Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

bigmama1

Thomson are quoting in their Defence "By reason of Article 3 of EC Regulation 2027 as amended, as a matter of English law the liability of a Community air carrier in respect of passengers and their baggage shall be governed by all provisions of the Montreal Convention relevant to such liability".

I don't believe I have read about this latest ploy by Thomson on the forum before? Comments would be very appreciated.

Thomson then begins to quote the Montreal Convention and its Article 35. I know this part is incorrect as its 6 years to bring a claim under EC261/2004.

They still insist that the "261 Delay Compensation was therefore extinguished if no action was brought against the defendant in respect of it within two years of 18 December 2010. No such action was brought within the two year period (this action having been issued on 11 March 2014). Accordingly, the current proceedings fail to disclose a reasonable cause of action and/or are an abuse of the Court's process"

Vauban

bigmama1 wrote: »

Thomson are quoting in their Defence "By reason of Article 3 of EC Regulation 2027 as amended, as a matter of English law the liability of a Community air carrier in respect of passengers and their baggage shall be governed by all provisions of the Montreal Convention relevant to such liability".

I don't believe I have read about this latest ploy by Thomson on the forum before? Comments would be very appreciated.

Thomson then begins to quote the Montreal Convention and its Article 35. I know this part is incorrect as its 6 years to bring a claim under EC261/2004.

They still insist that the "261 Delay Compensation was therefore extinguished if no action was brought against the defendant in respect of it within two years of 18 December 2010. No such action was brought within the two year period (this action having been issued on 11 March 2014). Accordingly, the current proceedings fail to disclose a reasonable cause of action and/or are an abuse of the Court's process"

Yes. This is their bog standard Montreal Defence point - which is being tested this month in the "Dawson" case at the Court of Appeal. I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that Dawson won't be upheld - so the "you only had two years" argument will fall away when Dawson is won.

dxc_chappie

bigmama1 wrote: »

I don't believe I have read about this latest ploy by Thomson on the forum before? Comments would be very appreciated.

It's hardly their latest ploy - see the post immediately above yours!

bigmama1

dxc_chappie wrote: »

It's hardly their latest ploy - see the post immediately above yours!

I was referring to their quote of "article 3 of EC Regulation 2027 which I hadn't seen anywhere before!

Vauban

bigmama1 wrote: »

I was referring to their quote of "article 3 of EC Regulation 2027 which I hadn't seen anywhere before!

I'm not sure how citing this 1997 document is meant to help them. Perhaps those of a legal bent might opine. But in my view 2027 both predates Reg 261/04 and is about "damages", not statutory compensation.

But as I said, all this will be before the Court of Appeal this month, so will be settled one way or another!

laurac1981

Hi, , first time posting on here. Our flight was delayed from lanzarote to Manchester in july 2010 for approx 18hours. Id like to apply for compensation but I have no boarding passes or flight information cant even find emails from them- think I cleared my emails after that. Is there anywhere that can give me this info? Would Thomson customer services? Tia

Caz3121

laurac1981 wrote: »

Is there anywhere that can give me this info? Would Thomson customer services? Tia

Info within this very thread
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64424891&postcount=4205

terriandaaron

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

the flights that whole week were late to Sanford, we flew on the 26th and was told a plane 3 days earlier was hit by lightening, they seem to have a different excuse all week, they had to get a totally different plane for us and were delayed over 5 hours, it had a knock on affect all week.


interesting one of the crew said a whole staff crew had striked/ walked out over cutbacks a few days before which was the true cause of the delay, I guess well never know, im submitting a claim anyway because 3 days before is not extraordinary circumstances, they should be able to sort it out not have flights lasted all week!

MGOR

My inbox had a surprise email this morning from the CAA finally responding to my complaint regarding a Thomson flight delay in August 2011. It has taken them over 1 year to respond and since then I have commenced proceedings and am now stuck in the log jam awaiting the Huzar appeal. Anyway they found in my favour advising that Thomson could not rely on extraordinary circumstances as a reason for the delay and they had not taken appropriate measures to avoid or minimise the delay and as such in their opinion compensation is due. They have given their view to Thomson who have advised that they will still not pay compensation. At least once Huzar case heard I have further ammunition to throw at Thomson when the time comes. Interesting that the CAA are still working their way through cases although as they say themselves they are unable to impose a solution on the airline so what is their role then? 3 years now since I used any of the TUI / Thomson empire for any travel arrangements for my family. If more people boycotted this shambles of a company then perhaps their shareholders / board might start realising the damage and cost being done to their reputation (what's left). I'm sure though they have run the numbers and realised it is better to make life difficult for the few who claim compensation in the hope of reducing payments.

David_e

MGOR wrote: »

the CAA are still working their way through cases although as they say themselves they are unable to impose a solution on the airline so what is their role then?

That is the $64,000 question.

The website says, and I kid you not:

"The Civil Aviation Authority is the UK's specialist aviation regulator. Through its skills and expertise it is recognised as a world leader in its field."