Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

lisyloo

I would personally repay the excess - but then I'm an honest sort ....

Really, so if you'd get an offer and settlement made properly and then hear a rumour it's incorrect, you're going to voluntarily pay back the excess are you? on the basis of a rumour?

David_e

lisyloo wrote: »

Really, so if you'd get an offer and settlement made properly and then hear a rumour it's incorrect, you're going to voluntarily pay back the excess are you? on the basis of a rumour?

In your earlier post you said "Now a number of us in the group have received £504 and I believe that's a mistake." Centipede100 said "You are correct that the right amount is €300 per passenger".

You are now talking about a rumour.

Yes, I would voluntarily pay back the excess like I would give back excess change accidentally given in a shop or a £10 note I see someone drop in the street, etc., because I think it's the honest thing to do.

lisyloo

Let me clarify for you.
Thomas Cook have offered me (and others) £504 compensation which we believed to be correct and was done in full and final settlement. They have not been in contact since.
Some friends have been told they are entitled to half and that was a mistake.
MSE and centipede say is should be E300.
Other sites do however vary.
I have not at this point in time had time to verify this thoroughly to my own satisfaction.
FWIW - I think the E300 is probably correct BUT cruicially I have not verified it yet to my own satifisfaction.

If you would pay out without doing proper due dilligence then I don't think you are honest and upstanding, I think you are a fool and I'm entitled to that opinion.

If you think I'm dishonest because I refuse to payout before doing full due dilligence then I think you are wrong, but I recognise your right to hold that opinion.

You have not influenced my morals one bit as it's not about morality, it's about not having completed the due dilligence.
Are we done now?

I wish you the very best of luck in your case. I honestly really do :-)

Thanks also to Centipede but I can see from his/her signature that they would fully expect me to do my own due dilligence and not take their advice at face value.

Vauban

lisyloo wrote: »

To be best of my ability I believe it's a mistake, that's based on what my friends have relayed Thomas Cook have said and also the MSE site.
Other sites have different levels of compensation which do not concurr.
I have not thoroughly investigated it to my own satisfaction at this point in time.

Yes some stranger on a website has agreed with MSE.
I suspect Centipede100 is correct but it's not enough for me to base a payment on.
I hope that clarifies it for you.

If you would give it back on those grounds then I guess that's your decision.

I personally would not give it back with that level of evidence. That doesn't automatically mean I'm dishonest, just that I have not verfied it sufficiently to my satisfaction at this point in time.
I have a bunch of friends talking about the CAA and small claims, so there is time to see how it all plays out.

If nothing I've said your mind, then let's agree that we have different levels of requirements for due dilligence.
If you want to believe I'm dishonest for waiting to see what happens, then that's your choice and you have a right to that opinion.

Good luck with your case.

Please accept this assurance that for a delay of 3-4 hours over 3500km then the appropriate compensation is 300 Euros (600 Euros reduced by 50 per cent). You can believe me, as someone who doesn't have a reputation as the airlines' friend. (You can also believe Centipede who has some expertise in this matter!)

However, if you still doubt what you are being told, I suggest you can go to the European Court's website and look it up for yourself. The judgement which set out this schedule of payments is called Sturgeon, and I refer you to para 63 in particular which says:

It is important to point out that the compensation payable to a passenger under Article 7(1) of Regulation No 261/2004 may be reduced by 50% if the conditions laid down in Article 7(2) of the regulation are met. Even though the latter provision refers only to the case of re-routing of passengers, the Court finds that the reduction in the compensation provided for is dependent solely on the delay to which passengers are subject, so that nothing precludes the application mutatis mutandis of that provision to compensation paid to passengers whose flights are delayed. It follows that the compensation payable to a passenger whose flight is delayed, who reaches his final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled, may be reduced by 50%, in accordance with Article 7(2)(c) of Regulation No 261/2004, where the delay is – in the case of a flight not falling under points (a) or (b) of Article 7(2) – less than four hours.

[Article 7(2)(c) relates to flights over 3500km, for ease of reference]

All of which is to say, you may still choose not to refund the additional money you have been paid in error. It's not for me to judge. But please don't try to pretend to people here that it is not an error - because it very clearly is.

David_e

lisyloo wrote: »

To be best of my ability I believe it's a mistake,

Compensation is based on flight delay length and flight distance so it's quite easy to determine (by reference to the legislation). You may have even specified the appropriate amount in your original claim.

This is a link to the legislation so you can check and put your mind at rest:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:439cd3a7-fd3c-4da7-8bf4-b0f60600c1d6.0004.02/DOC_1&format=PDF

I didn't say you were dishonest, I said I would give back any excess paid over what was due to me.

lisyloo

It might have been more helpful to potential respondent posters if you had given the full story from the off rather than giving it out in dribs and drabs as you have done during the day!

Apologies. Obviously I didn't think at the time it was relevant to the questions.

I don't agree with you about david_e opinions or my post.
I think I've been quite polite under the circs.
I think anyone who acts rashly without doing the necessary due dilligence about anything financial is foolish.
You're own singature indicates you don't expect people to take your advice at face value without doing their own due dilligence.

I actually don't think what I do with my legitimate gained money is frankly anyone else's business and actually I think there is a great deal of jealously around.
I also don't think it's helpful to other posters (I was only trying to help some friends).

Thanks to those who genuinely helped, but I do not need advice or jealously about my own good fortune (which I may well share but I can think of more deserving cases than airlines who have given compensation legitimately).

I won't be reading any replies but I respect your right to your opinions - I just have better things to do. I'm old enough to decide the morality of what to do with MY own money for myself without needing the advice of strangers.

David_e

Centipede100 wrote: »

I think calling David_e a fool is misplaced

Well, at least an honest fool! I've got broad shoulders and have been called worse, although not on here!

Vauban

David_e wrote: »

Well, at least an honest fool! I've got broad shoulders and have been called worse, although not on here!

To be fair I got called a C-fill-in-the-vowel-and-two-consonants the other day in a PM from one unhinged poster. People who are quick to take offense are often quick to dish it out too.

And to be clear, David is no fool. Yellow card to you, lisyloo!:(

Jadeybaby21

Hi All,

Benn following all the forums on flight compensation, and flight delay. we were delayed for approx 8 hours last sept Tenerife to Gatwick with Thomascook airlines.

I wrote to the Spanish authorities (CAA said i needed to take it up with them as the flight was departing Spain) they investigated and Thomas cook were unable to provide any evidence of an extraordinary circumstance so said they believed I was entitled to compensation.

I then decided to go ahead with the MCOL and paid 70 to start court proceedings against them. this morning i recieved a reply stating they want to defend the whole claim. wish me luck! im scared, never done anything like this before but going to research as much as possible to do it myself rather then employ a no win no fee. will keep you all updated.

David_e

Jadeybaby21 wrote: »

said they believed I was entitled to compensation.

Positive but sadly it is still likely to take some work to get your compensation.