Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

matt2baker

blondmark wrote: »

Make sure that THIS, THIS and THIS are in your bundle.

Thanks for itemising these links - they look "quite useful"

Mark2spark

madrayakin wrote: »

Hi, I have been reading the posts in this thread but I can't find anything specifically relevant to my own situation:

I wrote to Thomson to claim compensation for a delayed flight in September 2011 from Leeds Bradford to Palma. Our flight was scheduled to take off at 14.05 however our plane flew to Gatwick without any passengers to fly some passengers from Gatwick to Cancun whose plane had a bird strike. The announcement made at the airport said our flight was delayed for 'operational reasons'.

Most of the passengers from Leeds who were scheduled on that flight (including myself) were taken on a coach to Manchester for a flight at 21.00 that night. I think the remaining passengers were bussed down to Gatwick to go on a flight from there. Before boarding the new plane in Manchester the pilot explained what had happened. It was clear at the time from the explanation that there was no fault with our scheduled plane.

I have tried to look for the time we arrived in Palma on the Flightstats website but it says the status of our flight is 'Unknown' and then gives the following explanation:

"General Flight Notes:
We have one or more data sources for this flight, but we encountered a technical problem while trying determine the final status."

I do not therefore know what time exactly we arrived in Palma (we were very tired by this point!) but as we did not take off until more than 3 hours after our scheduled flight I believe I am entitled to compensation.

I have written to Thomson who are claiming extraordinary circumstances. The letter they have sent is factually incorrect as they state that the aircraft we were scheduled to travel on experienced bird strike when there was no problem with our plane whatsoever. They state the following:

"Your flight was delayed as the aircraft you were scheduled to travel on experienced a bird strike, which led to damage to the aircraft which need to be repaired. This led on to a knock-on effect on our Thomson fleet which subsequently led to your delay."

The letter then goes on to claim that it is extraordinary circumstances, not paying out, etc etc.

I am now considering small claims court and sending the 14 day NBA letter. I am going to point out that our own plane had no issues and ask them for proof of the alleged circumstances and evidence as to how this contributed to the delay on my flight. However I am slightly confused as to whether my claim should be for delayed flight or for denied boarding. I am leaning more toward delayed flight since our 'flight' did not actually depart from Leeds, just the plane took off to cover a different flight. However I am not sure how going from a different airport affects things in terms of a delay. I think the flight we eventually went on from Manchester had the same flight reference as our original flight, which would suggest it is a delay.

I did not have my boarding pass any more, and think that Thomson will try to use this in their defence if it goes to court. Do you think I should put a subject access request in with Thomson first to get proof that we checked in? Also I was considering, since Thomson delay things so much, whether there would be anything to be gained from a Subject Access or FOI request with the airport. Or should I just go straight to the NBA letter now?

I'm pretty sure we have a strong case but that Thomson are just using the circumstances on another plane to avoid paying out. If anyone could help with my queries above that would be great.

What typical nonsense. NBA and court.

I'm not sure why you are worrying about what length of delay you had? It has to be around 7 hours so well over any time threshold.

IANAL but it appears to me that your flight was in fact cancelled. Leeds to Palma plainly did not operate, did it? Was LBA closed to all planes?
You were bussed to an alternative airport for transport on a different flight it seems to me. Why didn't they fly the empty plane from Manchester to LBA to collect you all?

Do you think the Gatwick flight also had the same flight number as the Manchester flight in lieu of the cancelled LBA flight?

It's nonsense, all of it. Don't argue with them too much in your NBA letter. Just say they have their facts wrong, that they state a different set of circumstances as to what actually occurred, and that unless they reconsider within 14/21 days your going to take the matter to court without further notice.

matt2baker

davidbrian55 wrote: »

an update, and what a company. Having listened to mse on the radio today, and martin lewis giving the caa a hard time, I had hoped that my latest discussion with thomson was a joke. However they now have dropped the exceptional circumstances defence and are relying on the two years as being relevant.

Shelagh Fogarty - Radio 5 01/08/2013 about 40 mins into the programme, for those, like me, who missed it and want to listen on bbc i-player - the interview was with Martin and CEO of the British Air Transport Association (not the CAA) who must have splinters on his bum from sitting on the fence too much

beatie66

has anyone had any luck claiming on tom030 flight from gatwick to montego bay feb 15th 2011?

madrayakin

Mark2spark wrote: »

What typical nonsense. NBA and court.

