Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

pymers

111KAB wrote: »

Good but you have to read through whole of Thomson thread and understand 261/2004 and why your claim against Thomson should be a success. If you do not understand both the ruling (Wallentin), the procedure and the need for tenacity/patience your chances of 'winning' are reduced. Whilst others (including myself) may say your chances are good it really depends on how good you are at fighting your corner.

I think I might be best getting a no win no fee company to do it for me as I have never done anything like this before or even been to court do you know of any companies that deals with this sort of claim thank you for your advice

111KAB

pymers wrote: »

I think I might be best getting a no win no fee company to do it for me as I have never done anything like this before or even been to court do you know of any companies that deals with this sort of claim thank you for your advice

A pity you have to use someone else as your 'reward' will be lessened however fully understand and something is better than walking away. Without recommendation I suggest you PM Coby Benson on MSE. Good luck.

retatco

Sstaggy1 wrote: »

Vauban

Many thanks for your advice, it is so much appreciated. This is where the nerves start to kick in.:o

Hi Ssaggy1, could you let me have your flight details please? I am compiling a list of flights where crew duty hours is an issue so Thomsons can't come up with a defense of EC (I'm slowly reading through the forum!!)
Ron P.

graham29a

Thomson rejected my claim for a 2010 eleven hour delay due to it being more than two years ago. They quoted a supreme court ruling stating that it needs to be claimed within two years. Will spend next few days researching and then go to the CAA I think.

Any more advice from anyone?

thanks

bazaar_2

Sstaggy1 wrote: »

I have received my court hearing date for October and now need to pout together my court bundle.

My claim is for a delay of 18 hours 40, caused by a technical fault on the outbound flight of the plane we were due to travel home on, and the crew being out of hours. Although Thomson are claiming exceptional circumstances I am clear that the technical problem created a knock on effect that caused our delay, and this is not the particular flight on the particular day.

Do I need to find out more details about the technical problem ( with the Instrument Vertical Speed Indicator Unit) or just rely on the knock on effect not being EC

best to get on it now, rather than wait til the steps of the court, find out what they have in their defence.or what they want to try and rely on

111KAB

graham29a wrote: »

Will spend next few days researching and then go to the CAA I think.

Any more advice from anyone?

You are wasting your time going to the CAA.

JPears

retatco wrote: »

Hi Ssaggy1, could you let me have your flight details please? I am compiling a list of flights where crew duty hours is an issue so Thomsons can't come up with a defense of EC (I'm slowly reading through the forum!!)
Ron P.

retatco - you will only be able to present the list to show that out of hours is inherent in airline activity and you will have to choose your words carefully. The frequency of an event (Wallentin case I believe) does not necessarily mean something is inherent. Although this works both ways (which unforntunately my case judge did not understand) - frequency is a measure of rate, not incidence, so that fact that a event happens often or rarely is irrelavant in the wording of the relevant case law. ie if it is an infrequant or frequant event, is not necessarily inherent either way.

JeremyBuxton

retatco wrote: »

Hi Ssaggy1, could you let me have your flight details please? I am compiling a list of flights where crew duty hours is an issue so Thomsons can't come up with a defense of EC (I'm slowly reading through the forum!!)
Ron P.

Hi Ron - we have just won our case, and crew hours played a part in the case we presented. Flight was TOM2437 Samos-Manchester 05/08/2010.

JeremyBuxton

matt2baker wrote: »

You could get end up with a whole lotta mail for your dad to resolve!! I imagine that there are many on here (myself included) who would love to have the ace up a sleeve in the form of an expert on tech faults.

The thing to ask the airline for is the Minimum Equipment List - MEL - when it's a tech fault. And double check everything they tell you. In our case, they told us multiple versions of the "truth". It was their own evidence file which exposed their "truth" to be otherwise.

JeremyBuxton

Basingstoke_Betty wrote: »

Hello

I have received a cheque from Thomsons today as a full and final settlement. We settled before court and I agreed to 100% of compensation claim and all costs so far after a fraught negotiation process - I agreed to drop the interest claim to smooth things along.

So if you have a very genuine claim I recommend persistence - we had an 18.5hr delay caused by crew hours going over. The inbound fight had had a slight technical fault causing it to arrive slightly late which had a devastating knock on effect for us as the return sector. This was a 2012 case so not outside the 2yr thing that others are struggling with.

I had to start MCOL and go as far as allocation before they took me seriously.

Will try to find the court success thread to add specifics but I'm not sure if an out of court settlement counts!

I would like to thank everyone for their hints and tips which gave me the confidence to continue especially Vauban, Centipede100, Mark2Spark, 111KAB and Blondmark.

Basingstoke Betty x x x

Well done to you too!!! x