Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

Vauban

MITZIMELONS wrote: »

We have received notification today from the court informing us that Thomson are intending to file a defence......is this normal procedure by them ?

Our claim is for a 5 and a half hour delay as result of a 'knock on' due to weather on the previous flight and the pilot running out of his 'flying hours'. Therefore they had to source another pilot to fly our plane home. We have got this in writing from Thomson, although only recently and I have not forwarded this to the court - should I do this ?

Any comments would be much appreciated as usual - I am fast losing the will to carry on

It's entirely normal to hear that the airline intend to file a defence - they always do this. At a basic level it buys them time.

Weather is an extraordinary circumstance only if it directly affects your flight - the Regulations are clear on this point. But - and this is going to sound a bit harsh, but it's not meant to be - if you didn't know this already what an earth are you doing starting legal proceedings? You need to be sharp and across your brief if you want to face these bullies down.

The law is on your side. You are being mugged off. Are you ready to take a stand and force the airlines to respect your rights, as thousands of others have done before you? If so, get fighting - there's plenty of help on here.

And if not, withdraw your claim and walk away. There's no shame in deciding that you have other priorities in life. The airlines won't make it easy.

Vauban

AngieM2 wrote: »

Yes, exactly the same reason Mitzi and I'm also loosing the will...and I'm only on my third letter, hence why I'm considering using NWNF (but seeing as I'm tight, I want to keep all of the money for myself )

You're losing the will to live and are only on your third letter? Blimey. The games have not even started yet ...

MITZIMELONS

Thank you Vauban We are going to carry on with the fight - its not just about the money now, its the principle

NoviceAngel

MITZIMELONS wrote: »

We have received notification today from the court informing us that Thomson are intending to file a defence......is this normal procedure by them ?

As Vauban has already pointed out, it can buy them ooodles of time, in my case a couple of years, while various appeals and references to the EU tried to be made. It's all part of the fun....

You either give up, which is of course, what they want you to do, or have a drink of your choice, and play the game too, If you take the advice from us in here, then you've got a good chance of success, you certainly don't need a NWNF against THOMSON!

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

DorisTrousers

Hi Guys,

I know you get asked so many of the same questions again and again, so forgive me in advance.....

Received a letter, dated 2nd March, on 4th April (?). I have posted on this before, but thought I would give them another go in light of some of the success stories, and also the fact that it will cost £205 to instigate court proceedings. Briefly, my flight from Orlando to Manchester was delayed by over 24 hours. this was due to the Dreamliner flying from the Dominican to Manchester was diverted to the Azores. The Manchester to Orlando subsequent flight was delayed by 9 hours or so, and when it landed the crew were out of hours, hence the long delay. it was an alternative, albeit inferior, aircraft, in a 767, so that part of their letter is true. Anyway, this letter reads, in part and verbatim

"In light of the Supreme Court ruling on 31st October 2014 we have investigated the claim for flight TOM123 and our delay handling logs show that the flight was delayed due to your aircraft having to divert earlier as a result of low oil pressure in one of the engines. Alternative aircraft was sourced to minimise the overall length of the delay. Any engine issue is classed as manufacturing fault. Therefore, the root cause of the delay still sits within extra ordinary circumstances."

Later on

"Discovery of a hidden manufacturing defect by the air carrier (this is often noted by unusual failure of the same aircraft part)"

Signed by Fatah Ali, Customer Support Advisor

Apart from the appalling grammar and punctuation...

I read this forum avidly, and to my eye this looks like a fob off, but it is human nature to doubt your own sanity sometimes, and I can't help worrying if I have got this wrong, so a few questions if I may?

When I wrote to them last time (they sent me two letters of rejection, both with the phrase "knock on effect" in them) I also e mailed an NBA. Do I have to send another one (they claimed to have no record of the last, but I have a copy)?

Has anyone else had success on TOM 123 from Sanford to Manchester August 5th (took off on the 6th), as that would clearly help?

Lastly, there were 7 of us but I am the lead passenger. Me, my spouse, our two children, mother in law and nephew and niece. What details should I be putting on the form for the court (if you good people feel I have a case)? I have researched the exchange rate on the day, which would be better for me, and will be putting 8% interest down. Is/are there standard phrases to use? How many copies do I need to send in, one for the court and one for them or just the one?

I am happy to take them on, although the £205 is a lot for me to find, and in truth I would prefer not to have to go legal. I am sure I will be back on in the future with more daft questions, such as should I be asking them for proof of what Boeing have done to resolve this manufacturing issue?

Thanks for listening, your patience is much appreciated.

NoviceAngel

DorisTrousers wrote: »

"In light of the Supreme Court ruling on 31st October 2014 we have investigated the claim for flight TOM123 and our delay handling logs show that the flight was delayed due to your aircraft having to divert earlier as a result of low oil pressure in one of the engines. Alternative aircraft was sourced to minimise the overall length of the delay. Any engine issue is classed as manufacturing fault. Therefore, the root cause of the delay still sits within extra ordinary circumstances."

Later on

"Discovery of a hidden manufacturing defect by the air carrier (this is often noted by unusual failure of the same aircraft part)"

That's total hogwash, it was a fault plain and simple, it definitely is NOT a hidden manufacturing defect!

Take them to Court you have a case, all your other questions can be answered by reading Vaubans excellent guide.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

AngieM2

Vauban wrote: »

You're losing the will to live and are only on your third letter? Blimey. The games have not even started yet ...

ah yes, the games...haven't they just....I've received an email notification today from Thomson saying they are sorry I don't agree with their findings but that they are perfectly right and its tough really. I've just fired an email back saying, don't worry yourself further.....your Chairman will be receiving a NBA in the next 48 hours.


PS Do I address the NBA to the Chairman of Thomson at the Luton address or should I google his personal details and send it addressed to him by name?

NoviceAngel

DorisTrousers wrote: »

I am happy to take them on, although the £205 is a lot for me to find, and in truth I would prefer not to have to go legal. .

Just to add, you will have to go legal, if you can't afford the fee, then you could go to a NWNF Solicitor, hand the whole lot over. Although if you do want to go DIY, then you will get oodles of help in here!

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

NoviceAngel

AngieM2 wrote: »

PS Do I address the NBA to the Chairman of Thomson at the Luton address or should I google his personal details and send it addressed to him by name?

Just the registered Company address will be fine, they won't respond to it anyway, it's just the very first part of the process, it doesn't have to be addressed to the Chairman, just Sir/Madam at customer services is good enough.

Good Luck

NoviceAngel

AngieM2

Please don't think I'm being stupid here, I have read the guide and the stuff on line. When claiming for a family of 4, do I need to go through the N1 paper court process rather than MCOL? I'm guessing a family is not classed as a 'single claimant'