Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

richardw

If you can get all names in the claimant box, use Mcol, if you can't then use form N1.

bigmama1

Glad to hear this good news. The CAA have asked Thomson to re look at my claim. Thomson was given 8 weeks to reply but have now requested a further 8 weeks. I hope I get the same result as I'm getting stressed with the continual lies and being fobbed off by Thomson. As an OAP in her 70's, in poor health, I do not want to go down the small claims route. Although if I have to I will. I will never EVER recommend Thomson airways to anybody. Other airlines have paid out the delayed flights compensation to their customers without continually quoting the 2 year rule which is illegal under the EU regulation.

Kew73

RobRob888 wrote: »

I too have received the same letter from the "EU Delay Claims Team CL".
They say they are. appealing "Platts" and Dawson.
They have included the Dawson "Appellant's Notice".

The court say they have the letter and will pass to the judge along with any comments I wish to make.
Surprised to find I can use email for comments....

I've also received a second stay letter from Thomson today -this time relating to Huzar. The covering letter says that they've requested a stay 'as we are aware that points relevant to this case are to be considered by the Court of Appeal' and they 'expect the Court to stay the matter pending the outcomes of the appeal which is likely to be heard mid 2014.
- surely this is all ifs and buts at this stage? When will we find out if the appeal has actually been granted?

The letter continues...
'We appreciate that this will delay things further, however it is important for both of us to have some clarity concerning the law. We hope that you are agreeable to the same and will notify the Court of your agreement'.

Should i now notify the court of my disagreement (on the basis that the appeal hasn't been granted?). Not sure what to do as my case will probably be stayed because of the Dawson appeal anyway??

Really grateful for any advice

dpccrc6

Centipede100 wrote: »

I would question the airline about this in court. You may find in any case that they have already corrected it in the court submission anyway.

I received Thomson's defence papers/statements on 30th October - due in court 12th November, I too found huge mistakes in there defence statements, I sat for hours highlighting them and printing off flight stats that contradicted what they had said. When we got into court I produce all my hard work and the judge had not had copies of their papers so adjourned grrrrrr!!

Camaro3

Hi People, just a quick question for centipede or vauban. We are claiming against Thomson with the usual over 2 years, tech fault on aircraft 3 flights before ours so I expect the usual stay etc. However, wife was lead passenger & all documentation sent to her. But due to her ill health, if it got to court, I'm not sure if she could cope with court. Could I represent her? or would it be better going down the nwnf route?

chezza2524

Hi All,

I have just received my new allocation to the court (it was transferred to one court and then transferred to another). My letter doesn't give me a court date yet, but it states
" Paragraphs 3 to 9 of the defence are struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)(a). Regulation 2027/97 has no application to the claim, which does not allege an accident: Bogiatzi -v- Deutscher Luftpool. Two year limitation period does not apply to claim under Regulation 261/2004: More -v- KLM."

Does this mean I do not need to prepare to fight this in court? I know this sounds like a stupid question, but I don't want to go to court unprepared.

Thank you
Chezza

nicki_d987

Hi everyone,

Thanks for hints/tips/help so far!

Shockingly, I received a response from Thomson to my NBA within 14 days, however, its the old EU flight delay adjudication scheme admin'd by CEDR for the princely sum of £48.

No thanks! on to MCOL!

JarvJarv

In the opinion of my "learned friends" out there could you please advise if the following is a suitable MCOL submission:

I am named as the only claimant.

The following is the details of the claim:

Passengers Names: xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxxx,
xxxxxx.
I claim compensation for myself, my wife, my
son and granddaughter (as named above), under
Article 7 of EC261/2004 pursuant to the
Sturgeon judgment in the ECJ (Case C-402/07
of 19 November 2009)which provides for EUR600
per passenger to be paid in the following
circumstances. These were that Thomson
Airways delayed our flight from xxxxxx to
xxxxxx on xx/xx/xxxx by xx hours xx minutes.
Our arrival in xxxxxx was over xx hours
late. Despite writing to Thomson Airways on x
occasions since this event, they have
declined to provide any reason or defense
under EC 261/2004 Article 5.3 for this delay.
Therefore I contend that my claim is valid.


Your opinions will be much appreciated.


JJ

MinnieMouseSal

Mark2spark wrote: »

Do you mean that they did not give *any* reason for the delay?
If so, on what grounds are they saying 'no can do'?

Thomson have stated The European Court of Justice has confirmed that, as the regulation doesn't say how long passengers have to bring their claims, we need to look at our national law. The Supreme Court in the UK has said that all claims to with 'international carriage by air' need to be brought within 2 years. We therefore, can't consider claims for flights that were delayed more than 2 years ago.

So as seen on here they are talking rubbish??!

I'm glad CAA have sent it back to them but like you all have said I think i'll be taking them to court!

David_e

JarvJarv wrote: »

I am named as the only claimant.

The following is the details of the claim:

Passengers Names: xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxxx,
xxxxxx.
I claim compensation for myself, my wife, my
son and granddaughter (as named above),

As far as I am aware, you can't claim "on behalf of " others. You all need to be named as claimants (albeit on one claim form with one set of fees) and, if any of the claimants is a minor, you need to act as their "litigation friend" by including a completed form (N235 from memory). All of this is likely to mean that you can't submit the claim online but will have to go down the paper based route. No major difference as I understand it apart from slightly higher fees.

If you have plenty of time, you and your wife, say, could submit a claim, and then the rest of the family ought to be able to rely on a successful outcome.

If you search on N235, "locus standii" or "locus standi" you'll see the point discussed.