Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

bigmama1

Well I've done it! Just requested reimbursement of the £170 Hearing Fee! As we did not have an oral hearing after requesting one, I think it's only fair for the fee to be reimbursed? I bet the Court have never received a request for reimbursement before? Still I think it's worth asking, particularly how badly our case was handled.

Thomson changed their plea to extraordinary circumstances. Which was granted in their favour. Although originally had claimed technical fault.

We feel we have not had a fair trial and after incurring over £300 in fees and not getting an oral hearing we feel cheated in more ways than one.

I will keep you informed.

Goagoer

Sorry to hear the outcome of your case bigmama1.
Hope you at least manage to get reimbursement of your fee.
The more I hear the more I'm completely taken aback by how lenient the courts are toward Thomson.
In our case we are nowhere near a court appearance yet, there are no extraordinary circumstances and Thomson have completely ignored 3 court orders, yet still the court decides a stay is appropriate. Thomson didn't even ask for this - it's just been granted to them because they may be granted permission to appeal against Dawson.....again!!
Surely their charmed life must come to an end soon?!

bigmama1

Received a letter from my county court telling me if I wish to appeal the Judgment to download form N161A.

I've had a look at this form and it is guidance notes for completing form N161! Looked at form N161 and it says for all appeals "EXCEPT" small claims track appeals!

I've found that form N164 is for small claims track ONLY! (I think I should get myself a job in that court office)?

Bott & Co phoned back today and basically didn't want to know. I mentioned the mix up of appeal forms and I was told to phone the court and check.

Well after trying to get through on a phone line which is not a free phone or even comes under a local call, I'm now getting angry.

I have tried emailing the enquiries@southend.countycourt.uk only to have message back saying they will write in approx 5 days! The telephone number is always busy and I have tried hanging on but for how long does a person wait. Especially thinking about the phone bill!

On the small claims appeal form it doesn't appear to request a fee. So I'm thinking, as I can't seem to get help from a NWNF I will try once more using the N164 form.

It's so annoying when you only want to ask somebody a simple question.

To cap it all, I've since found the [email]enquiries@southend.county) is not for enquiries! Apparently it's for booking an appointment! They do not have any counter service at all at that court. Excellent. How to deter claimants eh?

So what are the chances of getting an appointment this week? Not good, time is running out to get this appeal in. As I said I might just send the form in and wait for a reply.

What a disgusting way to run a court service.[/email]

smartly

Any good Mama?

Phone Numbers

Enquiries: 0344 892 4000
Small claims mediation: 01604 795511
Money claims: 0300 123 1372
Money claims fax: 0161 743 4023

hogan815

Flight TOM097 Domincan Republic to Gatwick 24 hours 28 minutes delay due to a "technical fault" We were passengers on the same flight and have also made a claim with Thompsons, have received the same letter back saying they would not be paying any compensation as the delay was due to technical problem not related to maintenance, also we had paid to choose seats and on plane coming home these seat numbers were next to the toilets. Thomson not prepared to compensate for this as say "valid seats" but who would pay extra to sit by the loo! We are writing again to tell them their response is not satisfactory and ask for details re the nature of the technical fault.
ps think we may have been at same hotel, Caya Coa.

legal_magpie

You should press on with your claim but should note that your claim about seats is a separate matter from compensation delay under the regulations and while you can include it in the same legal claim you must set out this head of claim separately.
Personally I would never pay to reserve seats except possibly for extra legroom. They aren't going to split people up for the sake of it and the plus is that if they do you might end up sitting to someone better looking than your wife. (Did I really say that)

cherry_trees1958

Hi all received this today after a two emails sent because they hadn't replied within the time scale. was for a delayed flight which was then canceled from Zante to Stansted on 2nd Aug 2011

Please quote 1520986/NS

Dear Mr Unwin

Thank you for your correspondence.

Here at Thomson Airways, we are committed to on-time performance across our flying programme. Doing everything we reasonably can to get our aircraft to their destinations, and you on holiday, safely and on time is really important to us.

We invest significantly in operational initiatives, engineering excellence and having a modern fleet; they all help to keep the frequency and duration of delays to a bare minimum. As a result, for the past few years, Thomson Airways has been one of the best performing airlines in the UK and has been able to keep the title of most on-time charter airline.

