Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

NoviceAngel

Vauban wrote: »

.....I'm afraid I agree with the Angel...

There's no need to be afraid PtLV I wont hurt you, I'm just an :A

Tyzap

Vauban wrote: »

As a digression, there is an interesting point in all this though. Do you remember when the BA aircraft had an emergency landing in London last year, due to maintenance errors. In that situation, most passengers flying with other airlines couldn't claim for compensation from their airlines for the reasons I and Angel give above. But passengers with BA could, because a) they could argue the cause of the incident was in BA's control, and b) BA were the operating aircraft for their flight. And I saw it reported that BA did indeed pay out for these passengers accordingly.

Isn't this type of incident covered article 13 of the regs?
It's not as clear in the case of the op above but this part of the regulations seems to suggest to me, as a layman with no legal knowledge, that you claim from the airline and they can re claim it back from, in this case, BA.


Article 13
Right of redress
In cases where an operating air carrier pays compensation or meets the other obligations incumbent on it under this Regu- lation, no provision of this Regulation may be interpreted as restricting its right to seek compensation from any person, including third parties, in accordance with the law applicable. In particular, this Regulation shall in no way restrict the oper- ating air carrier's right to seek reimbursement from a tour operator or another person with whom the operating air carrier has a contract. Similarly, no provision of this Regulation may be interpreted as restricting the right of a tour operator or a third party, other than a passenger, with whom an operating air carrier has a contract, to seek reimbursement or compensa- tion from the operating air carrier in accordance with applic- able relevant laws.

NoviceAngel

Tyzap wrote: »

Isn't this type of incident covered article 13 of the regs?
It's not as clear in the case of the op above but this part of the regulations seems to suggest to me, as a layman with no legal knowledge, that you claim from the airline and they can re claim it back from, in this case, BA.

Interesting thought there Tyzap, I know where your coming from and I've read article 13 before, I've seen it mentioned where the delay was caused by a third party then yes you're covered under article 13.

That said, I still think it depends on the nature of the delay, so EC's still count, so if an EC (air traffic control) is caused by a third party then unfortunately no claim, like you no legal background that's just my very uneducated take on it.

Cheers

NoviceAngel

JPears

yes but the other airline had no contract with Virgin, so aricle 13 doesn't apply. Yes Vigin caused the delays, but without any contract to other airlines. ATC/airport shut the runway.

NoviceAngel

JPears wrote: »

yes but the other airline had no contract with Virgin, so aricle 13 doesn't apply. Yes Vigin caused the delays, but without any contract to other airlines. ATC/airport shut the runway.

ahhh, so there has to be a contract between the parties for article 13 to apply, didn't know that we do now Tyzap

Thanks JP,

NoviceAngel

JPears

It says it in the paragraph Tyzap posted up...

SimonAddison

Mark2spark - keen to know what you mean by 'report them for lying'.... do you think Thomson are lying to me in this instance?

razorsedge

JPears wrote: »

It says it in the paragraph Tyzap posted up...

I remember having this discussion with the much missed Centipede100 about a year ago. Unfortunatly most of his posts have been removed, including the reply he gave to my post:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/64608561#Comment_64608561

His reply was basically the same as the conclusions in the posts just above this one - that Article 13 does not apply.

Vauban

razorsedge wrote: »

I remember having this discussion with the much missed Centipede100 about a year ago ...

He is much missed - almost everything I know about this strange subject I learned from him. But I suspect he keeps an eye on us all from time to time ...

NoviceAngel

JPears wrote: »

It says it in the paragraph Tyzap posted up...

hmmmm, you assume I actually read it, let alone understand it :cool:

Centipede100 very sadly missed, he could have been on Mastermind specialist subject EC261/2004.