Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Ryanair ONLY

nysje

I will definitely claim as we were one of the people stranded on the stairs as well (with little children and no food or water). I will post here once I get a response.

SueDerbyshire

Hi everyone, my saga continues. I have received a reply from Ryanair after issuing court proceedings against them. They have until September to respond to the court, however, have sent me a letter asking me to ring them. Here's what they had to say, sorry it's long winded but wanted you to know all the facts.

"We acknowledge receipt of your claim form A which we propose to answer by the due date.

Whilst understanding the frustration caused by the delayed flight on 2nd June 2013 (etc etc), regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 does not itself provide any liability for an air carrier to provide 'compensation' in the case of a delay. What has happened though is that the European Court of Justice has ruled that any long delay (defined by the learned Judges, rather than by the European Parliament, as being a delay in a flight arrival of more than three hours) may be treated as if it was a cancellation. Article 5(3) of the regulation then applies, so that there is no automatic right to 'compensation' under article 7 of the regulation if the air carrier can prove that the cancellation/delay was caused as a result of 'extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken'. This is the case here, as the delayed operation of flight FR9185 was caused solely by our Boeing 737-800 that day being unexpectedly taken out of service upon its return from its first rotation, as a result of a random technical issue, namely the flight crew reporting they needed to use excessive force to operate the control columns to control the ailerons, this being a matter set out in point 25 of the (albeit non-binding) Guidance Document issued by the European Commission as being indicative of 'extraordinary circumstances'. A copy of this document is enclosed for ease of reference.

I also enclose for your information a copy of your reservation record and the 'daily Movement sheets' and would suggest you might call me on my direct number with a view to discussing and hopefully resolving the matter pragmatically on a 'without prejudice' basis."

Item 25 of the guidance document states 'unexpected flight safety shortcomings and highlighted next to it is 'Failure of necessary aircraft systems, flight control systems, where those systems had been maintained in accordance with the required maintenance programme.

1. Would you agree that this fault would still not constitute 'exceptional circumstances'?

2. Having looked for the guidance document myself, I can not find the exact copy in which Ryanair has sent me, I wanted to check that this guidance has not been updated due to the recent court cases, since April 2013 in which this document is dated. Can anyone confirm that this is the latest document please.

3. Can anyone suggest what I should use as an argument against Ryanair when I ring them, I obviously know the several cases confirming that technical issues are not exceptional etc. but as they are saying it is unexpected flight safety shortcomings, I am a little unsure as to where I stand.

Lastly, thank you once again for any help you can provide.

Sue x

JPears

Sue,
most of this reply is flimflam. The first half of the paragraph is of no relevance.
The second half is BS. Huzar has shown that a technical fault is usually not Extraordinary (EC) circumstances.
The "Guidance Document" described has completley dissed by Judge Platts (the same case as Huzar).
The fact that they are willing to discuss the matter to resolution suggests they want to haggle a settlement (which will be cheaper than defending in court), which is nothing short of admission of liabilty
By all means call them but don't accept anything less than what you are due, plus your court costs incurred to date. And settlement in full within 14 days.

Dr_Watson

JPears wrote: »

Sue,
most of this reply is flimflam. The first half of the paragraph is of no relevance.
The second half is BS. Huzar has shown that a technical fault is usually not Extraordinary (EC) circumstances.
The "Guidance Document" described has completley dissed by Judge Platts (the same case as Huzar).
The fact that they are willing to discuss the matter to resolution suggests they want to haggle a settlement (which will be cheaper than defending in court), which is nothing short of admission of liabilty
By all means call them but don't accept anything less than what you are due, plus your court costs incurred to date. And settlement in full within 14 days.

Sue,
JP beat me to it and is of course correct, same old Ryanair, I seem to remember saying this before somewhere within this thread...
It all probably sounds convincing, and maybe even plausible, but none of RA's argument is.
It's a technical fault simple as, and something that Ryanair and all the other airlines just cannot wriggle out of, yes due to the Huzar ruling and Wallentin set in the ECJ.
Do give them a ring and see what they have to say, like JP says settle for nothing less than the actual amount you are claiming and your court costs back....interest....that's up to you and personally would be the only bargaining i'd concede.
Make them aware that you are fully aware of recent case law, Huzar of course and Wallentin, and that you know exactly what your argument is, and that they would not beat it should they wish to proceed to court....the choice is theirs, Ryanair it's over to you is what I would be saying...
Good luck and keep going..

