Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

NoviceAngel

Vauban wrote: »

Tricky one this, then. Consequential losses are not of course included in the 261/04 regime. But you can't sue Tui for 261/04 compensation, as only the operating airline is liable. Would you need to name both as defendants, to cover both elements I wonder?

I would say, the airline itself for compo under EC261, and TUI for consequential loss, don't think you would be successful listing both companies, I would have thought you could only sue TUI for consequential loss, although personally with the trouble getting airlines to pay under EC261, I'm not sure a further claim for consequential loss would go down well in a Court environment.

bigmama1

WinnyWoo wrote: »

Our flight was Tenerife (TFS) to Norwich on 21/12/2010. There were many weather delays on that day, but ours was technical. They put us up in a hotel and fed us, but misinformation and unhelpfulness when we finally landed at Luton (instead of Norwich) around midnight, and were left at a closed Norwich airport at 3am, encouraged me to claim.

Thanks to MSE for the template letters and keeping us updated on the appeals. It's the one email I always look forward to reading.

Thanks for the info. Unfortunately that wasn't our flight. Good luck to you anyway.

SimonAddison

Hello everyone


I am in an ongoing battle with Thomson about my flight delay compensation, and would be grateful for people's advice.


I have read Vauban's excellent guide and the next stage for me is to write a Notice Before Action.


But here's the thing.


Thomson are arguing that my "flight was delayed due to manufacturing defects" and that the European Commission says that "discovery of a hidden manufacturing defect by the air carrier (this is often noted by unusual failure of the same aircraft part)" would be considered exceptional circumstances."


They continue: "An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the delay is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken".


So I guess my question is: Are Thomson correct? Or is this another example of being fobbed off? I am up for the challenge of pursuing this and have read up on the next steps, but am unsure about the specific legal point which this seems to hang on.


Any advice gratefully received!


Thanks
Simon

legal_magpie

You are being fobbed off. If what Thomson say is right they have a claim against the manufacturers and will have to disclose all correspondence with them. Get on and sue

Mark2spark

Vauban wrote: »

In my view (not a lawyer) you have to be careful about Finnair, as it relates to denied boarding - not delay. (And the legal point was about inequitable treatment between those allowed to board a plane, and those not.)

The better argument relates to the Wallentin judgement, IMHO, and particularly the"Third Question".

On the basis that the airlines barrister will say absolutely anything in court - even entirely unrelated cases - in an attempt to bamboozle the judge and get the win, IMO it simply does not hurt to have yet one more case - with the appropriate bits highlighted (and obviously not quoting anything regarding denied boarding) - that appears to back up the stance that previous examples of EC do not count to the actual flight concerned.

NoviceAngel

SimonAddison wrote: »

Hello everyone


I am in an ongoing battle with Thomson about my flight delay compensation, and would be grateful for people's advice.


I have read Vauban's excellent guide and the next stage for me is to write a Notice Before Action.

Hi Simon,

Fantastic and welcome to the forum, all sounds like you have everything in hand so far.....

SimonAddison wrote: »

But here's the thing.


Thomson are arguing that my "flight was delayed due to manufacturing defects" and that the European Commission says that "discovery of a hidden manufacturing defect by the air carrier (this is often noted by unusual failure of the same aircraft part)" would be considered exceptional circumstances."


They continue: "An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the delay is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken".


So I guess my question is: Are Thomson correct? Or is this another example of being fobbed off? I am up for the challenge of pursuing this and have read up on the next steps, but am unsure about the specific legal point which this seems to hang on.


Any advice gratefully received!


Thanks
Simon

Well, well well this one again, Simon ~ Thomson are perfectly correct in that, IF the delay was caused by a hidden manufacturing defect then they would not be liable to pay compensation under EC261/2004.

It's a very common excuse used by the airlines to avoid paying out compensation, my advice simple - Issue the NBA, wait for the airline to give you their legal defence, then pop back in here and re-post, we'll all guide you thorough the minefield.

Good Luck

NoviceAngel

Mark2spark

SimonAddison wrote: »

Thomson are arguing that my "flight was delayed due to manufacturing defects"...

You write one more time and request a copy of the Manufacturers letter stating that the part had a defect and that the plane *type* (in other words, *all* A320 airbus planes are being recalled) was being recalled to correct this defect.
Failing the supply of this documentary evidence you will proceed to court without further notice within 14 days. (unless they pay up)

Get used to being lied to Simon and you'll be half way there.

NoviceAngel

Mark2spark wrote: »

You write one more time and request a copy of the Manufacturers letter stating that the part had a defect..............

My golly gosh, you're actually giving them a chance Mark2spark? I'd have Thomson in the dock by now , To be serious yes, do what our Mark2spark says, they may even cough up once they know that they're not dealing with a push over!

SimonAddison

thanks guys, that's very useful.

NBA now issued and I will report back!

MrsChewy

Update on Claim,
Along with lots of others received a cheque from Thomson in December for my 2 claims. Went back asked for full payment of court cost and have finally received a cheque for another £300.00 which I have now accepted in full and final settlement total claims £4200. Interesting bit is that during this time I asked for judgement on the 2 claims which I was given. However, the claims were dealt with by 2 different judges one gave me 8% interest from the date of the flight and the other 8% but only from the date of the claim not the date of the flight. When I challenged this the judge said at the date of the flight the law as interpreted did not allow for interest!!