Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

matt2baker

dreamergirl32 wrote: »

Sorry I'm probably being a little dumb, do you mean this is in my favour?!

I have attempted to use flightstats before but found it fairly confusing, will attempt again if it will be of use to my case(s)

You have a private message from me.....

jenn1ewest1

VOB72 wrote: »

Exactly! That's why I put my two childrens' claims in the one for me and my husband! I had enough room in the 'particulars of claim' to state their names, what I was claiming per person, the total amount and why I disagreed with the claim of EC. It's with the local court now, so I guess I'll have to see what they say about it. As there are a few people querying this on various threads, it's clear that there is no definitive guidance available.....

you will need to fill in a form called
Certificate of Suitability for each of the children – see here http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n235-eng.pdf

panholio

matt2baker wrote: »

You have a private message from me.....

Do you fancy forwarding that to me?! I've been having a look on flightstats but can't seem to work out historic flight data. My flight was in 2011.

Rooonaldo

Rooonaldo wrote: »

Hope I'm doing this correctly.Thanks Corbin that is reassuring.I have read and think I understand Wallentin but obviously I may not know all the various technical issues as well as my opponent.It is also a worry that the Judge may not have sufficient time to understand the defence properly.Do you (or anyone else)have a simple skeleton argument which you would be prepared to let me see?If so I would be very grateful.

Furthermore Thomson is also relying on Sturgeon v Condor and Nelson v Lufthansa.I have seen these cases and Nelson at least seems to support my position.Does anyone have any further comments which may support my case?Not sure I can edit my above post to correct spelling of your name Coby so apologies again.

Vauban

Rooonaldo wrote: »

Furthermore Thomson is also relying on Sturgeon v Condor and Nelson v Lufthansa.I have seen these cases and Nelson at least seems to support my position.Does anyone have any further comments which may support my case?Not sure I can edit my above post to correct spelling of your name Coby so apologies again.

Sturgeon is principally about arguing that delays of three hours should be treated as a de facto cancellation, and Nelson is about reaffirming this (whilst knocking down the other arguments the airlines advanced to have Sturgeon repealed, including the principles of proportionality and legal certainty, plus consistency with Montreal). Both also endorse Wallentin's conclusions. So all three are helpful to your case.

If you pm your email address, I'll send you my own argument which I submitted to the court last week.

Rooonaldo

Thanks Vauban.I have pm'd you.

stevew48

matt2baker,

I have sent you a PM.

Stevew

matt2baker wrote: »

It may interest you to know that you'll find an ever growing number of claims on here relate to transatlantic delays - and a flight delay you experienced is likely to have been as a result of a previous flight from across the pond..... as I have discovered through some intuitive research of Flightstats.com - (dates/times/routes/inbound+outbound)

Thomson don't volunteer this info (naturally) when they say your aircraft had an EC technical fault,, but its 'quite' straightforward to do a Sherlock Holmes piece of work and see what delays there were prior to your flight, and prior to that etc. eg if your return flight to UK was TOM 123 - the outbound flight before that would be TOM 122. Doesn't work for flights before yours if you're leaving the UK, but Flightstats helps you by giving details of flight numbers of delays incoming to UK, and then it's fairly easy to spot the possibilities............

That EC fault may well have been 1 or 2 flights earlier..............

Nickybee76

Hi,
I'm just after a bit of advice please. After a 3 & half hour delay because of technical problems on our return flight from Tenerife in July this year I sent in a claim to thomson.
Today I received a letter from them which is 3 pages long and went right over my head !
Th e two paragraphs I did understand were as follows .....
"As part of our investigation I have checked our flight reports and can see your flight was delayed due to a technical defect being detected prior to a previous scheduled flight. It's then caused a knock on effect to your flight. The aircraft is unable to be legally dispatched with this defect. Therefore the cause of this delay sits under Exceptional Circumstances, as the technical issue with the aircraft was not due to poor maintenance and is not something that could have been foreseen.


Then goes on to say about CJEU etc etc (do not understand any of that)

The next paragraph in lay mans terms was
"In case of your flight,the cause of the delay was due to a delay to another aircraft due to " unexpected flight safety shortcoming" arising from the discovery of a technical defect that doesn't fall into the category of something that was or ought to have been discovered during routine maintenance.

Does this mean I am unable to take a claim any further with them ?

111KAB

Nickybee76 wrote: »

Does this mean I am unable to take a claim any further with them ?

No - far from it - it means Thomson are trying to bamboozle you with terminology whereas it should say "we accept your claim due to our lack of a proper service and we apologise and we have sent you a BACS payment plus some flowers as an apology - we hope this will persuade you to fly with us again" - just follow the thread, sue them and enjoy your BACS payment but I doubt you will get the flowers.

nquire76

I am interested in a Thomson flight from Manchester and have traced it through 'Flightstats.
The flight left on time and according to Flghtstats arrived at it's destination, Status 'on time'. However the records for the subsequent return flight is recorded as, Status 'Unknown'
Upon checking the data for that flights return to Manchester, this is also recorded as, Status 'Unknown'.
Flightstats elaborate that Status 'Unknown' is caused by conflicting information given to it by different sources.
Does anyone know of other sources which would be able to clarify the true details of this Flight.
Both flights, out and return, were due to be completed the same day and were to a European destination.
The reason for this query is that it could have consequencies to a Late Take Off Claim for a later flight from Manchester the same day.