Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

picardygirl

Ascot_Ed wrote: »

See my post a few above yours. I got decree (no solicitors involved) and then Weightmans sent me an offer by post on 27 April.
I then corresponded by email, provided bank details and gave them until 8th May to pay failing which I requested ongoing interest.
Payment received by BACS on Friday 8th May for just under £1100. Email communications with Weightmans Glasgow office was quick and helpful but I responded quickly and provided documents requested so I think this may have helped to push things along. Good luck

Thanks Ascot_Ed, i've just emailed my solicitors again, basically saying its not good enough, it seems like its boiling down to those who shout the loudest, I'll contact Weightmans if it comes to it! I know every case is different, but the case was settled on 26 March, this is madness.

So wished i had done this myself, all i've done is chase chase and chase again. I know we've had a settlement offer, but til the funds are in my hands its not finalised!

Thanks for the information.

endaf

Hi all, back again, further to my email last week about Bott & Co refusing to take on the claim as they were refused by a judgement previously with another passenger on the same flight. Thomas Cook state a power surge occured at Gatwick & the judge stated they had exceptional circs.
im now thinking about taking on the case myself as i have emails from Gatwick confirming no power spike occured and that no other airline reported any faults. Bott & co were not interested in this info.
So my questions here are- am i able to obtain records from Thomas Cook about this power spike they say happened? im going to write to both Gatwick airport directly & Swissport (the ground handling agents for TC) and ask for any relevant info but are they under any obligation to give me information?
or should i start the process through small claims first and then these companies must hand over all relevant info?
so after 11 months of complaining & hiring Bott & co, im back to square one but still determined!!!
As always any and all help is greatly appreciated!

batman44

endaf wrote: »

Hi all, back again, further to my email last week about Bott & Co refusing to take on the claim as they were refused by a judgement previously with another passenger on the same flight. Thomas Cook state a power surge occured at Gatwick & the judge stated they had exceptional circs.
im now thinking about taking on the case myself as i have emails from Gatwick confirming no power spike occured and that no other airline reported any faults. Bott & co were not interested in this info.
So my questions here are- am i able to obtain records from Thomas Cook about this power spike they say happened? im going to write to both Gatwick airport directly & Swissport (the ground handling agents for TC) and ask for any relevant info but are they under any obligation to give me information?
or should i start the process through small claims first and then these companies must hand over all relevant info?
so after 11 months of complaining & hiring Bott & co, im back to square one but still determined!!!
As always any and all help is greatly appreciated!

You have 2 options-


1. Ask for information about the event/incident from the airport direct or via a FOI request, this may cost around a £10.


2. Take them to court yourself only when documents are exchanged will you know the truth of what happened, if the are telling porkies then they will fold. You can present you evidence to the judge on the day if it comes to that.


I am sure that Bott & Co will not have investigated this as much as they have a big case load and don't tend to research or fight case's as much as they did Huzar now. You must remember they are a business. I know passengers on my flight are still waiting via Bott & Co yet I researched and fought it and won before trial.


If you feel confident and feel you have a good chance then go for it.

endaf

thanks batmann44-thats the pep talk i needed!
ill make a start over the weekend, i'll send the 3 parties some emails and see where i get from there.
thanks again

JPears

I don't think you will be able to do a FOI as airport is not a public institution.
You will also only be able to "force" the airline for information by a signed witness statement at court level. You will not be able to "force" any information out of the aiport even at court level.

razorsedge

endaf wrote: »

Hi all, back again, further to my email last week about Bott & Co refusing to take on the claim as they were refused by a judgement previously with another passenger on the same flight. Thomas Cook state a power surge occured at Gatwick & the judge stated they had exceptional circs.
im now thinking about taking on the case myself as i have emails from Gatwick confirming no power spike occured and that no other airline reported any faults. Bott & co were not interested in this info.
So my questions here are- am i able to obtain records from Thomas Cook about this power spike they say happened? im going to write to both Gatwick airport directly & Swissport (the ground handling agents for TC) and ask for any relevant info but are they under any obligation to give me information?
or should i start the process through small claims first and then these companies must hand over all relevant info?
so after 11 months of complaining & hiring Bott & co, im back to square one but still determined!!!
As always any and all help is greatly appreciated!

Have a read of the Pre-Action Protocols before you write your NBA to TC.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

Paragraph 6 (c) is relevant. When writing your NBA ask for documentation from TC that proves their story. You won't get it of course, but you can bring the non-disclosure to the attention of the Court when you get there.

endaf

Cheers razorsedge, i will read indepth before taking things further.
ive sent an email to both Gatwick Airport and Swissport (handling agents for TC) asking for any & all reports made during that time. so i shall await their response...if any!

supermac9

endaf wrote: »

Cheers razorsedge, i will read indepth before taking things further.
ive sent an email to both Gatwick Airport and Swissport (handling agents for TC) asking for any & all reports made during that time. so i shall await their response...if any!