Very occasionally, though, and despite our very best efforts to prevent delays, they can occur and we are truly sorry that your flight was delayed in the way that you have described.

Delays are always a disappointment for us, not only in respect of the effect that they have on passenger enjoyment and comfort, but also as there is a real financial cost to us in circumstances which are almost always not our fault. That cost makes offering the best value fares and holidays much more of a challenge.

In a limited number of circumstances Regulation 261/2004 of the European Union ("the Regulation") now entitles some affected customers to a payment when their flight is delayed over three hours on arrival.

The European Court of Justice has confirmed that, as the Regulation doesn't say how long passengers have to bring their claims, we need to look at our national law. The Supreme Court in the UK has said that all claims to do with "international carriage by air" need to be brought within two years. We, therefore, can't consider claims for flights that were delayed more than two years ago.

As you may be aware, the Court of Appeal has made its decision on the matter of Dawson v Thomson Airways. The Court decided that the correct amount of time that passengers can bring a claim for compensation under the Denied Boarding Regulations is six years.

On detailed review of the Court's judgment, we believe that they have made an error in both fact and law when coming to their decision, and It is for this reason that we have made an application to seek a further appeal to the UK's highest court, the Supreme Court.

Until the Supreme Court has considered the application, we are unable to progress your claim. We kindly ask that you contact us once this decision has been received.

Keeping an eye on the purpose and spirit of the Regulation and doing that while continuing to deliver real value to our customers is a challenge that can only be met by applying the law robustly and not making payments where there is no entitlement. If we didn't apply the rules in this way, prices would need to rise for you and all other customers.

Thank you for taking the time to contact us. And rest assured that we are doing all we reasonably can to ensure that your future flights with Thomson Airways arrive on-time."


Yours sincerely

Neil Sexton
Flight Delay Advisor
After Travel Customer Support
Tel: 0203 636 1614

hogan815

Sprite_2009 wrote: »

Hi we were delayed by 24hours 28mins on a return flight from Dominican Republic to London. Gatwick on Thomson airlines is this flight still governed by the E U rules so we can claim compensation .
Regards sprite 2009.

Flight TOM097 Domincan Republic to Gatwick 24 hours 28 minutes delay due to a "technical fault" We were passengers on the same flight and have made a claim with Thompsons, we have received a letter back saying they would not be paying any compensation as the delay was due to technical problem not related to maintenance, also we had paid to choose seats and on plane coming home these seat numbers were next to the toilets. Thomson not prepared to compensate for this as say "valid seats" but who would pay extra to sit by the loo! We are writing again to tell them their response is not satisfactory and ask for details re the nature of the technical fault.
ps think we may have been at same hotel, Caya Coa.

legal_magpie

cherry_trees1958 wrote: »

Keeping an eye on the purpose and spirit of the Regulation and doing that while continuing to deliver real value to our customers is a challenge that can only be met by applying the law robustly and not making payments where there is no entitlement. If we didn't apply the rules in this way, prices would need to rise for you and all other customers.

This is balderdash.

What they mean is:
"1. We think the regulations are grossly unfair.
2. We will do whatever we can to avoid paying
3. We will raise every obstacle we can in the hope that people get fed up and give up.
4. Even if we are satisfied that someone has a genuine claim we will only pay that person. We will never contact other people on the same flight to tell them they have a claim too"
JJ

111KAB

hogan815 wrote: »

Flight TOM097 Domincan Republic to Gatwick 24 hours 28 minutes delay due to a "technical fault" We were passengers on the same flight and have made a claim with Thompsons, we have received a letter back saying they would not be paying any compensation as the delay was due to technical problem not related to maintenance.....We are writing again to tell them their response is not satisfactory and ask for details re the nature of the technical fault.

A technical problem may not be due to lack of maintenance but it is still Thomson's problem and it should not be yours. Doubtful they will tell you what the technical problem was as that is tantamount to admitting liability. Forget the issue with the toilets as that is just clouding matters and has no bearing on a delay claim. Seems you have a valid claim and probably the only way to progress is via court action but recommend you do not involve the CAA.