SueDerbyshire

Thank you so much once again for your support. I read the first paragraph and said "and", I just had to read it again as I thought I was missing something but soon decided that it was just a pointless paragraph really.

I'm glad I am in the same mindset as both of you, I just needed it confirming from someone more knowledgeable in this than myself. The only concern I have is mentioning Huzar and then Ryanair saying they will stay my case due to the use of Huzar.

I will phone them Monday and won't accept anything less than what I have already asked for. I will of course keep you updated.

Thank you once again for your help.

Sue

Dr_Watson

SueDerbyshire wrote: »

Thank you so much once again for your support. I read the first paragraph and said "and", I just had to read it again as I thought I was missing something but soon decided that it was just a pointless paragraph really.

I'm glad I am in the same mindset as both of you, I just needed it confirming from someone more knowledgeable in this than myself. The only concern I have is mentioning Huzar and then Ryanair saying they will stay my case due to the use of Huzar.

I will phone them Monday and won't accept anything less than what I have already asked for. I will of course keep you updated.

Thank you once again for your help.

Sue

Sue,
For the time being just verbally use Wallentin if you like and ram it down their necks!
The ECJ ruling in this case is still the highest precedent, and EU law is what you are claiming under.
Huzar we may refer to if they play silly beggars and want to go to court.
Speak soon.

dxc_chappie

SueDerbyshire wrote: »

Thank you so much once again for your support. I read the first paragraph and said "and", I just had to read it again as I thought I was missing something but soon decided that it was just a pointless paragraph really.

I'm glad I am in the same mindset as both of you, I just needed it confirming from someone more knowledgeable in this than myself. The only concern I have is mentioning Huzar and then Ryanair saying they will stay my case due to the use of Huzar.

I will phone them Monday and won't accept anything less than what I have already asked for. I will of course keep you updated.

Thank you once again for your help.

Sue

Sue - I would suggest that if/when you do call them first establish that you are talking to them on a 'without predjudice' basis. Secondly, assert that you will accept no further reference to the NEBs guidelines since these have no standing in law. Then follow the the sound advice from JPears and the good Doctor.

Your case may well be stayed pending the Huzar SC appeal, but if RA are inviting you to discuss this then it would seem they are, for whatever reason, open to settle.

SueDerbyshire

DXC_Chappie, some great points there and I will take them on board when phoning them tomorrow. I have made a few notes which I will have besides me when ringing, so thank you.

Just got to work out how much I am claiming altogether, will it need to be in euros or pounds? When completing form A, I claimed €800 + £70 fees +interest, however, I didn't work out how much this would be n total, either euros or pounds.

Wish me luck.

Sue

Dr_Watson

SueDerbyshire wrote: »

DXC_Chappie, some great points there and I will take them on board when phoning them tomorrow. I have made a few notes which I will have besides me when ringing, so thank you.

Just got to work out how much I am claiming altogether, will it need to be in euros or pounds? When completing form A, I claimed €800 + £70 fees +interest, however, I didn't work out how much this would be n total, either euros or pounds.

Wish me luck.

Sue

Sue,
Calculate your court costs into euros and then add this to the amount you are claiming, when RA pay you, the total figure will be in euros.
Good luck for tomorrow, personally I don't think you'll need it....

SueDerbyshire

Well I have had a very interesting phone cal for 40 minutes, I won't go into details on here incase it is being watched but I will say that I wasn't offered enough and said see you in court. The person finally said they would go back to Ryanair and tell them what I would accept and get back to me in 7 days putting everything in writing.

So off to court I go.

Thank you for all your help, it prepared me for some very strange unexpected comments made by the mediator which will not get to me and has just made me even stronger.

Thanks again. Sue x