Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

Vauban

If you think that approaching the Cypriot CAA is going to get you compensation, you're going to be disappointed I fear.

111KAB

leon222 wrote: »

I have contacted Thomas Cook again and still they refuse to accept responsibility. I have since phoned the CAA and they are telling me Thomas Cook are correct because the flight was from outside the UK. They have advised me to send all my conversations, flight details etc to the Cypriot authorities. This is the address I was given. [EMAIL="passengerrights@dca.mcw.gov.cy"]passengerrights@dca.mcw.gov.cy[/EMAIL] . I have done this, time to sit back and wait again!

Cyprus NBA may well agree with you however this will mean didly squit to TC. For other readers general advise on this forum is not to involve the CAA as Thomas Cook are not correct in this case.

steveeo

Quick update:

Having emailed the CEO and speaking to her relations person

My flight out of manchester wasn't delayed due to a technical issue as I have been told a million times but a operational decision....what does that mean?


My return flight was delayed by more than 5hrs but this is what they are saying about that flight:
"An operational change was advised 11 days before the flight, the flight left 9 minutes early"
We was told of this change when we was on holiday the day before we where due to fly and we had to pay extra for a late check out

Any advice?

cerberusmx5

I wrote to Thomas Cook on the 7th July with regards to flight TCX78 to Gran Canaria on 18th October 2008. This flight was meant to leave at 22:30 but was delayed until 06:30 the next morning due to a computer fault on the flight deck. Hence my wife and I were delayed for 8 hours.


Using the template letter I sent the letter to the respondent, Thomas Cook claiming £640 under the current legislation.


On the 16th August I received a letter offering their apologies and telling me that the majority of their flights arrive on time. It went on to say:-



We have carried out an investigation as to the cause of the delay that you experienced and can confirm that this was due to a technical fault which was not inherent in the normal course of activity. A recent court case Huzar vs Jet2, has been heard in the court of appeal, which has resulted in a change of how EC 261/2004 is interpreted, which is the regulation that supports governance on compensation payments for flight delays. The decision of this case is due to be appealed at the Supreme Court by Jet2.com in teh near future, which may result in a further change to the interpretation of regulations.

In view of this , Thomas Cook will be deferring a review of your case until such time as further clarification is received on the EC 261/2004 Regulations. We will continue to monitor any developments, and we will ensure an updated message is posted on our website with regard to our revised position following the outcome of the appeal.

I was not prepared to accept this as the case has not been appealed to date, all that has happened is that Jet2 have lodged an application for permission to appeal the Court of Appeal's judgment. This may or may not be allowed. Until such time as a decision is made the ruling with regards to compensation is valid. If the appeal is allowed, then in the interests of justice, applications for compensation may be put on hold. This is the same procedure as in the criminal court, an appeal, must be lodged before and action is taken to suspending action as to such time a ruling is made. Permission to appeal is not the same.


I wrote back to Thomas Cook pointing this out only to receive exactly the same reply as above.


Having given them an opportunity to meet their obligation under the ruling, I started court proceedings on the 29th August. These were for the statutory (£640) plus the cost of taking out the action (£60) plus interest at 8%. This was served on Thomas Cook on the 3rd September giving them 14 days to respond. Some 13 days and 23 hours later they did respond giving them another 14 days to file a defence, (by the 27th September) as they had indicated they would defend the case.



On the 26th September I received a letter from Travlaw, solicitors appointed by Thomas Cook.


The letter admitted amongst other things:-



1 - It is admitted that claims of this nature, which concerns delays to flights, are governed by the provisions of the EC Regulation 261/2004 (2the Regulation2); which provide for a statutory regime of compensation. The Regulations were given force in domestic law by the Civil Aviation (Denied Boarding, Compensation and Assistance) Regulations 2005. The Regulations provide that compensation is payable in the event of cancelled flights and instances of denied boarding. It also provides that airlines are to make available welfare to passengers in the event of cancellation, denied boarding and delayed flights.

2 - For the benefit of the court it is agreed, despite the Regulations not expressly providing that compensation is payable in the event of a delayed flight, that the Regulations are to be interpreted in such a way and thus compensation is in fact applicable in the event of delay. This follows the decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the joined cases of Sturgeon -V- Condor Flugdienst GmbH and Bock -V- Air France, cases C-402/07 and C-432/07.

It went on to make an offer of £700 removing the interest that I had claimed and which it was contesting. Having set out to claim the compensation with no thought of interest, the offer was accepted, the cheque received and duly banked.


I hope this helps others both in terms of making a claim and the information it contains.


Hang on in there as they will force you to take it to the wire.

whatmichaelsays

It's amazing what finding the CEO on Twitter can do.....

Had a message from Harriet Green last night asking for a contact number and received a call today from a very helpful and apologetic member of her team.

She took half an hour to review my correspondence and then called me back, going over what their customer services teams have done wrong and informed me that an offer was to be made for a €2,700 voucher. When I asked for this in cash, she simply asked for the payment details and informed me that the compensation would be on it's way.