I'm not sure why you are worrying about what length of delay you had? It has to be around 7 hours so well over any time threshold.

IANAL but it appears to me that your flight was in fact cancelled. Leeds to Palma plainly did not operate, did it? Was LBA closed to all planes?
You were bussed to an alternative airport for transport on a different flight it seems to me. Why didn't they fly the empty plane from Manchester to LBA to collect you all?

Do you think the Gatwick flight also had the same flight number as the Manchester flight in lieu of the cancelled LBA flight?

It's nonsense, all of it. Don't argue with them too much in your NBA letter. Just say they have their facts wrong, that they state a different set of circumstances as to what actually occurred, and that unless they reconsider within 14/21 days your going to take the matter to court without further notice.

Do you think the distinction between whether my flight was cancelled or delayed really matters? I'm just thinking if I pursue it as say, a delay, and then the court finds there wasn't a delay but a cancellation or denied boarding, will they find in my favour anyway or will it be 'well, you wanted delay compensation, but this isn't a delay.. see ya'

The plane from Manchester was a smaller plane, we wouldn't all have fit onto it, not sure if that had something to do with it! Wouldn't have liked to be one of the ones bussing it to Gatwick (not that I much enjoyed the situation I ended up in!). To make things worse they dropped us all off at the wrong terminal in Manchester and we had to walk halfway across the airport!

Has anyone who didn't have their boarding passes won their small claims case? The court must know Thomson have records, surely?

Better get on to writing my NBA letter tomorrow!

111KAB

madrayakin wrote: »

Do you think the distinction between whether my flight was cancelled or delayed really matters?
Has anyone who didn't have their boarding passes won their small claims case? The court must know Thomson have records, surely?

A cancellation is much easier to present in Court as the flight you had booked and paid for didn't happen whereas there are causes for a delay which can be disputed or excuses given which MAY find favour with the judge.
Boarding passes are immaterial and just one of the stupid obstacles airlines put in your way to discourage you on claiming. I 'won' my case in Court without boarding passes.

madrayakin

111KAB wrote: »

A cancellation is much easier to present in Court as the flight you had booked and paid for didn't happen whereas there are causes for a delay which can be disputed or excuses given which MAY find favour with the judge.
Boarding passes are immaterial and just one of the stupid obstacles airlines put in your way to discourage you on claiming. I 'won' my case in Court without boarding passes.

Thanks, its useful to know that the thing with boarding passes is just one of Thomson's typical avoidance tactics. Thinking about it some more, I could always argue 'in the alternative' so if legally it isn't a cancellation I could argue that it is a delay over 3 hours. It seems that Thomson can still (wrongly, IMO) say that it is extraordinary circumstances to get out of paying whether it is a cancellation or a delay though.

OliveOil71

We were on a packaged holiday to Dominican Republic Nov 2010. We have the original letter given to us by Thomson Airways at the airport stating that we delayed due to technical issues in the fleet and the delay was 30 hours 32 mins. We were kept at the hotel for most of the delay as it was only 30 mins away but when I tried to claim my travel Ins at the time they said the delay only starts when we check in! I then telephoned Thomson's and they said they wouldn't compensate us but did say they had never heard of and ins company that specified your had to have checked in at the airport. Although we were kept at the hotel it was still a major inconvenience. Do you think we can claim under the new legislation?

Thanks

Larry1000

111KAB wrote: »

I presume there should be an s on the end of the underlined word rather than an s omitted at the start as 3 crew on the ground would suggest a problem.

You have a valid reason for a claim but you mention cancelled then delayed so ascertain firstly if you are dealing with a cancellation or a delay.

The incoming flight to Tenerife was delayed departing from Gatwick due to the discovery of three screws on the tarmac (presumably when the aircraft was on the gate). The delay of our aircraft into Tenerife meant the crew were out of hours so our flight Tenerife to Gatwick was therefore cancelled. My question is whether the discovery of these alleged screws on the inbound flight was a safety issue and therefore extraordinary circumstances. Also the fact that the original delay was on the previous flight but of course there was only one aircraft and only one crew so they could not take the plane back to Gatwick as they were out of hours.

111KAB

OliveOil71 wrote: »

Do you think we can claim under the new legislation?

Yes but forget about the insurance aspect that is a totally different issue and has no bearing on any compensation claim due to a delay.