Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

Ich_2

It is easy to find out though whether there were significant weather problems at destination or origin airports. If there were not, it is most unlikely that poor weather affected the flight concerned.

Yes totally correct, It's just that so many folk on here seem to think that as the weather is good where they are and that other flights are departing to different destinations, the airlines are automatically getting being less than correct. Fine if they are that as you say can be verified, but it is a very poor connection to make.

Folk need to be making the right decisions for the right reasons and not on the back of possibly incorrect assumptions. Or is it the intent just to let them go through the "system" to overload the airlines with dubious assumptions!

Similarly with ATC issues, decisions are being made from a position of little knowledge, fine if folk want to pursue the airlines that is their right, but don't you think a little research and knowledge into how it works is a good thing?

Vauban

Ich wrote: »

Yes totally correct, It's just that so many folk on here seem to think that as the weather is good where they are and that other flights are departing to different destinations, the airlines are automatically getting being less than correct. Fine if they are that as you say can be verified, but it is a very poor connection to make.

Folk need to be making the right decisions for the right reasons and not on the back of possibly incorrect assumptions. Or is it the intent just to let them go through the "system" to overload the airlines with dubious assumptions!

Similarly with ATC issues, decisions are being made from a position of little knowledge, fine if folk want to pursue the airlines that is their right, but don't you think a little research and knowledge into how it works is a good thing?

I will tell you what I think: that airlines are not being truthful with potential claimants and doing everything they can to deter legitimate claims. There are plenty of examples of this on this forum, including of folk being told that their delays were caused by weather - and then the airline changing its story once court action is started.

If airlines do not want to be inundated by invalid claims, they might consider responding more fully to passengers when they initially make a claim. I am sure that people would respond appropriately if the airline was able credibly to explain the reason for the delay, and provide a bit of proof on asking. That they generally refuse to engage the claimant when pressed tells you everything you need to know about how the airlines are responding to all claims - including those that appear legitimate (which seems most of them).

Shame on them, and on anyone on here trying to justify their behaviour.:mad:

Gravity2014

I was flying with Thomson at the end of 2012 from Sanford Florida back to the UK and when I arrived at the airport they had a delay desk set up informing passengers the flight wasn't going ahead as the Pilot had injured his arm. They then shipped us over to a hotel and we flew the next morning after a delay of 15 hours 55 minutes.

We were told at the time about claiming compensation by the flight operator so they clearly expected it. I sent my claim to Thomson using the MSE template and they rejected it saying this:

"I can see from our internal airline reports that your flight was affected by a delay of 15 hours 55 minutes. This was as a result of the Captain not being able to operate the aircraft due to an injury incurred immediately prior to departure. This meant that we had to arrange alternative staff cover to ensure a safe and compliant flight could operate...
as I'm sure you can appreciate, the reason for your delay was as a result of an event beyond our control. As the delay to your flight was caused by extraordinary circumstances, the Regulation does not require us to make a payment."

Firstly this did not happen "immediately prior to departure" as they already had a delay desk set up hours before not to mention another pilot already on a plane out to replace him. I believe I remember them saying he broke his arm (not extraordinary circumstances but human error).

I immediately referred the case with all necessary documentation to the CAA and got the standard acknowledgement receipt email. I got this acknowledgment in April, a long time after submitting my paperwork and since have had nothing. No contact, nothing. I have followed it up with another email and several phonecalls but as you can never get a human on the phone I have got NOWHERE!

I'm extremely frustrated as I believe I have a case here. I'd really appreciate anyone's help on this.

All the best,
Gravit2014.

David_e

Gravity2014 wrote: »

I'd really appreciate anyone's help on this.

It's all in the FAQs. Basically, you need to take them to court. Search "CAA" for reasons why you shouldn't bother with them.

renifos

Quite honestly, I thought we should try to be helpful to others on here? I mentioned the weather, because airlines use it often as an excuse.I feel like I am in court already! I wish I had not bothered asking any questions now.

Ich_2

I feel like I am in court already

But perhaps you now know the sort of things that you may need to be prepared for and the need to know exactly the situation..

At thre end of the day it is a serious business and as passengers there is a lot of what goes on behind the scenes we don't know. In Feb 2011 there was a fatal crash at Cork airport in The Republic of Ireland.
Of the 12 persons on board a small aircraft 6 of them died in the crash.
The flight was from Belfast where the weather was fine! At Cork visibility was seriously reduced and the aircraft should have not attempted to land, from the accident investigation these findings are quite evident.

4/ The flight was undertaken without adequate consideration of the weather conditions at the destination and alternate airports.

