Flight delay and cancellation compensation, BA ONLY

111KAB

NO NO NO - do not go to the CAA! I will edit this post in a while with Vauban's recent post re the CAA. They are worse than useless. By all means convert my note re technical problems into worthwhile English and tackle BA once more - you may thereafter have to commence court action so make sure you read the FAQ's.

111KAB

So, over 15 months after I first wrote to the CAA for help and a month after I thrashed Monarch in court, the CAA wrote to me today to say that my delay was " extraordinary": no it wasn't; and the Judge didn't think so either.
These guys are a waste of time - they're simply the airlines' friend. Ignore them is my recommendation!
See today's correspondence below:
_____________________________________________
From: Passenger Complaints
Sent: 16 April 2014 16:15
To: xxx
Subject: Monarch Airlines Your ref 155-506
16 April 2014
Our Ref: 155-506
Dear Vauban
RE: Monarch Airlines
Thank you for your patience with us while we investigated your complaint about the disruption of flight ZB249 on 8 April 2012. During our investigation we received information from Monarch Airlines about the flight concerned, which we have considered in the light of new guidelines clarifying the “extraordinary circumstances” exception of EC 261/2004.
After considering all the information provided to us from the airline, it is our view that the disruption of your flight is of a type which means that the airline does not need to pay compensation. It appears from this information that the disruption was beyond the control of the airline and could not have been avoided. It is our view therefore that this disruption falls under the ‘extraordinary circumstances’ exception of EC261/2004 and as such, we believe that you are not entitled to compensation in this case.
Unfortunately we are unable to take your case any further. Our opinion that, in this case, the disruption was due to extraordinary circumstances is based on the information provided to us. Please be aware that this is not a legally binding opinion and only relates to the flight concerned.
Please note that we will not re-open your case to re-consider any aspect of our opinion. There is no appeal process within the CAA for this issue. We will also not enter into further correspondence on this.
It is, of course, still open to you to issue a claim in the Court but, in our opinion, we believe that the airline has a strong case not to pay compensation. As such, it is entirely up to you to decide whether you wish to pursue this further. You can find information on how to take court action athttps://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/overview.
Yours sincerely
Yolande Okoh
Consumer Affairs Officer
Markets and Consumers Group
Civil Aviation Authority
CAA House, 45-59 Kingsway, London WC2B 6TE
Telephone: 0207 453 6888
www.caa.co.uk

---

Original message

---

From: Passenger Complaints
Date:16/04/2014 16:45 (GMT+00:00)
To: "'xxx'"
Subject: Monarch Airlines - Your ref 155-506
16 April 2014
Our Ref: 155-506
Dear Vauban
RE: Monarch Airlines
Further to my previous correspondence regarding your claim, Monarch have been in touch to advise that your claim has now been settled following court action.
Our assessment of your case was based on the information provided to us, however as the claim has been settled directly by the airline, we will close your file.
Yours sincerely
Yolande Okoh
Consumer Affairs Officer
Markets and Consumers Group

---

Dear Ms Okoh,
Thank you for your email.
I am uncertain as to which I should be most disappointed by: the fact that it has taken you some 15 months to come to this underwhelming conclusion, or that its central assessment is demonstrably flawed.
You say that "in our opinion, we believe that the airline has a strong case not to pay compensation". It seems to me inconceivable that any fair application of the Wallentin test could possibly reach this conclusion. And indeed when the facts were presented to District Judge Stewart at Winchester County Court the learned Judge took a very different view to you. I won my case, with interest and costs.
In the absence of any compelling explanation for this "extraordinary" conclusion, I hope you will forgive those who assess that, far from providing an objective service to passengers to ensure that their legal rights are respected by the airlines, the CAA is colluding in a systematic attempt by airlines to deprive passengers of their compensation.
You will be aware that the Huzar case is to be heard at the Court of Appeal next month. If the the judgement is upheld it will render the so-called "NEB list" redundant in law and expose whatever criteria the CAA has been using to make these determinations as fallacious. In these circumstances will the CAA commit to reviewing those cases where it is shown to have applied an incorrect interpretation of the law when determining the presence of "extraordinary circumstances"? I shall certainly be pressing Parliament and the press to ask some serious questions of you.
Yours sincerely,
The Prof

David_e

Donny_fan wrote: »

We have received a response from BA, but does how do I know if the faulty seal had been maintained properly? Do we pursue this asking for a copy of the service log for example? Also, this time they make no mention of a safety issue!?

These are my thoughts:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...postcount=4238


As 111KAB says, don't get into a technical discussion; there's no need and they probably know more about it than you!

JPears

Lord Prof V, I think your reply to the CAA was quite restrained :rotfl:
Way to soft. I note the simple language used, maybe someone at CAA might actually understand, the reg 261/2004 is being far too complex an issue to comprehend.....

Vauban

JPears wrote: »

Lord Prof V, I think your reply to the CAA was quite restrained :rotfl:
Way to soft. I note the simple language used, maybe someone at CAA might actually understand, the reg 261/2004 is being far too complex an issue to comprehend.....

Perhaps. But I am nothing if not diplomatic.

