Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

krissyporter

After a year or two going back and forth firstly via myself and now via travel insurance solicitor I received this.

"The Defendants have sent us a confidential report which shows the cause of the fault was possibly due to a manufacturing fault with a part on the landing gear. It seems the manufacturers have changed this part with another made from steel rather than aluminium. The part on the aircraft you were travelling on had an aluminium part."

Does this strengthen or weaken my case? I see the use of the word 'possibly' in there which doesn't really clarify anything.

Thanks
Kris

dunkertruck

I love how TC have refused our initial complaint since 2009. I said then i'd never book again because of poor customer service. Since then we have booked £54k worth of holidays (big family holidays per year! 12 of us) since I wanted compensated. I'll never use them again regardless of cost.

Scruffywuffy

diane456 wrote: »

Already issued 14 day NBA. It's help with details of claim I need - how much information do I put etc.

Diane - Thomsons have just settled with me after I issued a claim - we were delayed for 3 reasons, the first of which was birdstrike. Their only correspondence with me denied I was entitled to compensation because birdstrike was an extraordinary circumstance.

In my PoC I said that the birdstrike had occurred during the flight's previous rotation (quoted Thomsons own letter regarding this!) and not my flight thus was not an extraordinary circumstance, also quoted from the Ash v Thomas Cook hearing where the judge said that birdstrike was not an extraordinary circumstance. Let me know if you want any more detail.

diane456

Scruffywuffy wrote: »

Diane - Thomsons have just settled with me after I issued a claim - we were delayed for 3 reasons, the first of which was birdstrike. Their only correspondence with me denied I was entitled to compensation because birdstrike was an extraordinary circumstance.

In my PoC I said that the birdstrike had occurred during the flight's previous rotation (quoted Thomsons own letter regarding this!) and not my flight thus was not an extraordinary circumstance, also quoted from the Ash v Thomas Cook hearing where the judge said that birdstrike was not an extraordinary circumstance. Let me know if you want any more detail.

Any help you can give would be fantastic. I have already quoted Ash v Thomas Cook and was told 'it was judgement in error and doesn't set precedent' I've just fired off a complaint to CAA and am waiting to hear back from Egyptian CAA. I'm wavering at the moment about whether to hand it all over to someone like Botts or can I really do this myself. I'm keeping the two cases separate (delay and issue with how I was treated as a special assistance passenger). For some reason, having spoken to TC yesterday i am now doubting myself.

HappyNorthernEnglander

I claimed against Thomas Cook for a six hour delay on our 2012 flight from Newcastle to Kos. On the day they told us that it was a technical issue with our plane. We were due to depart at 0910, but actually took off at 1515.

Having delved a bit I have discovered that the flight time was altered at around 0100. The really odd thing is that all subsequent Newcastle - Kos flights that year were scheduled for 1515.

I have just received the result of their full investigation and the claim is rejected because it was caused by "adverse weather"! I have asked for details of the "adverse weather" (that mysteriously failed to affect other flights that day, and was never actually mentioned until the rejection letter). Thomas Cook has stated that they cannot provide further details but assure me that they have conducted a full investigation.

Ever feel that you're being lied to?

CAA here I come.....

SirGimpy

diane456 wrote: »

I have already quoted Ash v Thomas Cook and was told 'it was judgement in error and doesn't set precedent'

Which is true.

diane456

The problem I have is TC are stating that bird strike on the flight out to Hurghada is their get out clause. The fact is my flight didn't hit a bird and 13 hours of our delay was due to the crew being out of hours. So even if there were acceptable extraordinary circumstances for 9 hours of the delay, there surely isn't for the other 13 hours?

JPears

Sounds like a porky to me. NBA then court time.

diane456

I've sent off for the N1 forms and have also complained to CAA. I'm just doubting my own judgment here! As there are 5 of us it would be a lot of money if we used a NWNF company. I'm sure I can do it

Scruffywuffy

diane456 wrote: »

The problem I have is TC are stating that bird strike on the flight out to Hurghada is their get out clause. The fact is my flight didn't hit a bird and 13 hours of our delay was due to the crew being out of hours. So even if there were acceptable extraordinary circumstances for 9 hours of the delay, there surely isn't for the other 13 hours?

So it wasn't even your flight that suffered birdstrike? I'd argue that and the crew out of hours, and even though they are right that it doesn't set a precedent, I'd still quote Ash v Thomas Cook.