Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

111KAB

ShellyCochrane wrote: »

Big thanks for your answer makes me feel a bit better. When you say it is a small risk do you mean its not very likely or do you mean the costs involved in an appeal to crown court would be really small so I shouldnt worry?
Also do the no win no fee firms like flightmole drag you along to the court hearing if you give them your claim - that doesnt sound like much fun if i'm paying them.

The chances of the airline going to appeal are very slim as in effect they are doubting the Judge's jurisdiction. Whilst they may dispute your (or flightmole's) position they are extremely unlikely to argue/dispute the Judge's determination of the matter unless he has made a fundamental mistake/error in his judgement.
Flightmole and the like will represent you in Court.

bec84

I sent a letter to Thomson regarding Flight Delay Compensation.
We were delayed 5 hours in 2011 to Costa Rica.
I had a reply from them last week denying compensation, however there is a lot of jargon that I can't make sense of!
Is there anyone who would be willing to take a look and let me know if this is the end of the road or if they are just trying to fob me off please?

TIA

Jet2fan

I JUST HAD AN IDEA ?!

Consumer Credit Act (Good Old Section 75)

If you paid for your plane ticket with a Credit Card... Would that not make the Credit Comapany jointly liable ?

If you are denied a `legitimate` claim under Regulation (EC) 261/2004 off the Airline.... then could one not make a claim under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act off the Credit Provider (as the Credit Provider would be jointly liable)

At least the Credit Ombudsman has more teeth than the CAA.

It's a legal minefield, but legally speaking, does it not stack up ?

Just a thought.

John.

poplar

I would like a copy please if not to much trouble,,,,,and congratulations on your victory

Magik6

Hey Guys,

Have been away for 5 weeks in USA & luckily have 2 days left to send my reply otherwise it was going to be thrown out of court due to me not replying to them.

I could do with some urgent advice on how to proceed from here, if Centipede or anyone else can help it would be greatly appreciated.

Letter received from Thomson Directly:

Reply from Thomson with a Defence. (I think I have the best of the best here with their defence & can't stop laughing to myself at the moment)

Main points:

A1 - Boxed ticked Yes to agreeing to case being referred to the Small Claims Mediation Service

C1 - Box ticked Yes to agreeing that the small claims track is appropriate for the case.

D2 Box ticked Yes to asking for the courts permission to use the written evidence of an expert.

D3 Stating the use of 2 witnesses including the legal rep.

Defence:

Their defence:

1. It is strictly denied that the Defendant is liable for compensation under what is assumed to the Denied Boarding Regulations 2004 (EC 261/2004) (the “Regulation”).

2. It is admitted and averred that the Defendant (“the Airline”) operated Flight TOM182 on the 23rd April 2011 from Manchester, UK to Holguin Cuba (“the Flight”).

3. The claimant is required to prove that she and her party travelled on the flight.

4. It will be said by the Airline that the aircraft which was scheduled to operate the Claimants’ flight was subject to reactionary delays as a result of another aircraft in the defendants fleet being hit by a bird on the 20th April 2011

(Interesting of note that the claimed defence occured 3 days prior to my flight)

5. This resulted in a delay of departure of the claimants flight

6. It is averred that the matters pleaded in the paragraph 4 above were caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken and that, pursuant to Article 5 (3) of the Denied boarding regulations, no compensation is payable in these circumstances.

7) For the reasons set out above, the claim for compensation of 600 Euros per person pursuant to the Denied Regulations is denied.

8) The claimant is put to strict proof as to their loss

9) As to the compensation claim for interest, it is denied that 8% is an appropriate interest rate.






9) As to the contingent claim for interest, it is denied that 8% is an appropriate interest rate.

Vauban

poplar wrote: »

I would like a copy please if not to much trouble,,,,,and congratulations on your victory

Poplar: not sure what you're refering to?

Jet2Fan: sorry, but you're not the first to have that thought. Consensus here is that you would be on a hiding to nothing (on the basis that if a flight is provided, the credit card company's obligation is discharged: statutory rights under 261/04 apply only to the operating airline - not any third party).

Vauban

Magik6 wrote: »

Hey Guys,

Have been away for 5 weeks in USA & luckily have 2 days left to send my reply otherwise it was going to be thrown out of court due to me not replying to them.

I could do with some urgent advice on how to proceed from here, if Centipede or anyone else can help it would be greatly appreciated.

Letter received from Thomson Directly:

Reply from Thomson with a Defence. (I think I have the best of the best here with their defence & can't stop laughing to myself at the moment)

Main points ...

Not sure I understand this. You should have been sent the defence before you received your allocation questionnaire - this is the document you now need to send back to the court, presumably? That is straightforward.

You don't need to send in a full response to the airline's preliminary defence until you have been given a final court hearing date. Where abouts in the process are you?

Magik6

''Not sure I understand this. You should have been sent the defence before you received your allocation questionnaire - this is the document you now need to send back to the court, presumably? That is straightforward.

You don't need to send in a full response to the airline's preliminary defence until you have been given a final court hearing date. Where abouts in the process are you?''

I have the Notice of Proposed Allocation to the small claims track form with the defence of Thomson attached with it.

I have one day to send this back so it will be going on registered & recorded for guaranteed delivery tomorrow.

Do I agree or not agree for the case to be referred to the small claims mediation service?

Cheers

Dan

111KAB

Magik6 wrote: »

Do I agree or not agree for the case to be referred to the small claims mediation service?

Solicitor told me best to tick box to agree to mediation although it will probably get you nowhere although it shows a willingness to negotiate. If you are convinced regarding your 'position' then all you can really give away is the 8% interest surcharge.

Magik6

Centipede100 wrote: »

Tick the yes box for mediation since it shows willing but as others have experienced the mediation is a bit of a sham since neither you nor the airline are likely to give anything up before a hearing.

Love the defence about this being due to "reactionary delays as a result of another aircraft in the defendants fleet being hit by a bird".

Not sure I have seen reactionary delays listed as an extraordinary circumstance! I would be claiming costs in this case....

I know mate.

This is as epic as it gets IMO.

First actually proving with documentary evidence that a bird hit an airplane causing it to be damaged & then as a result of that a 3 day knock on effect.

If the judge or whoever awards this in the airlines favor then no one has a chance!!