Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

Phil1976

My claim is very similar to this. My claim has been ongoing for over 3 years. During this time I have been in touch with another passenger on the same flight as me who took Thomas Cook to court and won his case and TC paid out. (even though he had to get bailiffs to get his money following the court ruling)

I have his copy of his court ruling and submitted that to CEDR and they still favored with TC. So I am now taking TC to court myself.

Surely if TC have paid out for another passenger on the exact same flight as me then that means they are accepting liability by the fact they have paid out. I will not be able to get my head around it if when I go to court I lose, especially as I have submitted the other court ruling.

I was hoping someone could either reassure me or explain if there is a chance that I could lose my claim even though I can prove that TC have already accepted liability.

Paulcox741 wrote: »

Interesting development in my claim.

Have been informed by another passenger on the flight (and seen the evidence) that after referring to CEDR Thomas Cook were forced to pay out. Therefore assumed they would have to pay out for us too, having already set the precedent.

Having referred to CEDR myself Thomas Cook are still contesting it. And here comes the strange bit....they have provided examples of 2 cases for the same flight where CEDR have ruled in their favour.

Has anyone ever come across this? I.e. Where CEDR have provided contradictory rulings on the same flight.

JPears

Jeez Phil, you've lingered on with this one! Your 1st post was 3 years ago! Get on with it!

Phil1976

I was hoping for more constructive replies.

18 months mucking around with useless solicitors (Bott&Co), who don't offer anything more than what you can do yourself.

another year locating another passenger then waiting for their court case so I could use that as evidence in my case.

Another 6 months mucking around with CEDR.

Paulcox741 wrote: »

Interesting development in my claim.

Have been informed by another passenger on the flight (and seen the evidence) that after referring to CEDR Thomas Cook were forced to pay out. Therefore assumed they would have to pay out for us too, having already set the precedent.

Having referred to CEDR myself Thomas Cook are still contesting it. And here comes the strange bit....they have provided examples of 2 cases for the same flight where CEDR have ruled in their favour.

Has anyone ever come across this? I.e. Where CEDR have provided contradictory rulings on the same flight.

Tyzap

Phil1976 wrote: »

My claim is very similar to this. My claim has been ongoing for over 3 years. During this time I have been in touch with another passenger on the same flight as me who took Thomas Cook to court and won his case and TC paid out. (even though he had to get bailiffs to get his money following the court ruling)

I have his copy of his court ruling and submitted that to CEDR and they still favored with TC. So I am now taking TC to court myself.

Surely if TC have paid out for another passenger on the exact same flight as me then that means they are accepting liability by the fact they have paid out. I will not be able to get my head around it if when I go to court I lose, especially as I have submitted the other court ruling.

I was hoping someone could either reassure me or explain if there is a chance that I could lose my claim even though I can prove that TC have already accepted liability.

Hi Phil,

During the hearing don't set out your stall based on the fact that TC have had to pay out in another case. Judges don't like you trying to force their hand. Use the same argument as the passenger that won and mention that at least one other passenger on the same flight has been paid out. You can ask TC how many claims for the same flight have been paid out already.

No court or even CEDR has to follow suite at this stage, so please do not go into court expecting that they do. I know that this seem illogical but it is how the legal system works.

Regardless of what CEDR decided, MCOL will be more thorough and you will have a good opportunity to fully explain your case. Prior to a court hearing you should go through the ADR system which is offered by the court. If you put up a good argument, they may fold at that point, if not you can take it to a court hearing and have your say.

Good luck.

legal_magpie

It would be worthwhile getting a copy of the judgment in the other passenger's case but decisions of DJ's are not binding on other DJ's especially in smalll claims cases.

JPears

My response was tongue in cheek
You need to get your clain in legal via small claims.
No one can assure you of a win but if the reason for your claim is good and valid and you have a copy of a favourable judgement for the same flight, then your chances are good in court, if it comes to that.
Forget CEDR, it appears the process is flawed in many ways.
Could you re- post the details of the delay/cancellation etc? (brief)
And as you have "mucked around" for 3 years, don't forget to include interest in your small claims court submission.

Phil1976

No problem JPears I appreciate your help.

My flight was from Gatwick to Hurghada (Egypt) on 24/6/14, flight number was TCX1518. Original flight time was 13:50pm and we were delayed for approx 25 hours. If it helps people remember we were put up in a hotel in Folkestone for the night (70 miles away).

legalmagpie I have the court ruling from the other passenger and additional evidence that they used.

Tyzap - thank you very much for your reply, that is exactly the type of advice I was looking for.

JPears

For court procedures in particular:
Focus your claim on the actual facts - your delay, the reason for the delay. What airline did or didn't do to minimise your delay or re-route you (with a different airline if necessary) and how these all relate to the regulation and your claim for compensation. If the delay was for a technical reason, don't get bogged down in the technicalities of the issue. Most technical failures are not an EC, end of. You don't have to prove it. Conversely the airline will have to prove the delay was an EC, if they can.
If you are going to use the previous judgement as evidence, which I would, it must be submitted with all your papers (not the initial application to court), you cannot keep your cards to your chest, so to speak as the judge is unlikely to allow it as evidence at a late stage.
I would be tempted not to include any CEDR stuff in your initial evidence. I am sure the airline will in their submissions. If they do, you can make further submissions to address that. However, perhaps see if you can find any CEDR cases that have gone in favour of your flight ( or any flights where CEDR have found both in favour/against people on the same flight) - this will demonstrate the unpredictability of the CEDR process.
If the CEDR is considered a public body, you could submit an FOI to see how many people have claimed on your flight.

Phil1976

Jpears what is an FOI and how do I obtain that ?

Basically TC are claiming there was a power surge which blew 7 circuit boards on the plane, claiming extra ordinary circumstances and by the time they were replaced the crew were over the hours allowing them to fly.

I have an email from Gatwick saying that 98% of their flights that day experienced no problems with power.

The judge that found TC guilty said

" that he was quite satisfied that the use of electricity is clearly inherent to the operation of any aircraft. I agree with this and, in my judgement this must also apply to electricity supplied by the airport authorities whilst stationary at an airport, which must be, on any analysis, be within the category of normal airport services and will not, therefore, be an extraordinary circumstance. The power spike may have been an unusual occurrence, it may have been unforeseeable, but the supply of electricity is inherent in the normal exercise of the Defendants's activity and is not, therefore an exceptional circumstance".

JPears

Freedom of information act - you can ask for data on a specific question (as long as it doesn't compromise personal data). You can only apply if it is a public body, not a private company. Unless an element of your query involves public work carried out by a private company.
All circuit boards on airplanes are protected from such events by resettable trip fuses/circuit breakers so it is highly unlikely any actually blew. The circuit breakers may have had to be replaced. It is more likely that a thorough circuit check and reboot was required rather than substantial repairs.