Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

21yrold

The solicitor feels it was sent in error!

I write further to your e-mail below.

Please note you are not required to respond to the e-mail. Thomas Cook have appointed solicitors in respect of the above claim and the matter is listed for a hearing on xxxxxxxx

Thanks you for forwarding the e-mail to me, which I assume has been sent to you in error.

Yours sincerely

legal_magpie

I suspect that the long letter you received was a generic one sent to all people who have made appropriate claims. It is going to take them a while to clear the backlog (OK it is of their own making but most of us on here will give practical advice). The priority will have to be those cases which are already in Court especially those with a hearing date.

Unless there is something special about your case which takes it out of Huzar territory such as delay caused by fog I suspect that you will receive an offer shortly. If not, you should assume that it's all systems go for your hearing. If you do get an offer do remember to calculate your claim to include interest (assuming that you claimed it) up to the date of the hearing. Also your court fees and expenses for going.
JJ

Exodusone

Not much use/Help from the CAA

November 2014

Dear xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ref: xxxxxxxxxxx

We wrote to you in July as you had contacted us previously about a disrupted flight. We explained that the UK Court of Appeal had decided in the Jet2 v Huzar case, where long disruptions were caused by a technical fault on the aircraft that this was unlikely to be an extraordinary circumstance and airlines would need to compensate passengers.

Jet2 sought a further appeal which has now been refused. We therefore thought you would appreciate a further update and the opportunity to consider if your previous claim may be affected.

On 11 June 2014 the Court of Appeal issued a judgment in the Jet2 v Huzar case which provided clarity on what the definition of extraordinary circumstances means in relation to technical problems. The judgment clarified that the key issue is what caused the technical problem. If the cause was not something out of the ordinary, for example the failure of a component or wear and tear, then it would not be an extraordinary circumstance. However there are some extraordinary circumstances which may lead to a technical fault where the damage was caused by an ‘extraneous third party’, for example damage caused by a bird strike or a hidden manufacturing defect.

Jet2 sought leave to appeal from the Supreme Court. On 31st October 2014 the Supreme Court announced they had decided to refuse Jet2 permission to appeal the ruling. Therefore the Court of Appeal Judgment applies. Further information on ‘extraordinary circumstances’ can be found on our website at the following link;

xxxxxxxxxxxxxccccc

If your compensation claim was for a disrupted flight due to a technical problem with the aircraft then you may wish to raise your claim again with your airline to ask for compensation in light of the Supreme Court decision.

We have a standard letter template on our website which can be downloaded from the following link;

XxxxxxxxxxxX

We have been informed that it may take a minimum of 12 weeks for airlines to respond to your claim.

Please note that there is a six year time limit to take legal action. If you are nearing this time limit, you could consider whether you wish to take the case to a local County Court. If you are considering this, it will be important for you to bear in mind that Court action has to be started; with your claim form being lodged with the court, within 6 years of the date of the flight. The court will not hear claims that have been lodged outside of this period.

We are not able to provide you with legal advice in respect of your claim, but you can get guidance on commencing court proceedings from your local Citizens' Advice Bureau or the Court Service. Please refer to the information provided via the following links:

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Your case will remain closed with the CAA while you seek compensation from your airline. Given the large volumes of cases affected, we regret that we cannot enter into any communication with you while your case is being assessed by the airline.

Yours sincerely,



Tina Dunkin
Consumer Affairs Manager
Markets and Consumers Group
Civil Aviation Authority
CAA House, 45-59 Kingsway, London WC2B 6TE
Telephone: 0207 453 6888

Exodusone

Thank you for taking the time to contact the Directors’ Team for TUI UK & Ireland regarding your Flight Delay Claim.

Firstly I would like to apologise that you have not had a response from use within 14 days as advised. Due to a recent court case in the supreme court, all claims for delays need to be re-submitted to our Flight Delay Claims Team. My colleagues and I will not be dealing with these cases from here on in.

Thomson Airways has now a specialist team responsible for responding to flight delay claims and as such, we’ve passed on your correspondence so that they’re able to review the circumstances surrounding your delay and respond accordingly, they aim to respond as quickly as possible, however, due to thorough investigation and nature of your claim, please allow up to 56 days for a full response. If you’ve made a claim with us previously, you will receive a response within 56 days from your initial contact.

We’ll provide a full response to you in writing and this will outline the outcome of your claim along with any relevant reasoning to this decision.

Thank you in advance for your patience while we take the time to investigate your flight delay claim.
Kind Regards,
Flight Delay Claims Team – on behalf of the Directors’ Office for TUI UK & Ireland


Craig McDermott
Directors Team
After Travel Customer Support
TUI UK & Ireland

NoviceAngel

No, you won't get any help from the CAA,

Follow Vaubans guide, and take them on, any questions just post and we'll help.

Good Luck

Edit - your latest post above is just a standard email sent to everyone- you can give them the 56 days if you're feeling generous but you don't have to. Other airlines have finally started to pay out - not sure what stance Thomsons have taken yet- we'll see

Mark2spark

Legal magpie, would it not be a justifiable claim, to say that the airlines have had many many months, to 'fully investigate' the nature of the claim (ie tech issue or not), and that not doing so was unreasonable?
Should it be going to court I mean.
Just something else to say to a judge is what I'm thinking.

legal_magpie

Mark, I agree with you. I challenge their standpoint that all cases have to re-submitted to their "specialist team" for reconsideration. All cases have already been considered and rejected.

For Thomson to say that they want yet another 56 days after already rejecting the claims is simply their way of saying that they have a huge backlog of cases to clear and can't cope, which I'm sure is true.

If they came clean and admitted this I suspect that people might be more tolerant.

I agree with Novice Angel. I would be more inclined to give them the extra time if Thomson wrote to say that they would be paying the claims but that they need time because of the large backlog. But this is mere stalling tactics and if anyone who gets this letter has already got a case in Court which is stayed I would advise writing to the Court to get the stay lifted.

Here's to insomnia!
JJ

malcolmlowing

Whilst I'm content to wait rather than go to court I do think it is unreasonable that:
1: the CAA condone a 12 week delay in dealing with the cases;
2: Thomsons require claims to be resubmitted;
3: The 'Directors Team' don't want to know.

legal_magpie

1. The CAA are irrelevant. They represent the airlines. They are not an Ombudsman or its equivalent.
2. You should ask them what part of "get stuffed" they don't understand. If you have submitted your claim there is no need for you to submit it again. They hope that you'll not bother so that they can forget about you.
3. Of course not. They want to do things their way for their convenience.
Remember, Thomson chose to handle claims in the way in which they did and having called the tune it's up to them to pay the piper.

batman44

legal_magpie wrote: »

1. The CAA are irrelevant. They represent the airlines. They are not an Ombudsman or its equivalent.
2. You should ask them what part of "get stuffed" they don't understand. If you have submitted your claim there is no need for you to submit it again. They hope that you'll not bother so that they can forget about you.
3. Of course not. They want to do things their way for their convenience.
Remember, Thomson chose to handle claims in the way in which they did and having called the tune it's up to them to pay the piper.

Very well said, could not put it better myself. lol:T