As has been mentioned previously, it is highly unlikely that Gatwick will provide any information - I tried to get a response from Newcastle Airport when Jet2 insisted that we had boarded a flight and were then offloaded because of a technical fault. Complete fiction, despite quoting a 'Daily Operational Report' - Newcastle refused to have anything to do with it, and wouldn't provide any information.:wall:

Sarge94061

Hi all,

I'm new to the forum and looking for thoughts or advice relating to a reply I got from Thomas Cook today.

The wife and I were delayed returning from Egypt on 27 April, a punctured tyre resulted in a 24 hour delay. Emailed a detailed complaint to Thomas Cook via their online form and got the following reply today:

Thanks so much for being patient whilst we investigated your recent enquiry about your flight and previous claim with Thomas Cook Airlines. I have now completed the review of your claim for flight 6815.

"As you are aware, the previous investigation showed that the cause of the delay was as a result of a technical fault in which was not inherent in the normal course of activity.

A recent Supreme Court decision in the case of Huzar vs. Jet2.com, has resulted in a change to how EC Regulation 261/2004 is interpreted. This is the Regulation that provides for compensation payments for flight delays so we wanted to check if the outcome from your previous claim has changed as a result of this.

Following the review, under EC Regulation 261/2004 your case has been re-assessed and I can see from the aviation report that your delay was caused by a manufacturing defect of a part we had replaced on the aircraft. Based on this information under the revised EC Regulation 261/2004, technical faults due to manufacturing defects were not affected by the court ruling and remain classified as extraordinary circumstances, therefore I am unable to offer you compensation for your claim.

It’s so important to us to make sure that your flight is on time and you get the best possible customer experience so I’m really sorry that you experienced a delay on your flight with us. Thank you for taking the time to contact us and we look forward to welcoming you on your next holiday/flight with Thomas Cook."

Needless to say I was flabbergasted for two reasons, the first being that they hadn't replied to any of the concerns other than the delay and secondly they feel that I'd be happy with a reply saying that a 24 hour delay gets me nothing as they're blaming the manufacturer of the tyre.

I called Thomas Cook and they've re-opened the case, can't say I'm too optimistic about the outcome now though. I've done some reading and believed I was entitled to claim and still feel I am. Has anyone else had any experience of airlines, Thomas Cook in particular, using the manufacturer excuse to get out of paying compensation?

Tyzap

Sarge94061 wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm new to the forum and looking for thoughts or advice relating to a reply I got from Thomas Cook today.

The wife and I were delayed returning from Egypt on 27 April, a punctured tyre resulted in a 24 hour delay. Emailed a detailed complaint to Thomas Cook via their online form and got the following reply today:

Thanks so much for being patient whilst we investigated your recent enquiry about your flight and previous claim with Thomas Cook Airlines. I have now completed the review of your claim for flight 6815.

"As you are aware, the previous investigation showed that the cause of the delay was as a result of a technical fault in which was not inherent in the normal course of activity.

A recent Supreme Court decision in the case of Huzar vs. Jet2.com, has resulted in a change to how EC Regulation 261/2004 is interpreted. This is the Regulation that provides for compensation payments for flight delays so we wanted to check if the outcome from your previous claim has changed as a result of this.

Following the review, under EC Regulation 261/2004 your case has been re-assessed and I can see from the aviation report that your delay was caused by a manufacturing defect of a part we had replaced on the aircraft. Based on this information under the revised EC Regulation 261/2004, technical faults due to manufacturing defects were not affected by the court ruling and remain classified as extraordinary circumstances, therefore I am unable to offer you compensation for your claim.

It’s so important to us to make sure that your flight is on time and you get the best possible customer experience so I’m really sorry that you experienced a delay on your flight with us. Thank you for taking the time to contact us and we look forward to welcoming you on your next holiday/flight with Thomas Cook."

Needless to say I was flabbergasted for two reasons, the first being that they hadn't replied to any of the concerns other than the delay and secondly they feel that I'd be happy with a reply saying that a 24 hour delay gets me nothing as they're blaming the manufacturer of the tyre.

I called Thomas Cook and they've re-opened the case, can't say I'm too optimistic about the outcome now though. I've done some reading and believed I was entitled to claim and still feel I am. Has anyone else had any experience of airlines, Thomas Cook in particular, using the manufacturer excuse to get out of paying compensation?

Hi Sarge,

You have a valid claim, TC are being untruthful about what an EC is, it's as simple as that.

No tyre manufacturer offers a guarantee that a rubber tyre cannot or will not be punctured. EC's are something outside the control of the airline but all airlines know that a punctured tyre could occur and will occur from time to time. When it does the airline deals with the problem, which puts it firmly in their control.

Follow Vaubans great guide and then issue a NBA to get things moving.

Good luck.