Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

kevinhartshorn

Hi,

I had a flight delayed coming back from Barbados. It had to land halfway through the flight then we were delayed for 24 hour and had to land at a different uk airport.
The flight was just over 6 years ago and I still have the flight number. Iv contacted Thompson using one of the letter templates but they said they wont consider anything over 2 years old.

Does anyone think there is any more I can do or is this a lost cause???

Thanks for any advise received, kev.

CobyBenson

Lost cause, but because of it being more than 6 years, not 2.

emclwi

Hi
I used Martin's standard letter and sent to Thomson following a delayed flight to lapland in december 2010. we were delayed overnight so were about 20hrs late home. Thomson have written back rejecting my claim saying
"The European Court of Justice has confirmed that. as the Regulation doesnt 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 do with International carriage by air are subject to the framework of the Montreal Convention which provides that claims need to be brought within two years. We, therefore, can't consider claims for flights that were delayed more than two years".
I can see on the moneysavingexpert site that this is incorrect, but has anyone else come across this and got any advise about next steps

thanks

111KAB

emclwi wrote: »

I can see on the moneysavingexpert site that this is incorrect, but has anyone else come across this and got any advise about next steps

Please read previous posts regarding this subject - question answered on numerous occasions.

phritchie

Hi , I've got my court day tommorrow on the 2 year limit. I'll present the arguments in More, but should I present Dawson from the start? Of course I expectit will be stayed for Dawson, but ideally I want to have a go at defeating them on More alone and winning the case now.

Can I hold back on Dawson and pull it out later on if it logs like it'sgoing against me? Or do I need to have all of my points oinmy initial address to the court? I've not been in small claims before.

phritchie

Sorry, double post.

CobyBenson

phritchie wrote: »

Hi , I've got my court day tommorrow on the 2 year limit. I'll present the arguments in More, but should I present Dawson from the start? Of course I expectit will be stayed for Dawson, but ideally I want to have a go at defeating them on More alone and winning the case now.

Can I hold back on Dawson and pull it out later on if it logs like it'sgoing against me? Or do I need to have all of my points oinmy initial address to the court? I've not been in small claims before.

More isn't 'that' important, it basically just says that we need to look at national law to establish the limitation period.

Thomson will say that according to English law the limitation period is 2 years and to prove that they'll rely on a case called Sidhu v British Airways.

In a nutshell, your counter argument need to be that Sidhu deals with a claim for damages, whereas this is a claim for compensation - 2 very different things.

Claims for damages fall exclusively under the Montreal Convention. Conversely, claims for compensation aren't covered by Montreal at all. More specifically says that a claim under Reg 261/2004 falls outside the scope of Montreal.

You should use Dawson to persuade the Judge that your analysis is correct and indeed as already been endorsed by HHJ Yelton.

That being said, I'm also pretty certain that it'll be stayed.

ClareJM001

I have submitted a claim for a delayed flight Mexico to the UK and Thomson have rejected it siting the following;

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 do with "international carriage by air" are subject to the framework of the Montreal Convention which provides that claims need to be brought within two years. We, therefore, can't consider claims for flights that were delayed more than two years ago.

Any advice about what i do next? i know that the 2 years they are spouting is rubbish and claims can back as far as 2005

ClareJM001

I have had exactly the same response today and looming at the MSE website it seems the next step is the European Consumer Centre? I would appreciate some advice from anyone who is dealing with/has dealt with Thomson too please

emclwi wrote: »

Hi
I used Martin's standard letter and sent to Thomson following a delayed flight to lapland in december 2010. we were delayed overnight so were about 20hrs late home. Thomson have written back rejecting my claim saying
"The European Court of Justice has confirmed that. as the Regulation doesnt 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 do with International carriage by air are subject to the framework of the Montreal Convention which provides that claims need to be brought within two years. We, therefore, can't consider claims for flights that were delayed more than two years".
I can see on the moneysavingexpert site that this is incorrect, but has anyone else come across this and got any advise about next steps

thanks

111KAB

ClareJM001 wrote: »

Any advice about what i do next? i know that the 2 years they are spouting is rubbish and claims can back as far as 2005

Yes read the thread and FAQ's as you will stand zero chance if you think (court) claims can go back to 2005.