Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

CelticStar

Thank you both very much, that's really helpful.

JPears

Usually needs to be in 14 days before court date to both judge and defendant. Some would advise keeping your powder dry if you have serious discrepancies between yours and defendant's evidence or some ace card up your sleeve, particularly where it involves questioning witness's or their statements. You can submit additional evidence on the day but only with agreement of both judge and defendant.

Despondent

Anyone ever tried to make a claim against this airline please? We travelled on this airline from Manchester and left over 3 hours late. We wrote to them in February and have had no response. The holiday was a Thomas Cook holiday but they said our claim should be submitted to the airline.

Alan_Bowen

The claim can only be against the airline, I cannot recall any mention of it on here before and being outside the EU, I suspect they happily ignore correspondence on the basis that no one would understand the process of suing in Tunisia, and they are probably right!

The correct address is Zone Touristique Dkhila - 5065 - Monastir - Tunisie with an email of info@nouvelair.com.tn. They do fly scheduled services to France so they ought to be aware of EU261 for flights from the EU, they are not caught on return flights but make sure you emphasise that it was the arrival time that was more than 3 hours behind schedule, it is not the departure time that dictates whether there is a claim or not.

discodancing

discodancing wrote: »

I was delayed 24 hours this week on flight TCX 3035 Larnaca to Glasgow. I emailed TC two days ago claiming €600 x 5 (passengers in my group) so I'll update everyone with how I get on! Reason for delay was pilot caught food poisoning on the flight over and TC couldn't get another pilot over to Cyprus until the next evening.
Was anyone else on this flight?

Hi all, I have finally received a reply from Thomas Colk who have stated they will not pay out for a pilot falling sick and consequently delaying us for 24 hours.


A full investigation has been carried out to find out what the cause of the delay was and we can see that the flight was delayed due to circumstances that were completely beyond our control. This investigation shows that the root cause of the delay was due to industrial action/to adverse weather/a medical emergency.

On this occasion under EU Regulation 261/2004 compensation would not be payable.

Would anyone else agree with Thomas Cook that a pilot falling ill is extraordinary circumstances? Is it worth whole pursuing this?

Thanks!

111KAB

discodancing wrote: »

Would anyone else agree with Thomas Cook that a pilot falling ill is extraordinary circumstances? Is it worth whole pursuing this?

Doubt TC themselves believe this! Is it worth pursuing? Only you can decide this but IMO you have a totally 100% valid case.

discodancing

111KAB wrote: »

Doubt TC themselves believe this! Is it worth pursuing? Only you can decide this but IMO you have a totally 100% valid case.

€600 is definitely worth pursuing! From what I have read on the forum, my next course of action should be to write an NBA to the chairman? How likely are they to respond to this?

Thanks!

111KAB

discodancing wrote: »

How likely are they to respond to this?

Same as they have done so far ie inform you that you have no case due to the pilot being ill. A NBA should only be used if you intend to 'see it through' so after the Chairman/they reject your NBA the next part of the 'process' is to commence Court claim.

whatmichaelsays

Just had a response from Thomas Cook regarding a claim for flight TCX635, Orlando to Manchester, on 17 August 2014.

This flight was delayed for 3 hours and 40 minutes due an administration error with the passenger manifest.

TC have replied that the delay was due to a technical error and as a result, they will not entertain a claim until the result of Huzar vs Jet 2.

My issues here:
a) The claim that the delay was due to a technical fault is clearly false. It was confirmed to us by the ground agents, the captain and the cabin crew that the delay was due to discrepancies with the passenger manifest. The issue was only resolved by disembarking all passengers and physically crossing their name off a print-out when they reboarded.

b) In the case of delays caused by administrative errors, surely the Huzar case (which relates to tech faults) is irrelevant? If so, is TC's reference to this simply a fob-off to make me go away.

I've replied to TC with those points but assuming they come back with another denial, is the court my only appropriate course of action?

JPears

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

Just had a response from Thomas Cook regarding a claim for flight TCX635, Orlando to Manchester, on 17 August 2014.

This flight was delayed for 3 hours and 40 minutes due an administration error with the passenger manifest.

TC have replied that the delay was due to a technical error and as a result, they will not entertain a claim until the result of Huzar vs Jet 2.

My issues here:
a) The claim that the delay was due to a technical fault is clearly false. It was confirmed to us by the ground agents, the captain and the cabin crew that the delay was due to discrepancies with the passenger manifest. The issue was only resolved by disembarking all passengers and physically crossing their name off a print-out when they reboarded.

b) In the case of delays caused by administrative errors, surely the Huzar case (which relates to tech faults) is irrelevant? If so, is TC's reference to this simply a fob-off to make me go away.

I've replied to TC with those points but assuming they come back with another denial, is the court my only appropriate course of action?

Yes its a fob off.
and yes, your only recourse is probably to take leagl action. Its for the court/judge to decide if technical faults apply here ( which I'm sure here most would say it doesn't). Sounds more like a human error to me.