Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

blondmark

If you're in court against Thomson in particular and you expose any lies signed by a statement of truth that they could not reasonably have believed to be true, e.g. inventions, falsehoods, falsified documents etc., bring a copy of THIS and pass it to the judge.

In 2011 a Mr Loveday was sent down for 9 months for doing no more than lying under a statement of truth. If certain Thomson staff were faced with a spell inside to reacquaint them with the seriousness of this offence, some of their defences might become less fictitious.

matt2baker

Bonters wrote: »

What surprises me more is the fact that Thomson will almost certainly have spent more on the Barrister than it would have cost to pay you out. Normally companies will take a commercial decision rather than any ethical or principled decision and opt for the route of least cost.

On a stand-alone case, this would be costly to Thomsons. But as an example that they don't lose all their cases, it's perhaps a way of putting off those who may err on the side of caution, and decide that a court case route is worth giving a miss........plus it's a way of them testing the water on a different tack.

davidbrian55

lever arch file turned up today, 341 pages. They no longer want to claim extraordinary circs but do list unforseen technical fault, namely a problem with one of its engines.

Can I get details of this from thompson? Reading many of the other comments on here thompson seem to be using this now.

David_e

davidbrian55 wrote: »

lever arch file turned up today, 341 pages. They no longer want to claim extraordinary circs but do list unforseen technical fault, namely a problem with one of its engines.

It's been a long day but surely "extraordinary circumstances" is their only get out (under the 261/2004 Regs.) so, if they don't claim that, they can list what they like but it's not a defence.

Have they actually said "They no longer want to claim extraordinary circs" in so many words, or is it just that they haven't used that phrase (which would seem like a strange set of circumstances given they have provided a weighty bundle)?

Am I missing something?

bripar

laticsforlife wrote: »

Re: The question of naming the claimants in the N1 form or using the N1CPC form.

I have spoken with a friend who works for HM Courts Service and he has in turn spoken with colleagues who deal with civil claims every day and they suggest my claim (on the N1CPC - essentially the online form), is OK as it stands with me as Claimant termed as the 'leading passenger' entitled to issue a claim on behalf of my party.

This also covers the obvious fact that minor children would have to be done in this way as they couldn't be claimants themselves.

He is going to speak with a District Judge he knows and will report back to me this week, so if anything is different I'll post it here, but so far it sounds OK.

I am about to send off my Court Fee and have until around the end of August to issue my witness statement and bundle for the Court (and I guess Thomson will also wait until around then to issue theirs).

This is exactly my problem and would welcome further information. Courts have mentioned a need for a litigation friend for the children in my party and I am still waiting for their final decision. I also named myself as "Claimant" being the lead passenger and said I would be representing all family members that traveled. There seems to be conflicting views as to the correct procedure.

bazaar_2

bripar wrote: »

This is exactly my problem and would welcome further information. Courts have mentioned a need for a litigation friend for the children in my party and I am still waiting for their final decision. I also named myself as "Claimant" being the lead passenger and said I would be representing all family members that traveled. There seems to be conflicting views as to the correct procedure.

the general concensus is on new claims, if it is 1 person, claim via MCOL online.
If its a party use the N150 form and file.
For all of us who have erred with the MCOL route, each case will be dealt with on an individual basis, but you should ALL call MCOL for an idea of what to do next.
It seems these opinions will differ depending on who you get through to. but it is likely that you will need to do something. IE, apply to court to amend the claimants on the form. hopefully, we can get a decent answer on this.

Gooseman41

Hi

I have finally been given my court hearing date and have to file and serve all relevant documents by the 7th August 2013. I have prepared a document detailing all parts of laws and compensation etc, but would like to find out what other documents I should serve as well as this.

Any help would be appreciated.

Many thanks

Steve

corleone8400

Hi All,

I am posting to provide an update as promised on my claim. I have been successful in my claim against Thomson for a 24 hour delay on my flight where the reason given to me at the time was "Technical Issues" within the Thomson Fleet.

I had started court proceedings as I felt so strongly regarding the matter and the complications the delay caused me at the time. I was determined to take the claim all the way in order to win. Prior to initiating my court claim I sent Thomson a final letter and whilst I did not receive a reply back within the 14 days requested, a month later, a cheque arrived in the post. Whilst my court case was already in place for compensation and interest, because the letter and cheque unluckily arrived the day after I initiated my claim I guess I will have to accept a loss of the £70 fee the mcol charge as I am aware they do not refund this fee.

Finally, I would like to thank all those who dedicate their time to helping others on here as well as provide the valuable information that helped me with my success. So a massive thank you in particular to Centipede100, 111KAB, Vauban and Mark2spark.

All the best to everyone and do not give up as that is what the airlines want.

elinio

I wonder what peoples thoughts are on this claim. I was delayed in 2010 on a flight home from rhodes for 10 hours. I think the reason given at the time for the delay was that there had been a baggage handler strike in spain which had delayed the planes departure to rhodes. On arrival in Rhodes the flight crew then had been working too many hours and there was no replacement crew. I realise that a strike is an EC, however, is it unreasonable for them to have forseen the crew hitting the clock and either replaced them prior to leaving spain or have additional crew ready in rhodes (considering they had all the time for the flight from spain to rhodes to knwo they would hit their clock etc).
On a different note how many people have actually been successful I got to about page 16 of posts and there seemed to be alot of delaying tactics then on looking further down all the posts are about going to the small claims court.

Thanks in advance.

xsally83x

Do i have to make 2 separate claims for myself and my partner and pay 2 fees to the court or can i claim all on the same form? We traveled together on the same booking.