Flight delay and cancellation compensation, BA ONLY

111KAB

I am FIRMLY of the opinion that whitegoods_engineer is not fully aware of the law (EU 261/2004) in this respect and my response would be that the letter is a load of waffle and your answer is a YES to both questions however as Caz rightfully says you should be posting on the BA thread.

stewartmnd

Thanks for your replies as I said new to forums, and I will now post in the BA thread, so do I now delete this, so not got a clue on forum etiquette, oooppppssss

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.

111KAB

stewartmnd - do not get bogged down in the technicalities of thrust reversers - yours was a technical problem with a plane which can be likened to another common machine - your car. A plane is more complex than a car however both have technical problems which are common place hence the reason we have a hard shoulder on our motorways - planes break down (go tech) as cars do so quite ordinary and definitely not extraordinary. You have more than a leg to stand on, possibly two, but you will need them to get to court so as to take action against BA. Hopefully before then they will admit to their mistake/waffle and pay your due compensation.

stewartmnd

111KAB wrote: »

stewartmnd - do not get bogged down in the technicalities of thrust reversers - yours was a technical problem with a plane which can be likened to another common machine - your car. A plane is more complex than a car however both have technical problems which are common place hence the reason we have a hard shoulder on our motorways - planes break down (go tech) as cars do so quite ordinary and definitely not extraordinary. You have more than a leg to stand on, possibly two, but you will need them to get to court so as to take action against BA. Hopefully before then they will admit to their mistake/waffle and pay your due compensation.

Thank you for your response and reassurance that I am being fed waffle from BA, and I thank you for your time. I do have another question do I now respond to BA with:

Quote: from another post
Article 5[Cancellation]
5(3). An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken

must be interpreted as meaning that a technical problem in an aircraft which leads to the cancellation of a flight is not covered by the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ within the meaning of that provision, unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control. The Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, concluded in Montreal on 28 May 1999, is not decisive for the interpretation of the grounds of exemption under Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004.

2.The frequency of the technical problems experienced by an air carrier is not in itself a factor from which the presence or absence of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 can be concluded.

3.The fact that an air carrier has complied with the minimum rules on maintenance of an aircraft cannot in itself suffice to establish that that carrier has taken ‘all reasonable measures’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 and, therefore, to relieve that carrier of its obligation to pay compensation provided for by Articles 5(1)(c) and 7(1) of that regulation.

or do I go straight down the small claims route? This issue has so many grey areas I'm lost and bogged down.

111KAB

stewartmnd - given that the Huzar appeal is only 5 weeks away I would suggest waiting to see how that goes ....


http://www.scribd.com/doc/179933236/Jet2-appeal


unless you are close to the 6 year threshold. The appeal decision may not be out in 5 weeks but there should be an indication of how things went no long afterwards. The result of the appeal whilst in no way overruling 261/2004 may provide a little more clarity. The result therefore may make, in your case, BA taking a more sensible approach.

stewartmnd

111KAB wrote: »

stewartmnd - given that the Huzar appeal is only 5 weeks away I would suggest waiting to see how that goes ....

unless you are close to the 6 year threshold. The appeal decision may not be out in 5 weeks but there should be an indication of how things went no long afterwards. The result of the appeal whilst in no way overruling 261/2004 may provide a little more clarity. The result therefore may make, in your case, BA taking a more sensible approach.

Thank you so much you 111KAB, have given me invaluable advice :T I will wait and see the outcome, since it would appear I have years to settle. Out of curiosity I take it the details of the outcome will be posted on the forum page. I am not normally the sort of person who would challenge decisions like this. I am just so frustrated at being given the run around by a large company like BA. :mad:

111KAB

Yes there is a separate thread re Huzar plus there are people who post on here attending.

offshore1

After several months of fruitless exchanges with BA's Indian correspondence team I finally used MCOL to issue a court claim which brought a quick response. BA would still not admit liability but I was offered an e-voucher to the value of my claim plus refund of all costs which included some significant additional expenses I had incurred. I'm sure there will be those who say I should have stuck out for all in cash but the outcome suited me with summer holiday flights in mind. Thanks to all for the advice along the way.

David_e

offshore1 wrote: »

After several months of fruitless exchanges with BA's Indian correspondence team I finally used MCOL to issue a court claim which brought a quick response. BA would still not admit liability but I was offered an e-voucher to the value of my claim plus refund of all costs which included some significant additional expenses I had incurred. I'm sure there will be those who say I should have stuck out for all in cash but the outcome suited me with summer holiday flights in mind. Thanks to all for the advice along the way.

Do you mean you recovered 'additional' costs that you wouldn't have been able to claim if you had gone to court?