Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

David_e

Centipede100 wrote: »

I disagree. Airlines are as entitled to try to defend their position as much as passengers are entitled to bring a claim

Of course airlines are entitled to defend claims. I think the concern is that they are using the law, in many cases, not to defend on the facts of a case but to discourage a legitimate claim being pursued. If an airline claims a 2 year time limit or disputes the right of an indivdual to bring a claim, that is, in my view, an abuse of the legal process.

Rightly or wrongly, there's much more focus these days on the extent to which companies act in a responsible manner (see all the furore over legal tax avoidance) not just stick to the letter of the law. Airlines are falling well short on this measure.

The problem appears to be that airlines failed to reorganise their affairs in light of the "new" obligations imposed by 261/2004. They carried on doing what they did previously and it's now catching up with them.

Centipede100 wrote: »

There is no regulator to turn to in disputes over 261/2004. Please don't confuse the work of the CAA as National Enforcement Body for the UK with that of a regulator, the 2 are somewhat different.

DTDfanBoy wrote:

And that is where the problem lies, the regulation places enforcement at the hands of the CAA, yet the CAA are extremely reluctant to act as regulatort.

Interesting post by DTDfanBoy. Appears to suport the view that the CAA are failing on a grand scale.

morgana

waxbill wrote: »

My delay was 4.5 hours this year. I sent in my initial claim and received the 'even cars break down. . . not our fault' response.
I sent a reply this morning asking them to give details of the reason for the delay. I didn't give a time frame for a reply.
Is it likely they will come up with any details or should I just issue a LBA letter and go to court?
Thank you

I think there is an echo in here waxbill. Exactly the same as I. But after reading this forum, I don't expect a reply to my question so sent the NBA today, then received the CAA acknowledgement to my email to them yesterday. Just got to wait and see now but I will take them to court if they don't reply / settle

batman44

jimcbob wrote: »

If I'm honest, I think that an engine surge is an extraordinary circumstance (assuming proper maintenance etc). Engine surges are very unusual events which are not really in the nature of routine technical failures. The Commission also considers, as I read their proposals to revise the Regulation, that in flight technical issues will usually be ECs.

Although I don't disagree with making the argument that it isn't an EC, I would suggest that you focus on the length of the consequent delay (although I don't know how much delay there was between landing back at MAN and departing again?). At a hub airport, it will be hard for the airline to show that it couldn't (without making intolerable sacrifices) have found a replacement plane / crew earlier, although you may need to consider factors such as night curfews etc at the airport.

Sorry to diagree, engine/compressor stalls are more common than you may think, just reasearch or google it you find it is the nature of jet engines, not many these days but they were quite common and for basic wear on engines or too much power applied. The incident at manchester was not the first time with thomas cook.

thomascrook123

dawyldthing wrote: »

Late June this year from Corfu to East Midlands. Seems ages ago now though

Hi, please let me know how you get on as we had a delay with Thomas Cook for an engine bleed. We are due in court in December.

thomascrook123

dawyldthing wrote: »

Right, they have just rung me up after I left a message on there facebook a few days ago saying they haven't contacted me within the 14 days. They have quoted:

Having carried out a full investigation the specific circumstances surrounding the delay to your own flight were of a technical nature which was an Engine bleed. These were extraordinary, in that Thomas Cook took all reasonable precautions necessary to avoid the situation, and despite our proactive measures the problem could not have been prevented. All our aircraft are maintained to a very high standard, in line with CAA regulations, however, despite these steps, mechanical failures can arise without prior warning. These unpredictable events can be likened to those we encounter with our own cars, despite having full service histories, or MOT’s.

In line with Regulation 261/2004 a payment of compensation would not be considered applicable in this case.

I'm going to do some searching through the pages, but has people had a successful claim with such a problem?

tia

sorry, I also meant to say that maybe an engine bleed seems slightly less extraordinary to me now that I know it happened to you too!

steveoat

Hi I have read from the 30th of july this year , just wondering if anyone has tried a claim for 4.5 hours delay on the tcx 2002 manchester to ibiza flight, I have just submitted a claim direct to the airline ,thankyou

JPears

David_e wrote: »

Of course airlines are entitled to defend

The problem appears to be that airlines failed to reorganise their affairs in light of the "new" obligations imposed by 261/2004. They carried on doing what they did previously and it's now catching up with them.

A point I have been making all year and acknowledged by the judge in my case (not that it did any good... )

selski99

steveoat wrote: »

Hi I have read from the 30th of july this year , just wondering if anyone has tried a claim for 4.5 hours delay on the tcx 2002 manchester to ibiza flight, I have just submitted a claim direct to the airline ,thankyou

We were on this flight...wasnt it 31st july (supposed to be 6.15 am)? We sent thomas cook a letter as soon as we got back.. had reply advising they wouldnt be paying compo due to technical difficulty. Did you get the letter at check in to advise it was due to operational circumstances? However my second letter more or less said I will be taking this further but they are standing their ground still claiming technical fault. I havent got time to pursue this myself so have contacted no win no fee ( bott and co) and left it with them.. to date they have just sent tc first letter. I will keep you posted as if you can settle it with tc directly you will avoid paying fees out to no win no fee.

muthacutta

I was at Heraklion waiting for this aircraft. I have been in touch with thomas cook and CAA, now waiting for the authorities in Greece to get back to me as the flight was delayed from out of uk CAA WONT HELP!! Apparently the aircraft that was supposed to fly to Heraklion never left London to get to glasgow. Also look around page 185/186 something about the aircraft been used for a different flight in London
Good luck

muthacutta

Geemac wrote: »

Hi can someone give some advice please if they can.

We were delayed for 8 + hours flying from Glasgow to Heraklion on 3rd Sept this year but when I wrote to Thomas Cook I have had the letter back rejecting the claim as it was "exceptional circumstances". This was due to a technical nature they said plus they do maintain their aircraft etc etc. is my next step the CAA.
If someone could give me some advice I would be most grateful. We actually saw our aircraft sitting on the Tarmac and then it took off empty so it looks like it was deployed elsewhere however we have no proof of this but it was at the same gate we were told to go to.

Thanks

Geemac
I was at Heraklion waiting for this aircraft. I have been in touch with thomas cook and CAA, now waiting for the authorities in Greece to get back to me as the flight was delayed from out of uk CAA WONT HELP!! Apparently the aircraft that was supposed to fly to Heraklion never left London to get to glasgow. Also look around page 185/186 something about the aircraft been used for a different flight in London
Good luck