Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

daisysmomma

Section 75
If the flights were paid for with a credit card a passenger could consider claiming under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act (CCA). Section 75 holds the credit card provider equally to blame with the airline for any breach of contract, making it equally liable to provide a refund.
A claim could be made if a flight was fully or partially purchased on a credit card; cost more than £100 but less than £30,000; and was purchased in the last 6 years.
However, if flights were purchased either as part of a package or as a standalone product through a travel agent (considered a 'third party' under Section 75 rules) passengers would not be eligible to claim.

daisysmomma

Centipede100 wrote: »

You might work in retail but legal magpie is a legal professional so I would take what he says on board if I were you.

IMO the airline provided the flight on which you flew (albeit delayed) but this does not entitle you to deny payment to the airline. You may or may not have a claim for delay compensation but this does not AFAIK entitle you to set off this alleged debt for compensation against the cost of the flight.

So far as I know there has not been a single successful case where a claimant has claimed the compensation from their credit card company but I have seen quite a number of cases )including where the credit card ombudsman has ruled that compensation claims cannot be brought against the CC company) where card companies have refused to pay out compensation on this basis under S75.

Others are free to take alternative views.

at present all i have asked for is a refund for the return leg of the trip, i paid for the flights at a premium for the time they departed, had i wished to fly at 8.30pm i could have bought my fligts considerably cheaper, i am not asking the card company for compensation - thomson has refused my claim, so all i am doing is trying, i cant see it having a consequence on me, and if so in what way?

legal_magpie

daisysmomma wrote: »

How so? I work in retail and we have people making chargebacks all the time, mostly false chargebacks claiming they never recieved goods (proof of delivery provided closes the case)

If you work in retail and have claims of this kind, then you ought to know better. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Thomson fulfilled their contractual obligations to fly you out and fly you back. Your claim for flight delay is not contractual but based on European regulations. If Thomson were to sue you for the withheld payment they would undoubtedly get judgment, leaving you to argue your delayed claim at a later date. They might not necessarily do this of course but they would probably arrange for an adverse credit report to be made against you, so it would be on your credit record .

Also you will find that if you go to a NWNF firm, they probably won't take your case because of the stopped payment issue which will divert all attention from your claim.

I recommend that you back off from this course but, of course, you are free to ignore my advice .
JJ

daisysmomma

legal_magpie wrote: »

If you work in retail and have claims of this kind, then you ought to know better. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Thomson fulfilled their contractual obligations to fly you out and fly you back. Your claim for flight delay is not contractual but based on European regulations. If Thomson were to sue you for the withheld payment they would undoubtedly get judgment, leaving you to argue your delayed claim at a later date. They might not necessarily do this of course but they would probably arrange for an adverse credit report to be made against you, so it would be on your credit record .

Also you will find that if you go to a NWNF firm, they probably won't take your case because of the stopped payment issue which will divert all attention from your claim.

I recommend that you back off from this course but, of course, you are free to ignore my advice .
JJ

no thankyou for the explanation, i wasnt expecting that the card company would accept my claim, they will be getting back to me within the next week or so, i didnt realise that requesting a refund for a flight that didnt fly when it should would have such a negative effect. thanks again for your advice i do appreciate it xx

Vfurber85

I sent off my letter of complaint to monarch airlines on 10th jan 2014 for a delay of 11 hours back in June 2012! My partner and I have been successful and are waiting for compensation in the form of a cheque for £333 EACH - we were told we'd receive the cheques within 21 days - that was 7 days ago yippeeeee

JPears

Vfurber85 wrote: »

I sent off my letter of complaint to monarch airlines on 10th jan 2014 for a delay of 11 hours back in June 2012! My partner and I have been successful and are waiting for compensation in the form of a cheque for £333 EACH - we were told we'd receive the cheques within 21 days - that was 7 days ago yippeeeee

That information would be better on the Monarch thread, possibly? :rotfl:

Mark2spark

daisysmomma wrote: »

no thankyou for the explanation, i wasnt expecting that the card company would accept my claim, they will be getting back to me within the next week or so, i didnt realise that requesting a refund for a flight that didnt fly when it should would have such a negative effect. thanks again for your advice i do appreciate it xx

I hear what the others are saying Daisysmum, but I nonetheless still think that this is an interesting shout. The section 75 CCA ruling made card companies jointly liable for the supply of goods, as described, so of course the card companies will withhold payment whilst they consider their options. Paying a premium for an earlier flight when a cheaper one is available, at a later time, is a good twist on this.
I know that the T & C's of the holiday booking give airlines a let out to change flight times, but normally this has to be done at least 14 days before departure.
I'm also aware that there's info out there on the WWW - from Which! magazine amongst others - that give advice that a s.75 claim is possible, but I agree with Centipede, in that in the 18 months or so that we have been scrutinising developments of the EU 261 ruling, we're not aware of anyone as of yet who has made a successful claim using this precedent.
I'd like to know how this one plays out.
Perhaps a good scrutiny of the T & C's of your flight booking should be examined, to see how the airline words their get out clause in this respect.

RebekahLFC

Mark2spark wrote: »

For some strange reason, there doesn't appear to be a link in the FAQ's to the Dawson case.
So here it is:

The ruling is the Limitation Act, and that means 6 years is the limit to claim (in England). So on a daily basis, the date that you can go back to, changes. So no claims on flights before March 17th 2008 currently.
Thomson are currently appealing this ruling, the hearing for that will be in May.

Thanks for that information going to sit and read through it tonight. Prior to sending my letter off I read and re read through the information on MSE regarding the ability to complain for delayed flight so was confused as to why it stated 6 years yet Thomson stating 2!!

Thanks again
Rebekah

Rocketronnie

I submitted a claim to Thomson Travel in respect of a 12 hour delay from Manchester to Palma, Majorca in September 2010. They have replied that they are only obliged to pay claims for the last two years. I don't have the flight number or the exact date, should I continue or is it a lost cause?

richardw

Wait for the outcome of the Dawson appeal in May.