Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

brunlea99

I have just received an out of court settlement (in full) from Thomson for a delay dating back to August 2008 - 5 years almost to the day. It has taken some time but I ploughed on through the process (well documented on here) via MCOL, despite Thomson initially claiming the 2 year limit and subsequently, Extraordinary Circumstances.

NickyPower

Could you let me know the email address please, thanks

KMD7 wrote: »

It was submitted by email, reply will also be by email. It was sent to after care team, asking for reply within 14 days as per template.

Babydust35

Hi I'm claiming for a flight delay Manchester to Maldives Tom 188 7 dec 2010. I hit the two year barrier with thomson so have taken through mcol. I got thomson a defence today - they are essentially citing denied boarding regs 261/2004, article 35 of the Montreal convention article 35, unforseen tech fault prior to departure - essentially that 2 days prior to departure the aircraft suffered hydraulic issues and a breakdown of the auto land feature on a flight from goa to gay wick resulting in a diversion to standsted. They are claiming extraodinary circumstances and are relying on news on and uti c581/10 and c 629/10
Do I have a leg to stand on? I'm confident I can cite a good defence in relation to the 2 year crap but not sure re ecs bit and Nelson. Any help appreciated

Babydust35

Sorry typo it's Nelson and tui they are relaying on

matt2baker

NickyPower wrote: »

Could you let me know the email address please, thanks

Forget emails - if you want to query/claim/chase then you need to use pen and paper (or print a letter) and a stamp/recorded delivery, as suggested in the posts #2626, #2636 and #2637 Tues and Weds.

Otherwise you'll likely be wasting your own time.........

matt2baker

brunlea99 wrote: »

I have just received an out of court settlement (in full) from Thomson for a delay dating back to August 2008 - 5 years almost to the day. It has taken some time but I ploughed on through the process (well documented on here) via MCOL, despite Thomson initially claiming the 2 year limit and subsequently, Extraordinary Circumstances.

Congrats on sticking it out!!! :beer:

Are you in a position to explain the nature of what the Extraordinary Circumstances were that they used in their defence - and any other brief details of the delay etc? It would help (me and) a lot of others on here who know we're right and find the brick wall a bit of an obstacle!

Gromit22

Just thought I would clarify suitable routes to proceed with claim. I started MCOL but, as claiming for both my husband and myself, you would need 2 x MCOL. Therefore N1 if not single person claim. Helplines for both MCOL and N1 most helpful. My first claim rejected in 2008 - only revived claim May 2013. More rejections but I'm not giving up.;)

dxc_chappie

Babydust35 wrote: »

Hi I'm claiming for a flight delay Manchester to Maldives Tom 188 7 dec 2010. I hit the two year barrier with thomson so have taken through mcol. I got thomson a defence today - they are essentially citing denied boarding regs 261/2004, article 35 of the Montreal convention article 35, unforseen tech fault prior to departure - essentially that 2 days prior to departure the aircraft suffered hydraulic issues and a breakdown of the auto land feature on a flight from goa to gay wick resulting in a diversion to standsted. They are claiming extraodinary circumstances and are relying on news on and uti c581/10 and c 629/10
Do I have a leg to stand on? I'm confident I can cite a good defence in relation to the 2 year crap but not sure re ecs bit and Nelson. Any help appreciated

Do you have a leg to stand on? Absolutely. Read through this thread and you will see this is their stock cut n paste defence.
Walllentin is your case for tech faults are not ECs. And would you consider they took all measures short of intolerable sacrifices to avoid a delay discovered on another flight 2 days earlier?
More ruling will sort out the 2yr limit -Thomson are losing this argument in numerous courts it makes you wonder why they keep paying barristers to defend!
On to court you go (but phone them beforehand as they will probably settle).

matt2baker

dxc_chappie wrote: »

On to court you go (but phone them beforehand as they will probably settle).

Phone them?? They won't do nowt on t' phone! NBA's and take it to court will make THEM phone you if they think they won't win......

Babydust35

Thanks dxc_chappie. Do u thing ringing thomson will result in early settlement. I've hit a brick wall before - any ideas which number I would ring. Just an aside - I'm claiming for me and hubby but I'm only named as claimant - is this a problem? And is it only a prob if we go to court? Can I rectify?