Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

legal_magpie

Sue them, David and refer to the CEDR ruling. Also write to CAA telling them that Thomson are failure to comply with CEDR. They know already but the more examples they get the better

alisonmaui

Hi David,
The below is for guidance only from my personal experience - it worked for me but there is further guidance in the Civil Procedure Rules on how to start a small claim. There is separate guidance from the court on completing a claim online.

You should send a letter before action (there is one on Vauban's legal guide) saying that if you do not receive payment in 14 days you will issue proceedings and they will be responsible for the further costs incurred. If they don't pay, issue proceedings and claim the extra costs from them. It may sound daunting but it is worth it in the end and you have the backing of the arbitration decision.

You can do it online if it is just for you or you will need to file it by post if, for example, you are a family. I did it by post as we were claiming on behalf of children also.

If you are claiming on behalf of children you need to put something like this on the claim form (Court Form N1):-
In the County Court Money Claims Centre (all claims start here)

Claimants names and addresses including postcode
Mrs XX XX (1) Address
Mr XX XX (2) Address
Miss XX XX (Date of Birth) (a minor by her mother (or father etc) and litigation friend XX) (3) Address
(the Court insisted on me specifying the address for each Claimant even though it was the same address)

Defendants name and address including postcode
Thomson Airways Ltd
Wigmore House, Wigmore Lane
Luton
LU2 9TN

Brief details of claim
Compensation for a flight delay by virtue or EU Regulation 261/2004 was The Claimants' flight from XX to XX (Flight Number) on DATE was delayed by XXX

You also need to fill in Court Form N235 (available on the court website) for each child you are acting for (Certificate of Suitability of Litigation Friend)

You also need to attach a Particulars of Claim. An example is below.

IN THE COUNTY COURT MONEY CLAIMS CENTRE
Case No.
BETWEEN
Mrs XXX (1)
Mr XXX (2)
Miss XXX (DOB) (a minor by her mother and
litigation friend XXX) (3)
Miss XXX (DOB) (a minor by her mother and
litigation friend XXX) (4)
Claimants
AND

Thomson Airways Limited
Defendant


PARTICULARS OF CLAIM


1. On Tuesday 21st July 2015, the Claimants arrived at Manchester Airport at approximately 8.45am to check in for the Defendant’s flight TOM 122 to Orlando Sanford Airport.

2. A copy of the Claimants’ invoice is at Document 1. This was the first time the Claimants had been on holiday to America as a family and had saved hard to be able to afford the holiday. For the first week of the holiday, the Claimants were staying at Disney World in Florida. Expecting to arrive at the resort at approximately 17:30 (local time), the Claimants booked “fast passes” so they could go to the Magic Theme Park on arrival and use their fast passes to go on the rides on the first day of their holiday.

3. On arrival at the airport, the Claimant were advised that their flight had been delayed for three hours. The reason given by the check in staff (both at the counter and waiting at the front of the check in queuing rope) was that the delay was due to “Scheduled Maintenance”.

4. The flight departed from Manchester Airport at approximately 14:30 hours and landed at approximately 18:20 hours (local time at Orlando Sanford airport). The First Claimant noted that the plane had landed 2 hours and 55 minutes late and commented to her family that they could not claim compensation for the delay as that was her mistaken belief at the time.

5. The Claimants’ recollection of the flight landing time accords with the record of the flight at flightaware.com which recorded the landing time as 18:17 (Document 2) and the landing time confirmed by the Defendant in correspondence.

6. On 20 March 2016, the Claimants became aware of the case of Germanwings GmbH v Ronny Henning (C-452/13) (Document 3) which clarified the relevant time when calculating the total delay. The case made clear that the relevant time is the time at which at least one of the doors of the aircraft opened.

7. The Claimants submit that the doors to the plane did not open until 18:30 at the earliest. The Claimants had a fast pass ride booked for “Under the Sea – the Journey of the Little Mermaid” which expired at 18:30 and the Claimants were still sat in their seats waiting for the plane to arrive at the terminal at that time. The first Claimant commented to her family, whilst sat in her seat with the seatbelt on and the plane still moving towards the terminal, that the fast pass had expired.

