Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

JPears

socrates1882 wrote: »

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.

Agreed and any reasonable person, like the courts, would rather see justice carried out in full, rather than a judgement by default. HOWEVER, I don't think anyone here believes all these "lost" case papers are genuine. In the unlikely event they are, then that smacks of gross incompetance or negligence, knowingly or unknowingly.
Either way, there are enough instances of this occuring, that the Court system really should be looking at the behaviour of the airline industry as a whole. None of these cases will have come as surprise to the airline concerned as presumably all have recieved at least one NBA.

JPears

batman44 wrote: »

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.

See above, don't hold your breath. Why not contact TC and see if they are going to submit a defence, if they are, get a reason, in writing as to why they have not complied with the CPR timelimits. If they aren't going to submit a defence, get that in writing so they have difficulty if subsequently thy apply for a setaside, if your get judgement by default. You can then show you have done everything possibe and more to allow the defendent adequate oppurtunity.

socrates1882

JPears wrote: »

Agreed and any reasonable person, like the courts, would rather see justice carried out in full, rather than a judgement by default. HOWEVER, I don't think anyone here believes all these "lost" case papers are genuine. In the unlikely event they are, then that smacks of gross incompetance or negligence, knowingly or unknowingly.
Either way, there are enough instances of this occuring, that the Court system really should be looking at the behaviour of the airline industry as a whole. None of these cases will have come as surprise to the airline concerned as presumably all have recieved at least one NBA.

It's not airlines exclusively.

I'm afraid it's symptomatic of large organisations. If the papers have been addressed correctly and not returned by the Royal Mail then they are deemed served.

I can't imagine a DJ would consider that "some other good reason".

chili2001

JPears wrote: »

Agreed and any reasonable person, like the courts, would rather see justice carried out in full, rather than a judgement by default. HOWEVER, I don't think anyone here believes all these "lost" case papers are genuine. In the unlikely event they are, then that smacks of gross incompetance or negligence, knowingly or unknowingly.
Either way, there are enough instances of this occuring, that the Court system really should be looking at the behaviour of the airline industry as a whole. None of these cases will have come as surprise to the airline concerned as presumably all have recieved at least one NBA.

It's funny that they received every letter we sent before the court papers and everything after including the default judgement! I said that they would ignore it because they know that they can lie their way into getting extra time to waste.
In a way I blame the courts for allowing them to do this. I would rather pay an extra couple of pounds so the court papers have to be signed for upon receipt which would avoid all these "lost" documents.

martin1372

Today I banked a cheque from TC for £1800. I initially claimed 1600euroes for the delay for my party of 4 from Glasgow to Antalya during July 2008. I wrote my first letter to TC 13months ago and got all the normal replies that have been quoted on may occasions.
I commenced legal action. Thomas Cook represented by Simpson & Marwick. They tired to put me off by stating I would be liable for all expenses- in Scottish Courts it is 10% of amount claimed.
Went to court on 31/10/13. TC solicitor started by stating only I could claim. Sheriff consulted legal book called McPhail and ruled that all 4 of us could claim. TC solicitor then stated was extraordinary circumstances due to electronic circuit board failure. Sheriff did not believe this and stated to TC solicitor that how could this be extraordinary. I also used the Huzar case. TC solicitor then said this type of happening could not be compared to say servicing a car. I got up and handed him TCs letter which many people have received and told the sheriff that even TC did not seem to agree to what their solicitor was stating. The sheriff looked over to TC solicitor and told him that this does not help his case. Got to 3.30pm and neither of TCs witnesses had been called. The case was adjourned until 5/12/13.
I then received an offer of £1800 which I accepted.
The message is persist and you will eventually win.

Martin

martin1372

Today I banked a cheque from TC for £1800. I initially claimed 1600euroes for the delay for my party of 4 from Glasgow to Antalya during July 2008. I wrote my first letter to TC 13months ago and got all the normal replies that have been quoted on may occasions.
I commenced legal action. Thomas Cook represented by Simpson & Marwick. They tired to put me off by stating I would be liable for all expenses- in Scottish Courts it is 10% of amount claimed.
Went to court on 31/10/13. TC solicitor started by stating only I could claim. Sheriff consulted legal book called McPhail and ruled that all 4 of us could claim. TC solicitor then stated was extraordinary circumstances due to electronic circuit board failure. Sheriff did not believe this and stated to TC solicitor that how could this be extraordinary. I also used the Huzar case. TC solicitor then said this type of happening could not be compared to say servicing a car. I got up and handed him TCs letter which many people have received and told the sheriff that even TC did not seem to agree to what their solicitor was stating. The sheriff looked over to TC solicitor and told him that this does not help his case. Got to 3.30pm and neither of TCs witnesses had been called. The case was adjourned until 5/12/13.
I then received an offer of £1800 which I accepted.
The message is persist and you will eventually win.

merlin31

Could anyone clarify. Is the exchange rate for the compensation calculated at the rate at the time of the flight or the current rate, and am I entitled to interest?

len49

Hi Martin

I have pm'd you.

Thanks in advance

Len49

martin1372 wrote: »

Today I banked a cheque from TC for £1800. I initially claimed 1600euroes for the delay for my party of 4 from Glasgow to Antalya during July 2008. I wrote my first letter to TC 13months ago and got all the normal replies that have been quoted on may occasions.
I commenced legal action. Thomas Cook represented by Simpson & Marwick. They tired to put me off by stating I would be liable for all expenses- in Scottish Courts it is 10% of amount claimed.
Went to court on 31/10/13. TC solicitor started by stating only I could claim. Sheriff consulted legal book called McPhail and ruled that all 4 of us could claim. TC solicitor then stated was extraordinary circumstances due to electronic circuit board failure. Sheriff did not believe this and stated to TC solicitor that how could this be extraordinary. I also used the Huzar case. TC solicitor then said this type of happening could not be compared to say servicing a car. I got up and handed him TCs letter which many people have received and told the sheriff that even TC did not seem to agree to what their solicitor was stating. The sheriff looked over to TC solicitor and told him that this does not help his case. Got to 3.30pm and neither of TCs witnesses had been called. The case was adjourned until 5/12/13.
I then received an offer of £1800 which I accepted.
The message is persist and you will eventually win.

111KAB

merlin31 wrote: »

Could anyone clarify. Is the exchange rate for the compensation calculated at the rate at the time of the flight or the current rate, and am I entitled to interest?

I calculated mine at the time of the delay as, if you 'win' that is when they owe you the money from. I claimed for 8% interest and was awarded 5% in court.

batman44

TC have not submitted the defence as they said they would within the timescale, shall i fill in the form I used for the claim to ask for a default judgement now?