Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

Foxy31

Hello,


I have taken Thomson to small claims court for a 24 hour delay departing from East Midlands to Cancun in June 2010. I am currently waiting for a court date after months of emails, letters etc. Thomson are refusing to offer any compensation as they are quoting the 'Montreal Convention' which states they only have to look back as far as 2 years, I have done plenty of research and have sought advice and apparently this is a load of rubbish. The Montreal convention is only relevant under 'extraordinary circumstances'.


Thomson are saying a 'hydraulic leak' was the cause which is out of their control, can anyone advise me about a 'hydraulic leak' and if it is in fact the airlines the airlines fault or not? Does it come under 'extraordinary circumstances'?


To cut a long story short we had to queue up twice at two separate gates ready to board but in the end there were not enough hours for the flight crew? I believe that IT was Thomson fault as we did not fly until the very next day.


I would really appreciate people's opinion on if you think I stand a chance in court or not, as I've come this far ! Also if you give me any advice or comments.... anything that would help me.

111KAB

Foxy31 > http://www.scribd.com/doc/173815478/Brittain-v-Monarch-Airlines-Ltd-04-06-13-Jud

Vauban

Foxy31 wrote: »

I have done plenty of research and have sought advice and apparently this is a load of rubbish. The Montreal convention is only relevant under 'extraordinary circumstances'.

I'm not sure who told you that. I think you're confusing a few separat ethings. Whether the Montreal period of 2 years applies will be decided by the Dawson appeal. Whether technical failures counts as "extraordinary" will be determined by the Huzar appeal. Both are in the Court of Appeal in May.

Foxy31

Thank you for your responses so far, it is possible that I am confused as I have that much paperwork from this whole charade! I revising it all before the court date but thank you

bettyboo1923

Foxy31 wrote: »

Thank you for your responses so far, it is possible that I am confused as I have that much paperwork from this whole charade! I revising it all before the court date but thank you

I'm trying to claim from Thomson for my son and daughter in law for a 4 hour delayed flight from Ibiza to Stansted in September 2011. Needless to say Thomson are claiming extraordinary circumstances. I went to the CAA website to complete their online form but as the flight was from Ibiza it says I cannot go down this route.

Any advice please.

Many thanks

legal_magpie

Going via the CAA is usually a waste of time. What are the alleged extraordinary circumstances? Good idea is to read the FAQs on the first page

David_e

bettyboo1923 wrote: »

I'm trying to claim from Thomson for my son and daughter in law for a 4 hour delayed flight from Ibiza to Stansted in September 2011. Needless to say Thomson are claiming extraordinary circumstances. I went to the CAA website to complete their online form but as the flight was from Ibiza it says I cannot go down this route.

Any advice please.

Read the FAQs where all this is covered in detail (including why the CAA are, in any event, a waste of time - or worse) . If you don't want to do that, speak to a no win no fee firm.

bettyboo1923

David_e wrote: »

Read the FAQs where all this is covered in detail (including why the CAA are, in any event, a waste of time - or worse) . If you don't want to do that, speak to a no win no fee firm.

Thank you. I might try a no win no fee firm to see if they can help.

Kilvers

Hi All
This is my first time on here and I am looking for some help and advice regarding my claim for a delayed flight with Thomson. Back in May 2010 we boarded a flight from Cardiff to Zante. Half way there, the plane turned around and headed back to UK. They said the reason for this was a small crack had been discovered in the windscreen of the plane. Now the important bit for me is that the pilot stated that the glass was approx 10 layers thick and this small crack was on the outer layer only and there was no safety issue but they had to turn back and land at Manchester where there was a plane available to take us back on our way to Zante. We flew another 2 hours back to the Uk and landed at about 9.30 am in Manchester. We waited until 4.30pm for a new plane with no explanation why it took so long, as they gave us the impression that this spare plane was waiting for us as we travelled back to UK. We arrived in Zante at approx 10pm (EU time) so our flight was delayed by approx 10 hours. They say the crack in the windscreen was classed as extrodinary circumstance. My arguement to them is they had a choice to continue flying to Zante and fix the plane there as there was no safety issue but they will not give me a full explanation as to why it had to turn back. I did have one email from them in the beginning stating that the plane would be stuck in Zante for days whilst waiting for an engineer and a replacement windscreen to become available and that would not be cost effective for the company! I have contacted the CAA and they referred the case back to Thomson stating I have a valid claim but Thomson keep saying I don't. The latest letter now states it is out of the two year timescale for claims and therefore they will not be offering compensation. there were 9 people in the party in total so the claim is quite considerable. Any advice please?

David_e

Kilvers wrote: »

Any advice please?

Read the FAQs and use the search facility for anything specific. If you don't want to do that, contact a no win no fee firm.