Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

lwyatt2001

maghater wrote: »

Thomas Cook
Customer Relations
2-4 Godwin St.,
Bradford
West Yorkshire
BD12ST
Tel 08448798136.
Opening hours mon-fri 9-5.30
Wouldn't bother ringing, waste of time, they make suitable sympathetic sounds, keep you hanging on for hours, never contact you when they say they will get back, and when you ring them back, they claim to have no record of your earlier call. Suggest email or post, that way you can keep a record of your dealings.

thank you very much i need it cuz they have emailed me asking for more eveidence that i was on plane i have given them my booking ref but still asking for more evidence they have admitted the delay xx

Asenath1

Have been reading through the threads for sometime and have found them very informative - so thanks to everyone who has posted so far.
We were scheduled to fly on TCX0139 Dabolim (Goa) to Manchester on 04/02/2013 - at 02.15. We were in the premier seats and were waiting on the concourse to board the flight for nearly an hour when we were told the flight was delayed due to the landing lights not working and the back up system also failing and the pilot had made the decision not to fly the plane. After several hours of tannoy announcements stating the flight was delayed we were informed at approx 06.30 (local time) that the flight was cancelled and then chaos descended. Eventually we were provided with a hotel over an hours drive away and meals (although we were not informed re the use of telephones) before our flight was rescheduled at 18.00hrs later that day. On our return to the airport we were told that the parts for the flight had been at the airport before we had even left for the hotels and had been replaced but due to the airport being military, civilian flights were not authorised between certain hours (which by the way are different to the times Dabolim Airport info states on its website) and therefore was the reason for the longer delay. We eventually left Dabolim at 18.05 for Manchester. On our arrival we were furnished with a letter from TC claiming an "unforeseen operationally significant defect which required rectification prior to further travel". TC then go on to say how we should contact our own insurance companies for any compensation!
Needless to say I will be sending our claim in for our travelling party.
I am thinking we should be claiming compensation for our delay but it has been suggested we should be looking at a full refund because they actually cancelled the flight. Am I wrong in presuming that as we accepted the flight (not sure how else we would have got home!) we are only entitled to the compensation element?
I'm also aware of how much the language and reasons for delay are different to recent posts - is this something that has changed since the ruling against TC in January
I'll keep everyone updated as I go - fingers crossed!

Mark2spark

You can't claim a refund as you took the flight. Maybe compensation though. Do you mean the landing lights on the runway? Or the ones on the plane?

Camaro3

I'm trying to help a friend at work with her claim. She had a 25 hour delay on a flight to Cuba, the delay was caused by the air bridge hitting & damaging the aircraft as it came in. Thomas Cook have refused saying it is exceptional circumstances, but my way of thinking is TC will have put in a claim against the airport operator for the damage, so surely my friend can claim against TC.
Any Advice appreciated.

Mark2spark

File a court claim.

debtfreedaisy

Centipede100 wrote: »

The email confirming your seat reservations ought to be sufficient to prove you were on that flight and for the airline to find your reservation.

Can you outline exactly what happened with a timeline?

Thank you for the reply Centipede100.

The day was a nightmare from start to finish - the scheduled departure time was 9.30am. We were travelling with my super-organised dad so arrived at the airport at roughly 6.30am (always likes to allow lots of time)

Headed over to the check in desks to be told that the flight was delayed until much later in the day. We were not given any reason at this point and asked if we could go home and come back later. We live a few miles from the airport so could get back within half an hour easily. The airline staff told us this was our only chance to check in and that if we left then we wouldn't be able to fly.

So we checked in and received a voucher for £7 ish each - this didn't even cover breakfast! Spent about 8 hours fed up wandering around and trying to kill time until we finally took off. The airline were hopeless at keeping us informed and all we were told was that two flights were being merged - a bigger plane was used (believe it was an Air Palmantur 747.

A little off topic but after paying for reserved seats (with nobody sat behind us) I was disappointed to end up with a family sat behind me who seemed to think kicking the seat in front was great in-flight entertainment :mad:.

The reason given at the time was that there was no plane available for the later flight - the one that we were merged with. I think they said it had broken down and so our flight was delayed so that the second flight didn't have to be cancelled.

Our flight ended up taking off at about 5pm. So we more than 7 hours in the airport.

I have read through the FAQs (very helpful) and cannot see how TC can claim extraordinary circumstances here... but I don't doubt they will.

I have typed my letter up and will post it today. Will post on here if I have any response.

Camaro3

Mark2spark wrote: »

File a court claim.

Thanks Mark, will advise to do.

Mark2spark

Camaro3 wrote: »

Thanks Mark, will advise to do.

I didn't mean my reply to sound abrupt btw, it's just such a pathetic cop out from TC that I despair at times :undecided

maghater

Just received a copy of TCs defence to my claim against them which I have submitted to the small claims court.

The defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to any compensation for the delay under EC 261/2004. The defendant avers that the delay was due to an incident with the original aircraft prior to departure at Newcastle airport, when a worker failed to properly disconnect the pipes from the aircraft before driving away, thus causing considerable damage to the aircraft rendering it unserviceable. The defendant will state that this clearly constitutes an extraordinary circumstance as per Recital 14 of the aforementioned regulation, as the act of a third party are outside the defendants control.

They have neglected to mention that the AESA (Spanish enforcing authority) have written to both TC and myself stating that TC has not proven that the long delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances, and should pay compensation.

I have a letter from Swissport, who describe themselves as TCs ground handling agent , admitting an error but stating "that any form of compensation would be awarded from the airline if they deemed it appropriate. This ties in with the law of Principal / Agent I was kindly directed to by you.

I cannot see how they can possibly defend this situation

Mark2spark

maghater wrote: »

Just received a copy of TCs defence to my claim against them which I have submitted to the small claims court.

The defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to any compensation for the delay under EC 261/2004. The defendant avers that the delay was due to an incident with the original aircraft prior to departure at Newcastle airport, when a worker failed to properly disconnect the pipes from the aircraft before driving away, thus causing considerable damage to the aircraft rendering it unserviceable. The defendant will state that this clearly constitutes an extraordinary circumstance as per Recital 14 of the aforementioned regulation, as the act of a third party are outside the defendants control.

They have neglected to mention that the AESA (Spanish enforcing authority) have written to both TC and myself stating that TC has not proven that the long delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances, and should pay compensation.

I have a letter from Swissport, who describe themselves as TCs ground handling agent , admitting an error but stating "that any form of compensation would be awarded from the airline if they deemed it appropriate. This ties in with the law of Principal / Agent I was kindly directed to by you.

I cannot see how they can possibly defend this situation

Recital 14:
As under the Montreal Convention, obligations on operating air carriers should be limited or excluded in cases
where an event has been caused by extraordinary
circumstances which could not have been avoided even
if all reasonable measures had been taken. Such circumstances may, in particular, occur in cases of political
instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with
the operation of the flight concerned, security risks,
unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that
affect the operation of an operating air carrier.

Can't see any mention of third party problems in that recital?