8. On 20th March 2016, the First Claimant wrote to the Defendant setting out the details of their claim. A copy of the correspondence between the parties is at Documentt 4.

9. The Defendant has responded twice but both replies fail to address all the issues raised and do not consider the case of Germanwings GmbH v Ronny Henning (C-452/13). The Defendant has maintained that the flight “arrived” at 18:20 local time and was therefore 2 hours and 55 minutes late. The Claimants submit that this was the time the flight landed on the runway and not the time that the doors to the plane were opened as evidenced above and by the attached documents.

10. The Defendant has consistently failed to provide a substantive response or respond to the Claimants’ correspondence with anything other than a standard template letter which does not address the issues raised.

11. The Claimants submitted a complaint to the Civil Aviation Authority (“CAA”) on 4th May 2016. On 21st October 2016 the CAA wrote to the Claimants to say that the Defendant had not responded to their correspondence and they were unable to assist further. The CAA did indicate however that, on the information available, compensation was payable in this case. A copy of the letter from the CAA is at Document 5.

12. The flight was delayed by at least 3 hours and 5 minutes

13. The Claimants are entitled to 300 Euros per person which equates to a total of £1,070. The First Claimant also claims for miscellaneous expenses of £50 for preparing the claim and incurring postal costs.

AND THE CLAIMANTS CLAIM

14. The sum of £1,120.00.


Statement of Truth
I believe that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true.
Dated this 21st October 2016
To the Court and
to the Defendant

..........................
XXX
First Claimant
of (address)
..........................
XXX
Second Claimant
of (address)


..........................
Miss XXXr (a minor by her mother and litigation friend XX)

Third Claimant


..........................
Miss XXX (a minor by her mother and litigation friend XXX)

Fourth Claimant
of (address)

legal_magpie

Very good pleading although it is neither necessary nor desirable to include documents or exhibits when starting a claim. Certainly not reports of cases. Too many documents at the early stage make the court file unwieldy.
You can also claim interest on the money.

alisonmaui

legal_magpie wrote: »

Very good pleading although it is neither necessary nor desirable to include documents or exhibits when starting a claim. Certainly not reports of cases. Too many documents at the early stage make the court file unwieldy.
You can also claim interest on the money.

I included the documents because I wanted a build a case from the start for unreasonable conduct and in the hope that early disclosure would prompt Thomson to settle. Interest is not recoverable as compensation under Article 7 of the Regulation does not constitute "the recovery of a debt or damages" as defined in Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984. The Judge confirmed interest was not recoverable at my hearing.

Vauban

alisonmaui wrote: »

I included the documents because I wanted a build a case from the start for unreasonable conduct and in the hope that early disclosure would prompt Thomson to settle. Interest is not recoverable as compensation under Article 7 of the Regulation does not constitute "the recovery of a debt or damages" as defined in Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984. The Judge confirmed interest was not recoverable at my hearing.

That's one a view that some judges have - others disagree. I got interest at 8% on my claim.

legal_magpie

I certainly disagree. I also recovered interest under the CCA but it is necessary to plead it.

liljodes

Morning All,

This is my first post. I just wanted some advise as I had a 7 hour delay back in April from Malta to Gatwick.
I used the Resolver Tool the following day (after a bit of sleep) and I have not had one response from Thomson yet. I am able to escalate my claim through to customer services in 2 days according to Resolver, but I have sent 3 emails asking them to acknowledge my claim but nothing. Is this normal? Has anyone had experience with using Resolver with Thomson?

Thanks all in advance,

Jodie

JPears

You could try escalation but after 2 months will that make any difference?
Download Vauban's excellent guide, read, send your claim directly to Thomson. If no reply then issue your NBA and prepare your small claims papers.
Assuming your delay was not an EC?

liljodes

I'm sorry, what does EC mean?

JPears

Extraordinary Circumstances. You need to read Vauban's guide (google) if you are going to take this any further.