Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

heather_p03

Hi folks.

What happens if/when TC do not respond to MCOL? If their time to respond has expired is the next step really to ask that a judgement be made?
Has anyone been in this situation? I have been avidly following every single post on this thead and people seem to be commenting that TC generally respond saying that they will defend the claim.

Thanks.

bazaar_2

heather_p03 wrote: »

Hi folks.

What happens if/when TC do not respond to MCOL? If their time to respond has expired is the next step really to ask that a judgement be made?
Has anyone been in this situation? I have been avidly following every single post on this thead and people seem to be commenting that TC generally respond saying that they will defend the claim.

Thanks.

Read up on Civil Procedure Rules, mostly youll find the court allows them to be filing things late, but its not really allowed according to CPR.
So if theyre late, you file an application to court for summary judgement. ( youll likely find that once youve read the CPRs, theyll have filed, but youll be a little wiser for it.).

VOB72

bazaar wrote: »

Read up on Civil Procedure Rules, mostly youll find the court allows them to be filing things late, but its not really allowed according to CPR.
So if theyre late, you file an application to court for summary judgement. ( youll likely find that once youve read the CPRs, theyll have filed, but youll be a little wiser for it.).

But how can they keep delaying things and then get away with late submissions? First they refuse to respond to your queries; then they tell blatant lies; then they don't reply to NBA; then they don't respond to NEB; and finally they don't respond to MCOL deadlines. Surely in cases of repeated refusal to engage, judges must start a) issuing judgement by default in the claimants' favour; and b) penalising the airlines for such tactics ???:mad:

bazaar_2

VOB72 wrote: »

But how can they keep delaying things and then get away with late submissions? First they refuse to respond to your queries; then they tell blatant lies; then they don't reply to NBA; then they don't respond to NEB; and finally they don't respond to MCOL deadlines. Surely in cases of repeated refusal to engage, judges must start a) issuing judgement by default in the claimants' favour; and b) penalising the airlines for such tactics ???:mad:

Its all part of the game im afraid, its true if you played the same way, youll get tour knuckles rapped. Its all about putting doubt and frustration into you, its tough to do but you need to remove the emotion out of it.

Vauban

bazaar wrote: »

Its all part of the game im afraid, its true if you played the same way, youll get tour knuckles rapped. Its all about putting doubt and frustration into you, its tough to do but you need to remove the emotion out of it.

It is true - remove the emotion and play the game.

But you can also help yourself significantly to truncate the process. Make a claim. 21 days later send a letter notifying that if claim is not settled within the next 14 days you will commence legal action. Then five weeks after making a claim you have moved straight to MCOL. There is no need to engage a NEB/CAA: and indeed the arguments against doing so seem more compelling with every week that passes.

Remember: just because the airlines present you with hoops doesn't mean you have to jump through them!

chili2001

Quick question. My solicitor has just put this on the brief details of claim on the court forms: The Claimant seeks damages and interest arising from a breach of statutory duty and/or contract.

Is this right? Surely i'm not seeking damages but statutory compensation? I don't want to give TC any wriggle room by claiming for the wrong thing thus allowing them to use some other obscure law to get out of it.

bazaar_2

chili2001 wrote: »

Quick question. My solicitor has just put this on the brief details of claim on the court forms: The Claimant seeks damages and interest arising from a breach of statutory duty and/or contract.

Is this right? Surely i'm not seeking damages but statutory compensation? I don't want to give TC any wriggle room by claiming for the wrong thing thus allowing them to use some other obscure law to get out of it.

you should direct that question to the solicitor youve hired. its not really fair of you to question him/her after youve engaged them.
They should be aware of the correct wording for claims as theyve done it before ( you hope). us mere mortals as LIPs on the other hand, are supposed to be allowed a little grace

chili2001

bazaar wrote: »

you should direct that question to the solicitor youve hired. its not really fair of you to question him/her after youve engaged them.
They should be aware of the correct wording for claims as theyve done it before ( you hope). us mere mortals as LIPs on the other hand, are supposed to be allowed a little grace

Ok thats not really helpful! In the main wording of the claim it goes on to say about Denied Boarding Compensation Regulation (EC) 261/2004 but the other description regarding breach of contract doesn't seem to fit. What have the other people that have filed a claim put on the brief details. Of course I will discuss this with my solicitor Bazaar, but as he asked me to amend it where I thought necessary maybe someone who has already filed one could give me some helpful advise as to the correct wording?

bazaar_2

chili2001 wrote: »

Ok thats not really helpful! In the main wording of the claim it goes on to say about Denied Boarding Compensation Regulation (EC) 261/2004 but the other description regarding breach of contract doesn't seem to fit. What have the other people that have filed a claim put on the brief details. Of course I will discuss this with my solicitor Bazaar, but as he asked me to amend it where I thought necessary maybe someone who has already filed one could give me some helpful advise as to the correct wording?

Sorry Chilli, I didnt realise your Sol was asking that you amend your own claim. ( rather defeats the object of hiring them I guess),
As long as its factual, there shouldnt be a problem when you come to file your full witness statement. The airline did promise you a flight at such a time, they failed to do so, they failed.
The initial claim, is just that, a very brief POC ( normally MCOL). mine for instance stated something like this:-
claim compensation under Article 7 of EC 261/2004 pursuant to the Sturgeon judgment in the ECJ (Case C-402/07 of 19 November 2009) which provides for [EURxxxx per passenger to be paid in the following circumstances.

These were that xxxxxdelayed my flight from xxxx to xxxx on xx/xx/xx and did not return me until xx/xx/xx, a delay of some xx hours.

Despite writing to xxxxx on xx occasions since this event, they have declined to provide an adequate reply under EC 261/2004 Article 5.3, simply stating that the aircraft developed a technical problem and therefore the flight had to be delayed blah blah blah

Poets

My wife and myself were also on this flight. We sent a letter off to thomas cook and our claim for compensation was rejected. TCX163 cancun to manchester 11th july 2013