Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

batman44

Vauban wrote: »

On what basis are they continuing? I suspect they are doing it to leverage a better deal with you, but I hope you call their bluff.

They are claiming it was a lightning strike that blew engine on take off. This was not the case, i have evidence that proves it was a compressor stall and I witnessed the whole incident as i was sat in row 9 window seat emergency exit next to the engine. I have some major damming evidence they are not aware of yet including CAA FOI.

batman44

TC stayed the case twice pending Huzar & SC and continue to defend even after the decision, as they a making me go to court to prove now are they acting unreasonably? They stayed my case twice at my objection and the judge said the Huzar case was remarkably similer.

Vauban

batman44 wrote: »

They are claiming it was a lightning strike that blew engine on take off. This was not the case, i have evidence that proves it was a compressor stall and I witnessed the whole incident as i was sat in row 9 window seat emergency exit next to the engine. I have some major damming evidence they are not aware of yet including CAA FOI.

Very interesting. At some point, you'll need to exchange evidence bundles. Presumably once a date for a substantive hearing is agreed, you'll need to do so?

sarah69696pink

Hi All, I wondered what paperwork you needed to submit to make your claims via Thomas Cook. I no longer have any paperwork relating to my flight, but have my flight number/date and also emails from Thomas Cook customer service dept regarding my flight (as I complained at the time about the excessive delay and lack of customer care) I have emails in response apologising for this but not doing anything about it - is this enough to prove I was on the flight?

Vauban

This is covered in my guide. Read it, and save me typing it out again!

blocker9

Was turned down by t/cook last year due to adverse weather conditions now the new ruling has been made is it worth having another crack at them?

NoviceAngel

blocker9 wrote: »

Was turned down by t/cook last year due to adverse weather conditions now the new ruling has been made is it worth having another crack at them?

The clarification surrounding 'extraordinary circumstances' means that technical faults with an aircraft can't be classed as an 'extraordinary circumstance' I'm afraid acts of God are still classed as such.

Must have been very bad weather to delay your flight, if that was the true reason.

NoviceAngel

batman44 wrote: »

TC stayed the case twice pending Huzar & SC and continue to defend even after the decision, as they a making me go to court to prove now are they acting unreasonably? They stayed my case twice at my objection and the judge said the Huzar case was remarkably similer.

I'd say TC are acting entirety unreasonably, if they force it to trial - don't forget to ask the Judge for costs and to take into account their unreasonable behaviour


"I would like the court to note that I will be pursuing CPR 27(14)(2)(g) and 27(14)(3) costs if I am obliged to attend a hearing, due to the Defendant's continuing unreasonable conduct, i.e. refusing to settle"

batman44

NoviceAngel wrote: »

I'd say TC are acting entirety unreasonably, if they force it to trial - don't forget to ask the Judge for costs and to take into account their unreasonable behaviour


"I would like the court to note that I will be pursuing CPR 27(14)(2)(g) and 27(14)(3) costs if I am obliged to attend a hearing, due to the Defendant's continuing unreasonable conduct, i.e. refusing to settle"

TC still want to take my case to court despite all the evidence against. I will not post on here just yet but my god it stacked up against them not even houdini can get out of this one.

Disneysteve

Celebration we have just received an email from Thomas Cook to say they are sending a cheque for £1244 in relation to our delayed flight 24th June 2013 TCX315 .


Our perservation has paid off.