Excellent

JPears

cerberusmx5 wrote: »

I wrote to Thomas Cook on the 7th July with regards to flight TCX78 to Gran Canaria on 18th October 2008. This flight was meant to leave at 22:30 but was delayed until 06:30 the next morning due to a computer fault on the flight deck. Hence my wife and I were delayed for 8 hours.


Using the template letter I sent the letter to the respondent, Thomas Cook claiming £640 under the current legislation.


On the 16th August I received a letter offering their apologies and telling me that the majority of their flights arrive on time. It went on to say:-



We have carried out an investigation as to the cause of the delay that you experienced and can confirm that this was due to a technical fault which was not inherent in the normal course of activity. A recent court case Huzar vs Jet2, has been heard in the court of appeal, which has resulted in a change of how EC 261/2004 is interpreted, which is the regulation that supports governance on compensation payments for flight delays. The decision of this case is due to be appealed at the Supreme Court by Jet2.com in teh near future, which may result in a further change to the interpretation of regulations.

In view of this , Thomas Cook will be deferring a review of your case until such time as further clarification is received on the EC 261/2004 Regulations. We will continue to monitor any developments, and we will ensure an updated message is posted on our website with regard to our revised position following the outcome of the appeal.

I was not prepared to accept this as the case has not been appealed to date, all that has happened is that Jet2 have lodged an application for permission to appeal the Court of Appeal's judgment. This may or may not be allowed. Until such time as a decision is made the ruling with regards to compensation is valid. If the appeal is allowed, then in the interests of justice, applications for compensation may be put on hold. This is the same procedure as in the criminal court, an appeal, must be lodged before and action is taken to suspending action as to such time a ruling is made. Permission to appeal is not the same.


I wrote back to Thomas Cook pointing this out only to receive exactly the same reply as above.


Having given them an opportunity to meet their obligation under the ruling, I started court proceedings on the 29th August. These were for the statutory (£640) plus the cost of taking out the action (£60) plus interest at 8%. This was served on Thomas Cook on the 3rd September giving them 14 days to respond. Some 13 days and 23 hours later they did respond giving them another 14 days to file a defence, (by the 27th September) as they had indicated they would defend the case.



On the 26th September I received a letter from Travlaw, solicitors appointed by Thomas Cook.


The letter admitted amongst other things:-



1 - It is admitted that claims of this nature, which concerns delays to flights, are governed by the provisions of the EC Regulation 261/2004 (2the Regulation2); which provide for a statutory regime of compensation. The Regulations were given force in domestic law by the Civil Aviation (Denied Boarding, Compensation and Assistance) Regulations 2005. The Regulations provide that compensation is payable in the event of cancelled flights and instances of denied boarding. It also provides that airlines are to make available welfare to passengers in the event of cancellation, denied boarding and delayed flights.

2 - For the benefit of the court it is agreed, despite the Regulations not expressly providing that compensation is payable in the event of a delayed flight, that the Regulations are to be interpreted in such a way and thus compensation is in fact applicable in the event of delay. This follows the decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the joined cases of Sturgeon -V- Condor Flugdienst GmbH and Bock -V- Air France, cases C-402/07 and C-432/07.

It went on to make an offer of £700 removing the interest that I had claimed and which it was contesting. Having set out to claim the compensation with no thought of interest, the offer was accepted, the cheque received and duly banked.


I hope this helps others both in terms of making a claim and the information it contains.


Hang on in there as they will force you to take it to the wire.

As you did with your timing on court action . Well done and congratulations.

eastcdo

cerberusmx5 wrote: »

I hope this helps others both in terms of making a claim and the information it contains.

Hang on in there as they will force you to take it to the wire.

Well done. Excellent result and thanks for the information on responses and timescales.

Having been fobbed off with standard email responses for the last month I have lodged my Small Claim today in court in Scotland for 1200€ for a flight delayed due to technical reasons.

reidy100_2

The CAA have agreed I have a claim, but "We have contacted the airline about your case and they have advised that they will not be handling your case until the outcome of the appeal has been decided.

Given this uncertainty, we intend to postpone handling of your compensation claim until we have had further clarification from the Supreme Court. I would like to reassure you that we have not closed your compensation claim. We will hold your claim open until there is further clarification from the Supreme Court, at which time we will be in touch with you again to advise you on how we will be taking your claim forward."

So a case of wait and see I suppose.

111KAB

reidy100 wrote: »

So a case of wait and see I suppose.

Yes probably best to wait but be aware that TC seldom pay out even if the CAA have told them to do so. Presume you are not close to the 6 year limit however if you are the only way to keep your claim active is to take legal action now.

reidy100_2

111KAB wrote: »

Yes probably best to wait but be aware that TC seldom pay out even if the CAA have told them to do so. Presume you are not close to the 6 year limit however if you are the only way to keep your claim active is to take legal action now.

No it was this year 111KAB so no probs on that front. A NBA may help tho