Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

Tunisian_girl

111KAB wrote: »

As David_e said + you may want to look at recent Jet2 appeal case handled by Bott & Co.

Thanks. Can you point me in the right direction please. Do you think I still have a case?

111KAB

Tunisian_girl wrote: »

Can you point me in the right direction please. Do you think I still have a case?

Page one FAQ's. Definite case. Jet2 thread (last few pages) has details of Bott & Co appeal case or Google Bott & Co and look on their web page.

Right direction = https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4384699

Jet2 case = http://www.euclaim.co.uk/news/532/Technical-Defects-Not-%E2%80%98Extraordinary%E2%80%99-In-Flight-Delay-Claims

Hydraulic case v Monarch = http://www.scribd.com/doc/173815478/Brittain-v-Monarch-Airlines-Ltd-04-06-13-Jud

David_e

nicki_d987 wrote: »

I've had a look at the first page of this thread

To be honest you need to do quite a bit more than that to get the necessary understanding. Work your way through the FAQs.

nicki_d987 wrote: »

Is this worth me pursuing do you think? Have people who are pursuing claims further instructed solicitors or are people representing themselves?

If you look at the FAQs and read the Thomson thread you'll get a feel for this.

nicki_d987 wrote: »

I'm concerned, that whilst I have some legal knowledge, I will be out of my depth if I tried to do this myself?

Although it is not easy, if you are prepared to put in the effort, I am sure you can bring a case yourself.

roseandrog48

romanby1 wrote: »

Typical crap. It is useful if you have boarding cards CC statements invoices etc, but it is up to them to prove you were not on it with the aircraft manifest.
Montreal Convention does not apply this is a claim under EC Regulation 261/2004.
They have tp prove they made every effort to get you to your destination. read the regulation and the Wallentin-Herman and Sturgeon rulings, and any other EC rulings you can Google these.
Raed as many past posts on this site and you will get the jist of the course of action to take. A fault on an aircraft the day before is not an EC.
Para 13. your claim is not for a loss it is a right under the regulation.
Write a NBA letter rebuffing their response with a 14-21day response time with an offer or off to court it is.

Romanby1 , thught i'd give you an update, recieved my court date of 9th Jan yesterday, interestingly recieved a cal from Thomson legal ( Val) this afternoon, makingan offer of approx half my claim, to which my response was pay in full or see you in court, she put the phone down on me !!
Will update more when i hear anything

legal_magpie

I have previously mentioned my claim against Thomson for delay or possibly cancellation which was originally caused by a fuel leak on an earlier flight and made worse by the fact that when the aircraft eventually arrived at Gran Canaria to take us home (6 hours late) the crew were out of hours so we were flown to Tenerife for the night eventually arriving home 20 hours late. When we got to Tenerife it was a shambles and we had added a claim for an extra £500 for stress, distress and inconvenience plus a few other things.

The trial of my hearing was this morning at Milton Keynes County Court. Yesterday I discovered the case of Huzar -v- Jet2.com and included it in my bundle and referred to it at length in my skeleton argument (you will probably have guessed from my nickname that I am a lawyer)

Thomson had complied with all the Court time limits (just) and had filed a bog standard defence. They served a reasonable bundle of documents including statements explaining that the cause of the fuel leak was that an adaptor connecting the fuel tanker to the aircraft was leaking because 6 screws had come loose! My skeleton argument made quite a bit of this.

Thomson sent a very pleasant and efficient barrister who has done several cases before but was handicapped by Thomson not having sent him my bundle of documents including witness statements and various county court decisions on technical faults not being EC's. He was not aware of Huzar -v- Jet2.com.

We went in before a Deputy District Judge who had read my skeleton argument and Huzar and, after indicating to the barrister that while Huzar (being a decision of a County Court Judge) was not technically binding on him, it was highly persuasive and he want want good reasons to show why he should not apply it. He then told us to go outside and try to resolve it.

The barrister then phoned Thomson's in house legal team who seem to be an absolute shower, and who weren't aware of Huzar either. After further discussions including my floating an application for an unreasonable costs order if I won (because I had issued the claim through my firm I could claim costs) he came back and said that Thomson's were prepared to settle our claim in full (800 Euros plus the extra £500 for the stress and inconvenience, together with interest at 8% backdated to the date of the flight, small claims track costs, travel, expenses and car parking. In short the lot!!

This was on condition that there was no judgment against Thomson (as they had settled on "economic grounds") but only a Consent order. This made no difference in practical terms so I agreed and we drew up a short order which we both signed. We went in before a different judge who said that the outcome was sensible in the light of Huzar and made the order. Total amount of the order is £1810.01

Judges are aware of the Huzar case and unless any airline decides to take it, or a similar case to the Court of Appeal this effectively knocks on the head any more defences based on technical problems .

I have a copy of the Huzar judgment saved on my computer but can't work out how to upload it to the site but I will happily send a copy to anyone who wants one. Just pm me.

JJ

Vauban

JJ,

A very helpful account. Many thanks. I think Huzar must be a significant judgement, and should be one of those documents that any claimant should put in their bundle upfront (next to Wallentin and Sturgeon).

The barrister in my own case - the first hearing of which was adjourned until December due to Monarch's failure to provide their witnesses in person - was Mr. Bird, who I think may have featured in your encounter? For the record, he's a very nice chap and a credit to his profession (though I obviously look forward to exposing the paucity of his arguments in due course).

V

JPears

Vauban wrote: »

JJ,

person - was Mr. Bird, who I think may have featured in your encounter? For the record, he's a very nice chap and a credit to his profession (though I obviously look forward to exposing the paucity of his arguments in due course).

V

Hmmm... each to their own.....

richardw

....er perhaps best not get too personal in the public domain....he is a solicitor after all!

panholio

JJ,

A really useful post. Thank you.

Question, you mentioned you discovered the Huzar case the day before your court appearance? How did you include that in your bundle? I thought bundles had to be in 2 weeks before the hearing?

I'm in court tomorrow.

CobyBenson

In case JJ doesn't have a chance to respond to you in time...

It's evidence (in the form of witness statements and documents) that must be filed within 14 days. This is different to skeleton arguments and legal authorities which can be introduced on the day of the hearing.

If you have any last minute material such as this then you should hand a copy to the usher before the hearing and ask that he passes it to the judge to read. If the judge has enough time he will then skim through the skeleton args, authorities etc before the parties enter the court room.

Best of luck!