We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

Options
1427428430432433858

Comments

  • richardw
    richardw Posts: 19,459 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts
    Was the gouge caused by TC's handling agent?
    If so read up about 'principal and agent'.
    Posts are not advice and must not be relied upon.
  • Vauban
    Vauban Posts: 4,737 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    catryn wrote: »
    The airline has confirmed that this delay is covered by extraordinary circumstances, as the cause of the delay could not reasonably have been foreseen.'

    Is this correct? Thank you for all the help that has been received so far.

    That's not the correct test of "extraordinary circumstances". To be "extraordinary" the origin of the problem needs to be both not inherent in the operation of the airline and beyond its control. And then the airline needs to demonstrate that it used all of its resources to minimise the delay.

    If you think you have a case in the light of the above test, take them to court (or engage a NWNF lawyer). And if you don't, then you don't ...
  • batman44
    batman44 Posts: 545 Forumite
    Can i request diclosure of a report/document submitted to the CAA by TC under the disclosure clause in the CPR's? Fobbed off under the FIA by the CAA.
    Check out Vaubans Flight Delay Guide, you will be glad you did....:):):)
    Thomas Cook Claim - Settled Monarch Claim - Settled
  • pretzelnut
    pretzelnut Posts: 4,301 Forumite
    Vauban wrote: »
    Easy. You take them to court, and force them to divulge the true cause of the delay. Or you walk away.

    Was your flight during the time of the ash cloud disruption? If so, it is likely to be regarded as extraordinary.

    I don't know where to begin and before you say read the taking then to court thread, its all far too technical for me. Far to much legal jargon that I do not understand.

    Im ill and I did ask Bott&co to do it, but they've just said they cant due to the latest response. So thomas cook win.

    No my flight at the time as we were told, was delayed because it was delayed at the previous airport (MAN) due to a technical nature, and wouldn't be able to fly to us (DLM) till it was fixed. Yes it was around the time of the ash cloud, couple of week after in fact, but my delay had nothing to do with ash, but I cant prove it. No other flights were affected that day, I've checked.
    :TIs thankful to those who have shared their :T
    :T fortune with those less fortunate :T
    :T than themselves - you know who you are!
    :T
  • murty
    murty Posts: 6 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Our flight to turkey was delayed by 6 hrs, sent an email to Thomas cook advising them of this, received a voucher for £692 for 2 people within 10 days. Happy days:j
    Could you let us all know your flight number and dates please so we can see if it relates to any of our claims?
  • David_e
    David_e Posts: 1,498 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    pretzelnut wrote: »
    I don't know where to begin and before you say read the taking then to court thread, its all far too technical for me. Far to much legal jargon that I do not understand.

    Im ill and I did ask Bott&co to do it, but they've just said they cant due to the latest response. So thomas cook win.

    Sadly, that looks like the long and short of it. The airlines will quite happily do (or not do) what they like unless someone takes them in hand.

    It is a sign of desperation but you may as well write to the CAA and see if you are one of the very few who get help from them.
  • bobsa1
    bobsa1 Posts: 1,947 Forumite
    We submitted the paperwork for the small claims track and trav law have emailed us today to ask us to agree to a stay. They must have only got the information today so have been on to us quickly. Am I correct in believing that we should say no or alternatively say nothing. They say agreeing will prevent both sides incurring extra costs, but to be honest as we have asked for this to be moved to our local court, the costs For us would be minimal.
  • sging1
    sging1 Posts: 102 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    edited 7 January 2014 at 11:57AM
    batman44 wrote: »
    Does anyone have alternative arguments to Graham anor v thomas cook, right to claim? I have the ryanair case and the caa right to private case statement from website, just wondering is there anything else or how should i put my argument. Thanks

    Hi batman44, I'm not sure if you had a reply to this one but this is what I used against them:

    With respect to your argument, based on the decision in Graham v Thomas Cook [2012] ECWA Civ 1355, I would like to draw your attention to the decision of the Court of Justice of the EU of 31 January 2013 in case C-12/11, McDonagh v Ryanair, in which the CJEU rejected the argument that the possibility of enforcement of the Regulation by national enforcement bodies such as the CAA affected in any way the possibility of private enforcement at the behest of individuals (see, in particular, paragraph 22 of the judgment). It is thus patent that, in the light of McDonagh v Ryanair, Graham v Thomas Cook can simply no longer be regarded as applicable law.
  • sging1
    sging1 Posts: 102 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    Vauban wrote: »
    Bobsa1: don't beat yourself up over claiming for the whole family. Some folk have done this and had their claim struck out, others have only been able to claim for themselves, and others have experienced no problem at all. It's down to the discretion of the judge.

    On the substance of the claim, I think you have a pretty strong case: if the airline had two days to fix the issue and failed, I cannot see how anyone could conclude that they'd taken all reasonable measures.

    I've not been on here for a week or so apologies if you had advice on this. I'm claiming for 13 and I am not the lead passenger all they wanted off me was written authorisation from the lead passenger (my elderly father) and all the other passengers that they agree to me taking the lead. This was excepted and the judge on the intial hearing made no comments on this either.
  • batman44
    batman44 Posts: 545 Forumite
    sging1 wrote: »
    Hi batman44, I'm not sure if you had a reply to this one but this is what I used against them:

    With respect to your argument, based on the decision in Graham v Thomas Cook [2012] ECWA Civ 1355, I would like to draw your attention to the decision of the Court of Justice of the EU of 31 January 2013 in case C-12/11, McDonagh v Ryanair, in which the CJEU rejected the argument that the possibility of enforcement of the Regulation by national enforcement bodies such as the CAA affected in any way the possibility of private enforcement at the behest of individuals (see, in particular, paragraph 22 of the judgment). It is thus patent that, in the light of McDonagh v Ryanair, Graham v Thomas Cook can simply no longer be regarded as applicable law.

    Thanks for that bud.
    Check out Vaubans Flight Delay Guide, you will be glad you did....:):):)
    Thomas Cook Claim - Settled Monarch Claim - Settled
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.