Given Monarch were unable to provide any evidence to the court about either the age of the windscreen, the state of the windscreen during its last maintenance check, the reasons for its failure or the efforts if took to find an alternative plane - HOW COULD THE CAA CONCLUDE THAT COMPENSATION WASN'T DUE? On what basis did they consider my claim? Of course, they won't share any of that. Their lack of transparency, and their partisan application of the law, is simply outrageous.

I really hope someone takes them to court ...

All4nh

kimalicious wrote: »

Hi!

I have contacted BA directly about a flight I took from London to Mumbai that was delayed by 4.5hrs. This is there response;


Thank you for writing back to us. I am sorry that you are unhappy with our previous response. I am concerned that you feel that we did not take your complaint seriously enough, and you wish to escalate your complaint further to our senior manager. I am pleased to reply to you in this matter.

I have reviewed your claim for compensation and as previously advised the flight BA0199 on 07 February 2014 was delayed due to an unexpected flight safety shortcoming, which prevented the aircraft operating as scheduled.
During the final maintenance checks, we noticed fumes in the cabin, which led to an aircraft change and further there was an airport system failure, which extended the delay. This caused a flight safety shortcoming that had to be assessed by our engineering team.

Article 5.3 of the EU Regulation 261/2004 states that a carrier is not obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the delay or cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. In Recital 14 and 15 of EU Regulation 261/2004, extraordinary circumstances include weather, strike and the impact of an air traffic management decision which gives rise to a long delay. I regret, therefore you are not entitled to compensation under the EU Regulation for your delayed flight.

I realise that this will be disappointing for you but I hope this information will enable you to understand our decision.

Best regards
Rohit Ranka
EU Compensation Claims
Your case reference is:12069224


Does anyone know if I can take it further?

Thanks!

Hi Kimalicious and other interested parties

I also submitted a claim to BA regarding the 4.5 hour delay on Flight BA199, LHR to BOM, on 7th February 2014. Within my claim I included a request for re-imbursement of the cost of the tickets for an onward journey, booked through BA with their partner airline, Air India. Having missed the connection the idea of being put up in hotel overnight and then sit around Mumbai airport from 5 o’clock in the morning until they eventually got us on a flight the following day was not acceptable due to onward travel plans.

My response from BA was similar to yours; however the wording indicated that there was a double delay, firstly because of the fumes found in the cabin and then a further delay because of the airport system failure. At the time I was personally told that the problem was that the replacement aircraft was having computer difficulty in synchronising with the LHR tower.

Regarding the fumes they have stated that this had to be assessed by the engineering team. If the engineers had to get involved it would suggest that the problem arose from a technical issue such as the failure of a part. If my assumption is correct then this excuse would not be covered by point 27 of the “Draft list of extraordinary circumstances following the National Enforcement Bodies (NEB) meeting held on 12 April 2013”

It would seem to me that “fumes” are now going to be the new “get-out” for BA – or am I just am I just being cynical!

Regarding the failure of the airport systems – my research of open sources has failed to find any mention of such an event happening on 7th February. I am sure that any failures would have been all over the media (cynical again). If the airport systems failed it would have affected more than just flight BA199, and other flights were departing on time from adjacent gates. I personally intend to go back to BA, but before I do I have made a request to the LHR Authorities under the Freedom of Information Act to disclose details of any systems failures that could have affected the departure of Flight BA199.

The question regarding the onward flight tickets wasn’t even addressed.

It appears to me that with this particular flight BA have told staff to send out a standard reply and are not looking at each case individually. They are fobbing us off!!!!!

Personally I would not be accepting the reply from BA that you received.

Keep fighting for the little person !

All4nh

By The way I am a newbie who doesn'y usually use forums but I am so incensed by BA's attitude.............

stewartmnd

Hi everyone I am new to this so please be patient.
I received this as a second response after an initial refusal on the grounds of an unexpected technical fault.

I have reviewed the details of your claim for flight BA2957 on 26 March 2014. I am afraid your claim has once again been refused.

During our final safety checks, we noticed a fault with the thrust reverser system of the aircraft. This caused a flight safety shortcoming that had to be assessed by our engineering team. The thrust reverser system of the aircraft had been maintained in accordance with the manufacturers guidelines and was not scheduled for maintenance or replacement. This constitutes as an extraordinary circumstance and prevented the aircraft from operating as scheduled.

I do not doubt the inconvenience this caused you. It must have been frustrating. However, under EU legislation and as per CAA guidelines concerning extraordinary circumstances, British Airways is not liable for a compensation payment in this situation. I am sorry to disappoint you.

Article 5.3 of the EU Regulation 261/2004 states that a carrier is not obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the delay or cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. I regret, therefore you are not entitled to compensation under the EU Regulation for your cancelled flight.

I realise that this will be disappointing for you but I hope this information will enable you to understand our decision.

I have two questions
1 is this a typical "excuse" response?
2 Do I have a leg to stand on with regards to a compensation claim?

Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated as this is the very first time I've had to deal with an airline.

whitegoods_engineer

I think the letter explains it all clearly so no to both questions!

Caz3121

you would be better having a read of the British Airways delay thread, start with the FAQs on the first page