayed due to a refuelling problem and a part was required to remedy this and they believe this warrants an extraordinary circumstance - I plan to continue with my action of course - does anyone have any advice/suggestions? Also, should I accept the money for the outbound flight now or wait till we go to court? I am inclined to wait but will respect anyone's views on this.

IMO take any monies currently offered, whilst making it clear that action on the 2nd dispute continues.
If they don't pay up for the first flight if you say you're continuing, make it clear that you're going to apply for interest on the amount.
Hopefully get all the above in writing as well.

Wibblethwaite

Hi All

I've tried to research as much as possible before posting and hope you can help me. I recently has a category 3 flight (4616 miles) delayed by just over 5 hours. Thomas Cook did inform me of this in the morning, but as they didn't tell the hotel we had to transfer at the usual time which meant 7.5 hours in the airport. When I got home I wrote them a letter to complain and ask for some compensation as the hotel would have let us stay there for the day. I had not heard of 261/2004 at that time. I have just received an email back from them stating:

"I can see that you are making a claim for a payment under Regulation 261/2004. Having carried out a full investigation it would appear that your flight was not delayed for the qualifying period specified in the regulation. In view of this a payment is not applicable under the rules of the scheme."

Along with the usual sorry etc. So obviously I did some research! From this I do believe we qualify. My question is, do I respond to this with the 1st template letter, the second template letter or just another casual email asking them to explain why they believe a landing time of 313 minutes late (I checked historically on a statistics website) does not qualify. We were never given a reason for the delay apart from 'circumstances out of our control'.

Your thoughts would be much appreciated.

Mark2spark

The templates are just that, templates. Adapt and adjust each one to suit your needs.
You need to simply write back and tell them that they have not provided a true description of the reasons for the delay, or an accurate time of the delay, and that unless they reconsider and pay out the mandatory compensation within 14/21 days (your time frame but 14 days minimum) then you'll be at liberty to commence court action against them without giving them further notice.