Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

sweeps1

Patrick_Bisset wrote: »

Thomas Cook Airlines
Inmoor Road
Birkenshaw
BRADFORD
West Yorkshire
BD112PS

Thank you I am after an e mail address though.

sging1

maghater wrote: »

Quite agree with you, up until 12 months or so ago I would have said TC were a decent firm, probably had half a dozen holidays with them over 10 years. Delayed for 8 hours a year gone June, given 5 Euros to cover meals phone calls etc. Complained when I got home, and asked them if they would pay a more realistic amount towards our costs during the delay, plus extra day dog kennel and car parking. Point blankly refused! So yes was quite happy to take them to court, OK I lost (only the first round haven't finished with them yet), but they forked out for a bloody barrister to defend the case, so must have cost them. Result I will never holiday with them again, I doubt any of my family or friends will either. If they had sent me £50 to cover costs would have though ok then, if they had also provided a few holiday vouchers as a sorry would probably have been daft enough to book up with them again this year. Bottom line is the package holiday market is in decline, if they are prepared to treat passengers in such an abysmal way, their days are very much numbered, and the sooner they are out of business the better.

We had a 24 hour delay with disabled, elderly and an upset two year old in our party, they left us on the plane for 5 hours, as the pilot said it won’t take long to fix if they can find the parts, they did not find them They offered one orange juice and a cake then sent us into the terminal for 3 hours where 1 person tried to find accommodation for 300 plus people.
They gave us a plane on Saturday that was meant for someone else coming off our cruise and did the same to them but for 51 hours.
Point being, we are normally a party of between 6 and 12 spending around 10K a year in the past with Thomas Cook but now we will never use them again. Maybe if they had settled promptly as the law suggests and gave us better customer service from start to finish then maybe we would have and by paying out what we are owed would have been an investment for them.

For the sake of a couple of thousand they are now down hundreds of thousands over the lifetime of our holidays.
They are spending to much on barristers and not enough on accounts!! :rotfl:

friendofbillw2

maghater wrote: »

if they are prepared to treat passengers in such an abysmal way, their days are very much numbered, and the sooner they are out of business the better.

:T

Are you listening, Thomas?

friendofbillw2

sging1 wrote: »

Point being, we are normally a party of between 6 and 12 spending around 10K a year in the past with Thomas Cook but now we will never use them again. Maybe if they had settled promptly as the law suggests and gave us better customer service from start to finish then maybe we would have and by paying out what we are owed would have been an investment for them.

For the sake of a couple of thousand they are now down hundreds of thousands over the lifetime of our holidays.

:T

Listening yet, Thomas?

romanby1

sweeps1 wrote: »

Thank you I am after an e mail address though.

Personally I prefer snail mail in this type of instance. At least you can get "Proof of Posting" it is not unknown for letters and emails to not be received?????

VOB72

sweeps1 wrote: »

Thank you I am after an e mail address though.

do@thomascook.com

dcellwood

I used the automatic link on the complaints page of the Thomas Cook website rather than use a template...

Anyone had a response this way?

flymeaway

maghater wrote: »

Indeed Thomas Cook must prove that the event was an extraordinary circumstance, as defined in EC261. Regs don't actually say who they have to prove it to, appear to be quite happy now to let it go all the way to court, and then appoint lawyers to defend them. If you have a positive response from the CAA , which TC wont honour I suggest you write to the CAA and ask them what sanctions they are going to impose on Tc for non compliance. The knock on effects after an earlier ec are not so simple, look at Eglitis in the FAQs

I have had a quick read of Eglitis and am now confused since it seems only to relate to the cancellation of flights and not the knock on delay to subsequent flights - can someone help me out here pls?

Vauban

flymeaway wrote: »

I have had a quick read of Eglitis and am now confused since it seems only to relate to the cancellation of flights and not the knock on delay to subsequent flights - can someone help me out here pls?

The point about Eglitis is that airlines are told they need to build some capacity into their schedule so that, when the ECs affecting a flight are ended, they can resume the service (and not be caught out by eg staff going over hours).

maghater

flymeaway wrote: »

I have had a quick read of Eglitis and am now confused since it seems only to relate to the cancellation of flights and not the knock on delay to subsequent flights - can someone help me out here pls?

Sturgeon also talks about a particular aircraft on a particular day,so really don't think you have much milage on knock on effects for 6 hour delay, concentrate on the reason for the delay