Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

tonxy22

So, ive just got back from my day in court.

On arrival at the court the Thomson barrister came over to speak to me, gave me their skeleton arguement and said he would be conceding today and asking for a stay. He was really friendly and asked if I had done this before and to just ask him if I needed any advice or help.

We went into the court room (little room with 3 desks - not at all daunting) - the judge didn't look interesred...the Thomson barrister said they are only contesting the time limit in my case hence the Dawson appeal precedes and therefore requested a stay. The Judge said she couldn't pass judgement today as the case had gone to a higher level than she is therefore she is accepting the stay on the grounds of the pendng result of the Dawson appeal. I asked if I could claim for costs to this point seeing as i had to take day off work when they could've filed for a stay via the proper means to avoid the need to go to court today...the Judge said she wouldn't make any comitment to this until the Dawson case is complete.

When I got out of the court I asked the barrister if he had done many of these - he said his job is basically to go round all these 261/2004 cases just asking for a stay. He said Thomson are overloaded and have missed loads hence the need to go to court to request stays in person. He congratulated me on my court bundle and said if we had've got to present and put forward our cases he is pretty certain I would've won. He said that personally he thinks the Thomson appeal will fail and 6 years will be the time limit upeld. He said its a narrow case and won't take the high court long to come to a judgement in his opinion.

Thomson are reying soley on the Sidhu case and its reliance on the Montreal jugement via the House of Lords. I said I think the circumstances in Sidhu and the reliance on it to activate the 2 years via Montreal Convention are a bit spurious - he agreed!!! His parting words were "this is going to really shake up those budget airlines"!

So, a wasted day to be honest...was looking forward to picking holes in their case but didn't actaully get the opportunity!!

A massive thank you to everyone who has helped me on here...especially Vauban and David_e!

Stick with it everyone - there's so much good info on here that if you are willing to take time to read it and prepare it makes perfect sense meaning you can take on these guys!

So all eyes on Dawson now!!

Baz397

Can anyone offer advice please??

I have just received a letter back from Thomson rejecting my claim. I was delayed coming back from Florida in January 2013 by 10 hours, the letter states, they have investigated my claim and checked flight reports and can see the flight was delayed due to a technical defect being detected prior to a previous scheduled flight. This then caused a knock on effect to my flight. The aircraft is unable to be legally dispatched with this defect. Therefore the cause of the delay sits under Extraordinary Circumstances, as the technical issue with the aircraft was not due to poor maintenance and is not something that could have been foreseen.

They go on to quote As confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the judgment on Nelson v Lufthansa and C629/10 TUI.

Any advice on how I should procede will be greatly accepted Baz397

111KAB

Baz397 wrote: »

Can anyone offer advice please??

I have just received a letter back from Thomson rejecting my claim. I was delayed coming back from Florida in January 2013 by 10 hours, the letter states, they have investigated my claim and checked flight reports and can see the flight was delayed due to a technical defect being detected prior to a previous scheduled flight. This then caused a knock on effect to my flight. The aircraft is unable to be legally dispatched with this defect. Therefore the cause of the delay sits under Extraordinary Circumstances, as the technical issue with the aircraft was not due to poor maintenance and is not something that could have been foreseen.

They go on to quote As confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the judgment on Nelson v Lufthansa and C629/10 TUI.

Any advice on how I should procede will be greatly accepted Baz397

Please read earlier posts. You question has been asked numerous times and indeed you have a valid claim which is best pursued by your understanding the law and how it relates to your delay.

georgewn.1

I am in the process of taking court action against Thomson but I have a question.
It may be that it has been answered before but I cannot find it.
It has often been said that interest can be claimed at the rate of 8% and this same figure has been quoted on many web sites as "the statutory interest rate" .
The county courts Act 1984 section 69 confirms that interest can be awarded but makes no mention of the actual rate.
Does anyone know if there is a statute that sets the rate and where I can find a copy of this statute.
If I am to argue a case for compensation at this rate in court I would like to have to hand a hard copy of any document that confirms this rate.
Thank you for any answers and sorry if it has been mentioned before and I have missed it (please dont bite me ) .

stevemej123

https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/work-out-interest

PERKIE

doodle1234 wrote: »

Just wanted to say thanks for the information and guidance given on this forum. I was delayed on my flight MAN/MAH in July this year, I wrote to Thomson on my return and received a call this week offering full compensation.

I messaged doodle1234 who advised me that the flight above was TOM2656 on 13th July 2013. This was my flight, yet despite me following up my NBA to Thomsons with a letter stating I know they have already offered full compensation to a fellow passenger they have ignored my request. I am now left with no option but to take them to court. I have tried contacting doodle1234 again but they have not replied - I presume they no longer need the forum as they have received payment. Does anybody know a way I can prove in court that they have paid compensation on this flight?

doodle1234

Perkie, I have sent you a pm. I hadn't logged onto the site so hadn't seen your messages.

legal_magpie

Some Courts are now giving a direction at the allocation stage as follows:
1. Whether there have been any otherclaims in respect of this flight?
2. If so, whether any such claims areor have been the subject of Court Proceedings? If so, please provide in each case:-
a. Details of the case number and theCourt in which the matter is proceeding;
b. The result, if known, of the case.
JJ

MGOR

They're the questions Court asked Thomson. I chased up Court as they should have replied a few weeks ago. They did respond but I was not copied in - should I have been? I've asked the Court for a copy. The matter is with the Judge to consider the reponse and then issue directions. No doubt this will be followed eventually by a request for a stay pending Huzar appeal sorting itself out one way or another.

SciTech

Hi Success at last!
After 2 flight delays in 2010 I have now received and banked a cheque after initiating court proceedings against Thomson Airways. The flights were TOM2658 on 29/05/2010 and TOM2659 on 05/06/2010.
I had reached the 'allocation' stage when Thomson's offered a settlement. Achieved full amount plus costs.
I had initially claimed in 2010 but was refused due to pending appeal which was lost in October 2012 and then resubmitted my claim. Got the usual 2 year then EC before they offered to settle. CAA was useless as expected.
Thanks to everyone on this forum. the help and advice is outstanding but especially to HappyChap and SimonD.
Not sure what I shall do with my evenings now!!!