Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

simonk123

Anybody offer any advice on the following,
We had a 25 hour delay on a Thompson flight to Mexico this year, a fault was found as te plane was being pushed back off the stand, they kept us on the plane six hours whilst they attempted to fix it, eventually they took us off and put us into hotels until the following day,
When we re boarded the following day the captain apologised and said the length of the delay was due to working hours regulations as they had been at work 6 hours and if te flight had departed 6 hours late then they would have exceeded there working hours allowed.
I wrote to Thompson who declined compensation as they couldn't foresee the fault which was only found as the plane pushed back.
I have referred it to the CAA but 10 weeks later had no reply.

Any advice on how to proceed?

simonk123

Anybody offer any advice on the following,
We had a 25 hour delay on a Thompson flight to Mexico this year, a fault was found as te plane was being pushed back off the stand, they kept us on the plane six hours whilst they attempted to fix it, eventually they took us off and put us into hotels until the following day,
When we re boarded the following day the captain apologised and said the length of the delay was due to working hours regulations as they had been at work 6 hours and if te flight had departed 6 hours late then they would have exceeded there working hours allowed.
I wrote to Thompson who declined compensation as they couldn't foresee the fault which was only found as the plane pushed back.
I have referred it to the CAA but 10 weeks later had no reply.

Any advice on how to proceed?

Pierre_De_Grenoble

tr54vrs wrote: »

Hi,


However, after using the claim checker through [FONT=&quot]Bott & Co[/FONT] it would seem that I may not be entitled.

I tried giving my claim to Bott & Co (ie Euclaim) first they told me that they couldn't find my details so I copied and pasted them the "flightstat" page, and then they said I had no claim as First choice Airlines had merged with Thomsons..

A cynical mind might suspect that they simply don't want the hassle of a claim against Thomson, because they know they will have to work for their commission

Steve

bazaar_2

happychap7 wrote: »

Hi
E mailed MCOL the other day explaining I had not included my partner and children's details in the claimant section but had put them in the particulars of claim section instead. They've e mailed me back stating they have referred it to the District Judge for directions and I should get a reply within 3-6 weeks. This is a lot better than when I phoned them when someone told me they couldn't offer any advice and suggested and sought legal advice !

good, at least youll get directions from the judge. keep us all posted as theres a few on here in the same boat

bazaar_2

Pierre_De_Grenoble wrote: »

I tried giving my claim to Bott & Co (ie Euclaim) first they told me that they couldn't find my details so I copied and pasted them the "flightstat" page, and then they said I had no claim as First choice Airlines had merged with Thomsons..

A cynical mind might suspect that they simply don't want the hassle of a claim against Thomson, because they know they will have to work for their commission

Steve

I dont understand why anyone would entertain these abulance chasing chancers anyway

rajivsingh100

Vauban wrote: »

Not para 39 of Nelson/Tui by any chance? Have a read of it: it's not very helpful to them ...

Up to you whether you keep your powder dry - on balance I would, but the airlines know what you're basically going to argue.

Indeed it is para 39? why is that helpful to us? I ll look it up but your advice would be helpful.

Vauban

rajivsingh100 wrote: »

Indeed it is para 39? why is that helpful to us? I ll look it up but your advice would be helpful.

Because all it says is (I paraphrase) if the delay is caused by extraordinary circumstances, the airline doesn't need to pay compensation. So claiming extraordinary circumstances using para 39 to justify it is what philosophers would describe as tautological! Or, more crudely, smoke 'n' mirrors.

blondmark

simonk123 wrote: »

Anybody offer any advice on the following,
We had a 25 hour delay on a Thompson flight to Mexico this year, a fault was found as te plane was being pushed back off the stand, they kept us on the plane six hours whilst they attempted to fix it, eventually they took us off and put us into hotels until the following day,
When we re boarded the following day the captain apologised and said the length of the delay was due to working hours regulations as they had been at work 6 hours and if te flight had departed 6 hours late then they would have exceeded there working hours allowed.
I wrote to Thompson who declined compensation as they couldn't foresee the fault which was only found as the plane pushed back.
I have referred it to the CAA but 10 weeks later had no reply.

Any advice on how to proceed?

You should write to Thompson giving them 14 days to evidence with full particularity the nature of the technical fault that caused the delay, as well as evidence as to why they were unable to call out a standby crew to staff your plane. Point out that if they fail to cooperate with your request you will issue proceedings without further reference to them.

Then do so (contacting the CAA is usually an unhelpful diversion that serves only to delay your claim).

Kaiser_06

matt2baker wrote: »

The check-in desks are operated by airport handlers in the main, and not by the airlines. Systems failures at check-in desks are nothing to do with aircraft faults, are they not? More check-in staff and all desks open would help the slow process, but it's not an irregular occurrence that systems have a blip - and check-in staff all have a back-up process in that situation. That means it's up to the airline to claim from the airport handlers for the delays caused to their passengers. They may well have done so, but forgot to tell their passengers that they can claim........

IMHO its nowhere near close to an EC !!

What's the next steps for me then? Do I have a valid claim?

spaceaarvark

mda1974 wrote: »

Has anyone had any success if appealing a decision by Thomson?
Just had a letter turning down our request for compensation on the grounds of Extraordinary Circumstances.
The delay was caused by a fault to one of the engines which from want I have been able to gleam noes not constitute being extraordinary.

Thanks

Marcus

If by "appealing a decision" you mean writing back to Thomson and asking them to change their mind, don't waste your time!

On the other hand, several people on this forum have received the same negative response as you and have then gone down the small claims route and have received their compensation - usually without the case going to court.