5/ The flight plan specified one alternate aerodrome, whereas the weather conditions at the destination were such that two alternate aerodromes were required

6/ The flight crew were not aware of the weather conditions at the alternate aerodrome specified on the flight plan

There were items 4 to 6 of 54 findings, which is why I get concerned when folk seem to think weather at the departure airport is relevant if it is fine and there is a cancellation due to weather (bearing in mind the "don't upset the passengers prior to the flight" conditions of information release)

deb.p123

I am in court this Friday the 7th in Liverpool.
I rang Thomson today to confirm they had my skeleton argument (thanks Vauban), and they have, and asked when I would get theirs. The response was my claim handler was off until next Wednesday so I would get it then. I pointed out we were in court this Friday, she then said I will get back to you.
I then got a phone call stating they would be asking for a stay as they were waiting on the outcome of various appeals. They also stated several other cases had been heard in Liverpool yesterday and they had got them all stayed.
She asked if I would agree to a stay and I said no (as it took me my surprise and I was driving to a funeral).
On reflection I am now wondering should I ring Thomson and agree to a stay? I don`t want to take a full day off unnecessarily and I am wondering if I will be liable for further costs if I don`t agree to a stay?
Any advice?


Debbie

Vauban

You are not liable for extra costs if you don't agree a stay. So don't worry about that.

As to whether you should agree to a stay to avoid a wasted day, only you can answer that. I took some satisfaction from the fact that it cost the airline more to attend than it ever cost me (and of course I got my costs in the end too!).

Your call ...

Mark2spark

Gravity2014 wrote: »

I was flying with Thomson at the end of 2012 from Sanford Florida back to the UK and when I arrived at the airport they had a delay desk set up informing passengers the flight wasn't going ahead as the Pilot had injured his arm. They then shipped us over to a hotel and we flew the next morning after a delay of 15 hours 55 minutes.

We were told at the time about claiming compensation by the flight operator so they clearly expected it. I sent my claim to Thomson using the MSE template and they rejected it saying this:

"I can see from our internal airline reports that your flight was affected by a delay of 15 hours 55 minutes. This was as a result of the Captain not being able to operate the aircraft due to an injury incurred immediately prior to departure. This meant that we had to arrange alternative staff cover to ensure a safe and compliant flight could operate...
as I'm sure you can appreciate, the reason for your delay was as a result of an event beyond our control. As the delay to your flight was caused by extraordinary circumstances, the Regulation does not require us to make a payment."

Firstly this did not happen "immediately prior to departure" as they already had a delay desk set up hours before not to mention another pilot already on a plane out to replace him. I believe I remember them saying he broke his arm (not extraordinary circumstances but human error).

I immediately referred the case with all necessary documentation to the CAA and got the standard acknowledgement receipt email. I got this acknowledgment in April, a long time after submitting my paperwork and since have had nothing. No contact, nothing. I have followed it up with another email and several phonecalls but as you can never get a human on the phone I have got NOWHERE!

I'm extremely frustrated as I believe I have a case here. I'd really appreciate anyone's help on this.

All the best,
Gravit2014.

Sorry if you don't have a sackload of replies, but people are becoming indifferent at re-answering the same, or similar, scenario.
Involving the CAA is a waste of time. If you'd read any of this thread you'd see dozens of posts about it.
Basically you initiate the claim, get a denial, then issue a court claim, or hand it to a no win firm. Any further letters is a waste of time.
Then read the FAQ's and get yourself in tune with what 'the second test' that the airlines must satisfy is. They have failed and you have a valid claim. The summary of the Huzar case will spill most of the beans.

JPears

deb.p123 wrote: »

I am in court this Friday the 7th in Liverpool.
I rang Thomson today to confirm they had my skeleton argument (thanks Vauban), and they have, and asked when I would get theirs. The response was my claim handler was off until next Wednesday so I would get it then. I pointed out we were in court this Friday, she then said I will get back to you.
I then got a phone call stating they would be asking for a stay as they were waiting on the outcome of various appeals. They also stated several other cases had been heard in Liverpool yesterday and they had got them all stayed.
She asked if I would agree to a stay and I said no (as it took me my surprise and I was driving to a funeral).
On reflection I am now wondering should I ring Thomson and agree to a stay? I don`t want to take a full day off unnecessarily and I am wondering if I will be liable for further costs if I don`t agree to a stay?
Any advice?


Debbie

Perhaps contact the court and see if they have actually applied for a stay (by the correct forms/paperwork). If not then go to court if the hearing is still to be held and politley inform judge about the poor handling of the case by Thomson