Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

JPears

superowls wrote: »

Went to the hearing today. As expected thomas cook requested the stay. This was granted by the judge. He said he would be damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

Stayed until after the huzar appeal permission hearing when either party can request to hear the case or stay until a further date (obviously this would be after the actual hearing).

Judge did say he was very impressed with the presentation of my bundle (thanks must go to Vauban for this).

Left with huge confidence to carry on the case.

Did tell the judge about not receiving the defence until Friday 6th and he said to bring this up at future hearings.

Were you relying on Huzar?

superowls

JPears wrote: »

Were you relying on Huzar?

Did not mention it in my particulars of claim. I gave the court a copy to add to my bundle in my last directions hearing. The judge said that although he wasn't bound by hhj platts ruling, any decision he made today would be open to appeal with the outcome of the huzar appeal hearing.

flymeaway

Was today. As expected judge granted a stay pending whether Huzar appeal is granted and then, if it is, the outcome of it. Judge said the ruling on Huzar was made by someone superior to them in court standing so therefore it was wrong to continue. So TC continue to waste everyone's time for 400 Euros - amazing. In the defence their witness statements actually say the words "corrosion" and "worn" - not words consistent with a good maintenance programme - if that was my family car I would not be happy LOL! Any comments from other claimants?

brownaldinho

In the Summer our flight (Thomas Cook TCX153) from Cancun to Glasgow was delayed over 4 hours.

I subsequently filed a complaint with Thomas Cook to which I got an initial reply stating that "Having carried out a full investigation it would appear that your flight was not delayed for the qualifying period specified in the regulation. In view of this a payment is not applicable under the rules of the scheme."

Following this response I then contacted CAA who then asked the airline to reassess my complaint to which I received no reply from Thomas Cook.

I've since chased them up and again they have came back stating that "the delay was 2hrs 57 mins leaving it below the claim threshold. The information we hold on your flight has not changed, should it as a result of contact from one of the NEB’s then the team which deals with these types of issues will be in touch with you directly in due course."

According to flight stats our scheduled departure was 4:00PM but the estimated departure was 8:01PM so I enquired with TC where they got their information from as there is a clear conflict and have just received the following reply:

"With regards to the query presented in same, the information that we hold comes to us directly from the airline flight logs. This is what they use to make decisions on some delays. Occasionally a flight can leave an airport over 4 hrs. late but make up time on the journey, this may explain the discrepancy in the timings that you have as opposed to what we have."

I was under the impression that regardless of the time made up, it was the length of delay in actually departing that is what determined if I am due compensation?

Can anyone shed on light if I am right in thinking that I am entitled to compensation?

Thanks

111KAB

brownaldinho wrote: »

I was under the impression that regardless of the time made up, it was the length of delay in actually departing that is what determined if I am due compensation?

Delay is calculated as the difference between scheduled arrival and actual arrival time.

CobyBenson

If you were on TCX153 on 29th July 2013 then the arrival delay was less than 3 hours so you can't claim compensation.

brownaldinho

Oh well, thanks for your replies

batman44

Time is up, TC have said they are defending and the return address is Peterborough, that was 28 days ago when the claim was received. Today is the last day but still no defence papers.

chili2001

flymeaway wrote: »

Was today. As expected judge granted a stay pending whether Huzar appeal is granted and then, if it is, the outcome of it. Judge said the ruling on Huzar was made by someone superior to them in court standing so therefore it was wrong to continue. So TC continue to waste everyone's time for 400 Euros - amazing. In the defence their witness statements actually say the words "corrosion" and "worn" - not words consistent with a good maintenance programme - if that was my family car I would not be happy LOL! Any comments from other claimants?

They really love to drag it out as long as possible don't they.
I have the problem that my case was granted a default judgement as they ignored the court papers. Of course, then claimed they didn't receive them and want a set aside which we didn't agree to much to their annoyance as now they will have to send someone out to my local court at the beginning of February 2014 to see whether the set aside is granted or not. This will have been going on for a year in February so not amused. Of course, they will lie their way into getting it and then months again for another court date will follow before they ask for another stay until the Huzar appeal is heard. I intend to get as much interest as possible from them!

socrates1882

chili2001 wrote: »

They really love to drag it out as long as possible don't they.
I have the problem that my case was granted a default judgement as they ignored the court papers. Of course, then claimed they didn't receive them and want a set aside which we didn't agree to much to their annoyance as now they will have to send someone out to my local court at the beginning of February 2014 to see whether the set aside is granted or not. This will have been going on for a year in February so not amused. Of course, they will lie their way into getting it and then months again for another court date will follow before they ask for another stay until the Huzar appeal is heard. I intend to get as much interest as possible from them!

The rules around setting aside a judgment are quite clear.

CPR13.3 is where you want to look, but if I may quote :-

1) In any other case, the court may set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12 if –
(a) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim; or
(b) it appears to the court that there is some other good reason why –
(i) the judgment should be set aside or varied; or
(ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim.
(2) In considering whether to set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12, the matters to which the court must have regard include whether the person seeking to set aside the judgment made an application to do so promptly.


Lots to go at there in the rules.