Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

jamesh

Basingstoke_Betty wrote: »

I have received a cheque from Thomsons today as a full and final settlement.

Hi BB, do you know how long it took for the cheque to arrive after they agreed? Or did the cheque just appear with the letter?

matt2baker

Vauban wrote: »

Yes you can. Plus the text of the Regulation, that notes ECs applying to "a particular aircraft on a particular day".

I've seen that phrase quoted a few times - and am unsure how it will be interpreted. If an aircraft is delayed on its outbound flight (allegedly by an unidentified EC) and subsequently delayed on its return trip, does that mean the "particular aircraft on a particular day" deems the return trip as a non-compensatable claim? The EC is yet to be established, so it's difficult to know what the initial cause of the delay was that caused the knock-on effect, hence the claim on the return leg of that aircraft.

ruthiec1972

Hi I'd love for anyone who was unfortunate enough to be on the flights from hell to get in touch, want to see if Thomson are telling us all the same story or telling everyone something different to get out of paying compensation. We were told fault was discovered in flight when the pilot told us before we'd even taken off originally that the toilet wasn't working so how they can say it was inflight is beyond me. Also I'd say a faulty toilet is not a “unexpected flight safety shortcoming” as they told me, infact the pilot said we could carry on but it would be better to have all toilets working. Just starting so trying to get as much info together as I can and if we can help each other all the better. Ruthie

Vauban

matt2baker wrote: »

I've seen that phrase quoted a few times - and am unsure how it will be interpreted. If an aircraft is delayed on its outbound flight (allegedly by an unidentified EC) and subsequently delayed on its return trip, does that mean the "particular aircraft on a particular day" deems the return trip as a non-compensatable claim? The EC is yet to be established, so it's difficult to know what the initial cause of the delay was that caused the knock-on effect, hence the claim on the return leg of that aircraft.

I think that a case could be argued, yes. But the longer the knock-on delay, the trickier it is for an airline to show it had taken "all reasonable measures".

Vauban

ruthiec1972 wrote: »

Hi I'd love for anyone who was unfortunate enough to be on the flights from hell to get in touch, want to see if Thomson are telling us all the same story or telling everyone something different to get out of paying compensation. We were told fault was discovered in flight when the pilot told us before we'd even taken off originally that the toilet wasn't working so how they can say it was inflight is beyond me. Also I'd say a faulty toilet is not a “unexpected flight safety shortcoming” as they told me, infact the pilot said we could carry on but it would be better to have all toilets working. Just starting so trying to get as much info together as I can and if we can help each other all the better. Ruthie

I agree that a broken toilet cannot be described as an unexpected flight safety shortcoming!

matt2baker

ruthiec1972 wrote: »

Hi I'd love for anyone who was unfortunate enough to be on the flights from hell to get in touch, want to see if Thomson are telling us all the same story or telling everyone something different to get out of paying compensation. We were told fault was discovered in flight when the pilot told us before we'd even taken off originally that the toilet wasn't working so how they can say it was inflight is beyond me. Also I'd say a faulty toilet is not a “unexpected flight safety shortcoming” as they told me, infact the pilot said we could carry on but it would be better to have all toilets working. Just starting so trying to get as much info together as I can and if we can help each other all the better. Ruthie

unless it was an outside toilet, i can't see any safety shortcomings!:D

Basingstoke_Betty

jamesh wrote: »

Hi BB, do you know how long it took for the cheque to arrive after they agreed? Or did the cheque just appear with the letter?

took 21 days after email confirmation of settlement.

VOB72

I had an 8 hour delay with thomas cook as a result of a blocked toilet on the INCOMING flight. AESA have found in my favour that it wasn't EC; have issued MCOL; TC now appointed TravLaw solicitors to prepare their defence. I'll take it all the way - see my posts on TC thread.

romanby1

Basingstoke_Betty wrote: »

took 21 days after email confirmation of settlement.

When we settled with Thomsons we said the money had to be in our account by the Friday or we would be submitting the papers to the court. It was there next day.

matt2baker

Vauban wrote: »

I think that a case could be argued, yes. But the longer the knock-on delay, the trickier it is for an airline to show it had taken "all reasonable measures".

the other issue is determining when the EC was discovered.......ie how long was it before the check-in desks were notifying passengers, or during pre-flight checks? In an example that I'm involved with, FlightStats don't give a clue that it was known that far in advance. Delay was nearly 5 hours.