Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

Tyzap

Hmm, interesting to get others views on it.

So, using the BA example (the Virgin one is too complicated), what do we think about the following scenario.

The BA aircraft has an emergency landing caused by negligence, poor maintenance or whatever. The runway is blocked causing further delays to other aircraft. The airfield operator (I presume) then closes the runway.

Other delays are directly attributable to the BA incident and their passengers try to claim 261 compensation as a result.

These other airlines pay compensation to their passengers (cos they're obviously not Jet2).
These airlines then claim it back from the airport operator whom they have contracted to supply landing and take off slots.

The airport operator then reclaims from BA, with whom they have a contract.

I don't see any difference between a company moving steps around to an aircraft or a company suppling airfield facilities such as landing slots. The chain is just extended slightly, which I suspect could be the crux of the matter. Would that still count as third party?

Vauban

Tyzap wrote: »

Hmm, interesting to get others views on it.

So, using the BA example (the Virgin one is too complicated), what do we think about the following scenario.

The BA aircraft has an emergency landing caused by negligence, poor maintenance or whatever. The runway is blocked causing further delays to other aircraft. The airfield operator (I presume) then closes the runway.

Other delays are directly attributable to the BA incident and their passengers try to claim 261 compensation as a result.

These other airlines pay compensation to their passengers (cos they're obviously not Jet2).
These airlines then claim it back from the airport operator whom they have contracted to supply landing and take off slots.

The airport operator then reclaims from BA, with whom they have a contract.

I don't see any difference between a company moving steps around to an aircraft or a company suppling airfield facilities such as landing slots. The chain is just extended slightly, which I suspect could be the crux of the matter. Would that still count as third party?

I think the difference in law (like how would I know?) is that one situation involves damage being done to an aircraft - or a delay otherwise caused - by a third party directly contracted by the airline. The airline has direct responsibility for the actions of its directly contracted parties and is therefore clearly liable under 261/04. The airline remains free to seek compensation from that contracted company for the costs endured.

But in a circumstance whereby the airport is closed - including through the negligent actions of others - then:

a) there is arguably a less immediate contractual relationship between general airport management and the airline's operations (ie the closure of the airport cannot be reasonably seen as an extension of the airline's operational failure, in the way that a luggage truck driver, contracted by the airline to load their plane, who drive his truck into said plane might be);

b) therefore the incident that closes the airport cannot be said in any meaningful way to be within the airline's control, and would be classed as extraordinary circumstances;

Article 13 of the Regulation does not make provision for the transfer of liability to third parties, except in so far as the airline itself is primarily responsible. So for example because eg Monarch were not liable in any way under 261/04 for the closure of Gatwick following the BA plane incident, Monarch's passengers cannot sue BA (as they are not the operating air carrier for their flight) nor Monarch (against who any claim would fail the extraordinary circumstances/control test).

In other words, Article 13 cannot be used by passengers to extend liability to anyone beyond their operating air carrier, who need to be responsible for the circumstances of a delay/cancellation.

Does that make any sense at all?

Tyzap

Thanks Vauban,

I can understand your reasoning and don't disagree.

Some sections of the regulations are unclear, having said that, it's a very difficult job to cover every scenario.

iwant2savemoney

Just a quick question, we were delay by 27 hours and arrived back this morning, have downloaded and filled in / posted in a claim form to Thomson, is it still ok to put a claim in to my travel insurance as well (Total payout by them would be £80).

NoviceAngel

Vauban wrote: »

I think the difference in law (like how would I know?) is that one situation involves damage being done to an aircraft - or a delay otherwise caused - by a third party directly contracted by the airline. The airline has direct responsibility for the actions of its directly contracted parties and is therefore clearly liable under 261/04. The airline remains free to seek compensation from that contracted company for the costs endured.

That is the point that JP makes, in that there is a contract that exists between the airline and the third party that damages the aircraft with the steps..

So taking that point a little further, what happens if there is damage to the aircraft, which subsequently causes a delay, that is caused by contractors that are not involved with that aircraft....

I list the following example:-

A small minor bump, caused by ground staff, be it maintenance, security, cleaning, causing damage to the aircraft, but the maintenance, security, cleaning staff have no contract with BA, they are working for another airline carrier.

Or even damage caused by a minor collision between one stationary aircraft and the person driving that little pull back tractor that isn't looking where he is going, you could have a situation where the passengers on the slowly moving flight are awarded compensation under article 13 but the passengers on the stationary plane still waiting to depart are not compensated because the airline does not have a contract with the aircraft company that caused the damage or even the company paid to tow back the other aircraft from it's parked position....

Is that the point you were making in your answer (a) Vauban ? you just said it all in a very intellectual way that takes my brain time to catch up with.

How bizarre the regs are

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

legal_magpie

iwant2savemoney wrote: »

Just a quick question, we were delay by 27 hours and arrived back this morning, have downloaded and filled in / posted in a claim form to Thomson, is it still ok to put a claim in to my travel insurance as well (Total payout by them would be £80).

Yes. The two claims are entirely separate.

MITZIMELONS

Hello, I am new on here please go gently

We started a claim for flight delay compensation with Thomson over a year ago for a 5 and a half hour delay from Ibiza back into Birmingham in June 2009. Firstly, we were fobbed off with the 2 year rule, then were told it was on hold pending the court hearings in October. Following the ruling I contacted them again in November to be ignored until today when we receive a letter saying that the delay was due to thunderstorms in Birmingham ?!? We were flying INTO Birmingham and our delay was due to the flight coming FROM Birmingham being delayed by 98 minutes and the pilot would have gone over his 'flying time' had he taken our flight. The plane arrived at 11.03pm and we were due to depart at 10.25pm (so just a small delay - how long would it take to turn a plane around ?) We then had to wait for replacement pilot to be flown in from Majorca , hence the 5 and a half hour delay for us. Can they use 'extraordinary circumstances' excuse for this given that they had from 5.55pm to organise another pilot as they knew at that time there was going to be a delay ?

Thank you

Vauban

No, in short. Weather is only "extraordinary" if it affects you flight directly. Read my guide.

You have four months to start legal action before your claim is time-barred.

MITZIMELONS

Thank you, thats what I though. I will write to them again (NBA letter ?) and give them a cut off time in which to reply / pay compensation before I take it further. Would it be best to go to the small claims court ourselves or to use someone to do it for us (Bott ?)

kazzamoon

Hi All, never been on here before to ask a question but read loads of advice. So looking for advice now. I have just been reading about flight compensation and immediately thought of a Thomson flight to turkey in 2010 where our departure was delayed 5 hours. With a 3 and 4 year old this sticks in my mind. Based on compensation calculators we could get a sum of money. However other than my bank statements I cannot locate any proof of the flight. Emails have been lost and I never kept boarding cards. Am I able to do anything? Is it worth trying? Or should I 'not go there'?