Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Ryanair ONLY

Dr_Watson

bird2658 wrote: »

I have just received £96 in compenasation for a 5 hour delay in Nov 2010 in Italy with Ryanair

bird2658,
Well done for finding the Ryanair thread amongst all the clutter that hits these pages...but...it does sound to me that you have been left a little short changed.

Justice13075

£96 for a flight delay is wrong it is 400 euro per person which is around £320 per person. You need to explain a little further.

111KAB

http://www.travelmole.com/news_feature.php?news_id=2015471&c=setreg&region=2

Dr_Watson

....and tidy. And also...

Pmcm_2

Hi,
I have had a letter from the County Court at Liverpool regarding my claim,
Ryanair have issued a formal application to the court for the claim to be stayed pending the outcome of the preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the matter of C.van der Lans v Koininklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij.
My claim is now stayed pending the determination of Ryanairs application.

So Im wondering, what exactly does this all mean?
Thanks

Dr_Watson

Pmcm wrote: »

Hi,
I have had a letter from the County Court at Liverpool regarding my claim,
Ryanair have issued a formal application to the court for the claim to be stayed pending the outcome of the preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the matter of C.van der Lans v Koininklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij.
My claim is now stayed pending the determination of Ryanairs application.

So Im wondering, what exactly does this all mean?
Thanks

Pmcm,
I thought RA had made you an offer on your claim- albeit without the other members in your party?
Anyway KLM v VDL is an attempt by the airlines to try and get some ruling and precedent in their favour regarding EU 261/2004. In reality Huzar and Wallentin have addressed this issue but by trying a different angle and a slightly different twist in their argument, they are able to manipulate the legal system to get some cases 'stayed'.
Interestingly courts over in Holland are ignoring KLM V VDL, as precedent is effectively set by Wallentin. Here in the UK the Huzar ruling should effectively be the precedent but, by manipulating the wording in the case of KLM V VDL we have another case that could potentially go all the way through the court system here in the UK.

This effectively pushes 261/2004 claimants further in the time it takes to successfully make a claim which is what the airlines want- they want you to go away.


If an application has been made to stay your claim regarding this I'd write to the court with reference to Huzar and Wallentin as already being the precedent and -add in the comments by the Judge (in Scotland) from the Vergara vs Ryanair case.
His words were swift and to the point and disregarded this futile argument full stop.
And just because RA have applied for a stay to your case doesn't mean that the court will automatically grant it - write to the court with your say in the matter. Also include detail of RA's previous offer to you to settle your part of the claim- this is acquiesce to your claim as I have said before.
Good luck and keep going.

Pmcm_2

Dr_Watson wrote: »

Pmcm,
I thought RA had made you an offer on your claim- albeit without the other members in your party?
Anyway KLM v VDL is an attempt by the airlines to try and get some ruling and precedent in their favour regarding EU 261/2004. In reality Huzar and Wallentin have addressed this issue but by trying a different angle and a slightly different twist in their argument, they are able to manipulate the legal system to get some cases 'stayed'.
Interestingly courts over in Holland are ignoring KLM V VDL, as precedent is effectively set by Wallentin. Here in the UK the Huzar ruling should effectively be the precedent but, by manipulating the wording in the case of KLM V VDL we have another case that could potentially go all the way through the court system here in the UK.

This effectively pushes 261/2004 claimants further in the time it takes to successfully make a claim which is what the airlines want- they want you to go away.


If an application has been made to stay your claim regarding this I'd write to the court with reference to Huzar and Wallentin as already being the precedent and -add in the comments by the Judge (in Scotland) from the Vergara vs Ryanair case.
His words were swift and to the point and disregarded this futile argument full stop.
And just because RA have applied for a stay to your case doesn't mean that the court will automatically grant it - write to the court with your say in the matter. Also include detail of RA's previous offer to you to settle your part of the claim- this is acquiesce to your claim as I have said before.
Good luck and keep going.

Hi Dr Watson, Thanks for that. Yes they did offer me my part of the compensation but nothing for the rest of my party. Im beginning to think it might have been easier to accept it and start again for the other members of my party!
In my letter from the Court it says;
IT IS ORDERED that:-
1.This claim is stayed pending determination of the defendants application etc etc
2.That i have the right to apply to have the order set aside , varied or stayed. i must send the application to the court within 7 days.

How do you suggest I respond? What exactly am i asking the Court to do? I have read a bit about the cases you mentioned above but I couldn't see anything about the judges comments you mentioned to include?
What would happen to my claim if i didn't respond?

Thanks again.

Dr_Watson

Pmcm wrote: »

Hi Dr Watson, Thanks for that. Yes they did offer me my part of the compensation but nothing for the rest of my party. Im beginning to think it might have been easier to accept it and start again for the other members of my party!
In my letter from the Court it says;
IT IS ORDERED that:-
1.This claim is stayed pending determination of the defendants application etc etc
2.That i have the right to apply to have the order set aside , varied or stayed. i must send the application to the court within 7 days.

How do you suggest I respond? What exactly am i asking the Court to do? I have read a bit about the cases you mentioned above but I couldn't see anything about the judges comments you mentioned to include?
What would happen to my claim if i didn't respond?

Thanks again.

Pmcm,
Firstly if you saw a response from me flash up and then disappear- I apologise, new tech and a 7 year old in the Watson household 'interested' in RA claims saw to that!
The court are asking if you would like to have your say to this stay request, too right you would.
What you are asking the court is to respectfully reject the stay. (Have the order set aside).
The reason for this is because the whole subject of the KLM v VDL case has already been dealt with in Wallentin and Huzar.
You need to write to the court asking for the stay request to be set aside because the issues that are represented within KLM v VDL have already been dealt with.
They were dealt with in the Wallentin judgment by the European Court of Justice, and where reference was made to individual states determining such cases, the Huzar case here in the UK is the set precedent.

My reference to Vergara was because RA tried to have a stay (or sist as in Scottish law) imposed on this claim quoting the KLM v VDL case.
The judge refused this quoting the fact that the legal arguments represented by KLM v VDL had already been settled in Jet2 vs Huzar.

In the next 5 mins I'll send you a PM with some more detail on how to approach this.

NoviceAngel

Interesting Moneybox article this weekend on Radio 4 regarding VDL http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=67780338&postcount=1817

Tyzap, has already said he will update the Jet2 thread with the Liverpool Allen case result as soon as it's delivered, I'll do the same for our good Ryanair patients in here, you will get the result as soon as the Judge delivers it.

dartilov

Having sent my ESCP forms to Liverpool, have had the acknowledgement back that they will be deemed served on 26 February with RA having until 12 March to respond.

I am guessing I might well receive the same response as Pmcm but will be responding as Dr Watson has said in that "You need to write to the court asking for the stay request to be set aside because the issues that are represented within KLM v VDL have already been dealt with.
They were dealt with in the Wallentin judgment by the European Court of Justice, and where reference was made to individual states determining such cases, the Huzar case here in the UK is the set precedent".

With regards to additional costs and interest, what should I be adding on for this?