Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

David_e

unhappyflyer wrote: »

Received reply from Thomson saying we were not entitled to compensation because the holiday was over 2 years ago, whereas Martin Lewis states this is wrong as the law has been changed. Therefore, we contacted the CAA who contacted Thomson and Thomson still say the same so what to do? Is it worth going to court for? Has anyone else been in the same position?

If you read the FAQs and the Thomson thread the answers are there. If you don't want to do that, contact a no win no fee firm.

Dizzy_Ditzy

huwy123 wrote: »

Was your flight to Sanford on the 30th April by any chance?

We were delayed 3 hours 45 on the return flight to gatwick (due to a delay in the inbound flight) and I was wondering if a claim is likely to be successful.

-Huw

I had friends who were on the inbound flight. The plane was delayed leaving by 2h 43m because of a hydraulic fault.

I only stumbled across this because I'm trying to see if they can get compensated for it.

Their flight left before the magic 3 hours but it landed after the 3 hour mark

Vauban

queen_of_cheap wrote: »

I had friends who were on the inbound flight. The plane was delayed leaving by 2h 43m because of a hydraulic fault.

I only stumbled across this because I'm trying to see if they can get compensated for it.

Their flight left before the magic 3 hours but it landed after the 3 hour mark

If it landed three hours late or more, then that's what matters.

Dizzy_Ditzy

Vauban wrote: »

If it landed three hours late or more, then that's what matters.

Thank you

Do we think that Thomson are likely to use the bit about it being a manufacturers problem to get out of it?

huwy123

I was wondering if they delay on my flight would be classed as due to the "hydraulic problem" (on the previous flight) or "the delay on the inbound flight".

I've got a feeling they won't be paying out for a hydraulic issue as its an "exceptional issue". I wouldn't have said a delay on an inbound flight is exceptional however.

Vauban

huwy123 wrote: »

I was wondering if they delay on my flight would be classed as due to the "hydraulic problem" (on the previous flight) or "the delay on the inbound flight".

I've got a feeling they won't be paying out for a hydraulic issue as its an "exceptional issue". I wouldn't have said a delay on an inbound flight is exceptional however.

A hydraulic fault is neither exceptional nor extraordinary for that matter. A good NWNF lawyer should be able to help you fight your case.

Dizzy_Ditzy

huwy123 wrote: »

I was wondering if they delay on my flight would be classed as due to the "hydraulic problem" (on the previous flight) or "the delay on the inbound flight".

I've got a feeling they won't be paying out for a hydraulic issue as its an "exceptional issue". I wouldn't have said a delay on an inbound flight is exceptional however.

Vauban wrote: »

A hydraulic fault is neither exceptional nor extraordinary for that matter. A good NWNF lawyer should be able to help you fight your case.

Thank you- I'll show this to my friends when they get back and they can decide for themselves what they wanna do

akm

can anybody help please is the ruling 2 years or as Thomson says 6years i have wrote to CAA and still got no answer
cheers

Vauban

akm wrote: »

can anybody help please is the ruling 2 years or as Thomson says 6years i have wrote to CAA and still got no answer
cheers

Google/search for "Dawson" ...

dxc_chappie

akm wrote: »

can anybody help please is the ruling 2 years or as Thomson says 6years i have wrote to CAA and still got no answer
cheers

Try this thread:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4489367