Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

puddy1

Has anybody had any luck claming for the flight delay from montego bay to manchester 4th of september 2012 arriving on the 5th flight no tom157.They are not been helpfull.

romanby1

puddy1 wrote: »

Has anybody had any luck claming for the flight delay from montego bay to manchester 4th of september 2012 arriving on the 5th flight no tom157.They are not been helpfull.

You are not going to get your compensation if you do not put in the work in particular study the various EC court rulings
Some detail would help, you should be able to get some idea if you have a claim if you study as many of the posts on this site similar to yours.
You are going to have to pursue them vigorously to get what you are entitled to.

puddy1

I have a letter back from them stating the cause of delay was due to unexpected flight safety short coming. Arising from the discovery of a technical defect that doesnt fall into the catergory that should have been discovered during maintainance.

We were two hours waiting to board. they told us the cleaners were late, then they didnt have enough food for all the passengers. After boarding, we sat for half an hour while they switched the power on and off as they said the intercom system was down. We had a twenty-four hour delay.

The letter states the aircraft is unable to be legally dispatched with this defect. We assume it was the intercom system.

VOB72

I've just logged into my MCOL case a day before the defence deadline to find TC have now filed a defence, but I can't access it online. Rang MCOL and they said it was because they have submitted it via a firm of Solicitors called Trav Law LLP. Is this usual, and if not does it mean they intend to take this all the way?

Vauban

VOB72 wrote: »

I've just logged into my MCOL case a day before the defence deadline to find TC have now filed a defence, but I can't access it online. Rang MCOL and they said it was because they have submitted it via a firm of Solicitors called Trav Law LLP. Is this usual, and if not does it mean they intend to take this all the way?

The Court sends it to you in hard copy - you don't get to see it online.

Are they going to take it all the way? Who knows? You up for the ride, though?

VOB72

Vauban wrote: »

The Court sends it to you in hard copy - you don't get to see it online.

Are they going to take it all the way? Who knows? You up for the ride, though?

MCOL said if they do the defence in house, it would have appeared online, but as they have appointed a firm of solicitors, it will be sent in post, hence why I posed the question was the appointment of Trav Law a usual occurrance. Absolutely am I up for it - I'm no stranger to court appearances in my every day work so they can bring it on!

Vauban

VOB72 wrote: »

MCOL said if they do the defence in house, it would have appeared online, but as they have appointed a firm of solicitors, it will be sent in post, hence why I posed the question was the appointment of Trav Law a usual occurrance. Absolutely am I up for it - I'm no stranger to court appearances in my every day work so they can bring it on!

Monarch have defended using their in house lawyer, but I didn't get their defence online either - it came a few days later by snail mail. There's plenty of time in the process anyhow - I filed my claim in February and my hearing is scheduled for early October!

maghater

flymeaway wrote: »

I could not agree with you more - I plotted JUST the flights we were delayed on over a period of 6 weeks and every week every flight was delayed over 3 hours! And remember this is just two flights per week from their schedule. It seems very clear to me that they just could not cope at that time, having sold off the family silver to get a bit of money in but forgetting they still had obligations to fulfil. I really want to use this as part of my argument when we eventually get into court later this year - any thoughts?

Well I used it and it didn't do me any good. I do however think it is highly relevant. I tried to discredit TC (doesn't take much doing), mentioned their initial refusal to give me the reason for delay, then they gave me two different reasons, not answering letters/ emails, not filing court documents on time etc., but their barrister just smiled

maghater

Horace_Goes_Skiing wrote: »

First post! Have taken on board a good bit of advice when pursuing my claim for compensation with TC so thought I'd post the ongoing events in case even a small part of my experience helps others.

Not wishing to go overboard with the detail with it still ongoing but the good lady and I were subject to a lengthy delay on a return from Greece.

Sent the letter off to Thomas Cook and got the standard acknowledgement with a case number to quote and shortly after received the anticipated "exceptional circumstances" fob off.

Replied stating I didn't agree with their assertions and would pursue further if three was no change of heart. Fourteen days passed - zip.

Next stage was to get the Greek authorities involved. Filled out the EU claim form and sent a raft of scanned documents from booking itinerary to the letter TC gave us going off the plane to a time-frame of events.

Received correspondence from them a few days later with the copy of a communication sent to TC effectively saying explain what the exceptional circumstances were, or pay up.

I had CC'd in Thomas Cook when contacting the Greeks and a few days later I got the same acknowledgement as before giving me a case number - a different case number incidently.

So now I'm waiting and wondering.

Has the new TC case come as a result of the promptings from the Greeks despite it making absolutely no mention of their involvement. Or because I happened to CC them in? Hmm....

To add further mystery all my dealings went through their customer relations email addy, but the Greeks sent their letter to TC via their claims addy.

To be continued!!

Don't want to dash any hopes, I had a finding from the Spanish NEB in my favour, used it in my court case, and it was about as much use as a promise from a politician. If you get a positive response well and good, but don't put too much reliance on it. Still another judge in another place may see sense. Rulings from NEBs are of no real value, unless they are prepared to back them up with sanctions as per EC 261/2004.

Davidvgoliath

VOB72 wrote: »

Rang MCOL and they said it was because they have submitted it via a firm of Solicitors called Trav Law LLP. Is this usual, and if not does it mean they intend to take this all the way?

My reading of this is that TC must be besieged by claimants taking legal action against them, so much so that they are now having to farm out the work to outside sources.

Serves them right, hope it all goes very badly for them....

On another note, received my court bundle from TC. This is the first time I have actually received a proper explanation for the substantial delay in my flight. And right slap bang in the middle they have attached the recently published 'PRELIMINARY (my capitals) list of extraordinary circumstances following the NEB meeting held on 12 April 2013', yes, the one that says 'this document is for information and guidance only, the content of this document does not represent a binding opinion on the European Commission' as if this some kind of legal document or something! The whole thing smacks of desperation. But there is something they have obviously missed or not read properly, so much so that it looks like one big smoking gun to me.

I cant wait to reveal it court :rotfl: