Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

Vauban

HELS wrote: »

I flew with BMI baby and when checking details on Flightstats, airline is now shown as WW. I know BMI baby disappeared so can I claim from WW?

You are in the Thomson thread!

Here's the link to the right airline threads - you want the first one. http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64696657&postcount=1

As you'll see, you claim from BA.

legal_magpie

JPears wrote: »

As you will see from other posts, your reponse, although positive, is not worth the paper it is written on.

A little too pessimistic. While you will probably have to commence Court proceedings, you should make sure that the letter from the CAA is at the front of your trial bundle so that it's the first thing the Judge sees
JJ

MGOR

No surprise but received a letter from Liverpool Court advising Thomsons request for a stay pending Supreme Court ruling on Huzar case. I had written requesting no stay be granted on basis that no appeal has yet been made nor any guarantee they will be granted one. Perhaps the court knows something we don't as I do not believe an appeal has been made yet. No doubt leaving to last minute to try and string process out. Reasons given having regard to the over riding objective particularly cpr part 1.1 e cpr parts 1.4j and 3.1 (2)(f). Whatever they may mean. Frustrating but I guess the court want someone to make the decision for them hence letting the legal wheels grind on.

Kew73

MGOR wrote: »

No surprise but received a letter from Liverpool Court advising Thomsons request for a stay pending Supreme Court ruling on Huzar case. I had written requesting no stay be granted on basis that no appeal has yet been made nor any guarantee they will be granted one. Perhaps the court knows something we don't as I do not believe an appeal has been made yet. No doubt leaving to last minute to try and string process out. Reasons given having regard to the over riding objective particularly cpr part 1.1 e cpr parts 1.4j and 3.1 (2)(f). Whatever they may mean. Frustrating but I guess the court want someone to make the decision for them hence letting the legal wheels grind on.

Snap!!!!!!

retatco

I had my copy of the court letter from Thomson yesterday requesting an extension to the stay till mid October. My stay was only for Dawson but now they are asking for Huzar as well. We await the DJ's decision.
By the way MGOR, cpr = civil procedure rules.

LULU5779

Well today is 14 days since the Dawson case was decided so as per the Judges instructions I have written to the court asking for the stay to be lifted and my compensation and costs to be paid.

I know some people have had requests for an extension on their stay and rumours that Thomson are appealing to the supreme court. I am hoping that if I get there first they will be ordered to pay up and stop messing around. Wishful Thinking…..

nigelpm

retatco wrote: »

I had my copy of the court letter from Thomson yesterday requesting an extension to the stay till mid October. My stay was only for Dawson but now they are asking for Huzar as well. We await the DJ's decision.
By the way MGOR, cpr = civil procedure rules.

Snap. I had also written to the Court last week to ask them to remove the stay.

Fairly sure the Court will oblige with Thomson but it does at lease make them have to think about it.

nigelpm

LULU5779 wrote: »

Well today is 14 days since the Dawson case was decided so as per the Judges instructions I have written to the court asking for the stay to be lifted and my compensation and costs to be paid.

I know some people have had requests for an extension on their stay and rumours that Thomson are appealing to the supreme court. I am hoping that if I get there first they will be ordered to pay up and stop messing around. Wishful Thinking…..

Highly likely you'll get the standard letter from Thomson saying they plan to appeal to Supreme Court so continue to keep on Stay until Mid October at the earliest.

bigmama1

nigelpm wrote: »

Highly likely you'll get the standard letter from Thomson saying they plan to appeal to Supreme Court so continue to keep on Stay until Mid October at the earliest.

What I don't understand is that surely, if claimants have had a court decision in their favour, why would Thomson be allowed to request a stay as they PLANNED TO APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT? A decision has been made and should be paid by Thomson. Thomson haven't even got a Supreme Court date yet! All claimants decisions given in court cases should be paid out until Thomson MIGHT/EVENTUALLY get a Supreme Court date. This is just more delaying tactics by Thomson and shouldn't be allowed.

LULU5779

nigelpm wrote: »

Highly likely you'll get the standard letter from Thomson saying they plan to appeal to Supreme Court so continue to keep on Stay until Mid October at the earliest.

great!! When i won the EC battle but the 2 years defence was stayed back in september i was told Jan 2014 which turned out to be June 2014 so no doubt Oct 14 will be April 2015.