Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Ryanair ONLY

Steve_xx

Caz3121 wrote: »

My post did show the scheduled time as 6:35pm
the 7.12pm was the actual time of departure not the scheduled time
That length of delay can be made up depending on the length of flight - I have been on flights that have left 45 mins late and ended up arriving early
The problem will have come from when it got to BCN and what the weather situation was like, if it was bad then this vastly reduced the number of flights that take off and land

Ah right I see. Yes I take your point that it's possible to make time up during a flight, especially if wind direction is favourable. I'm debating if I might argue that had it left Manchester on time that it may have been able to land at Barcelona, ie the weather might have been ok if it had landed when it was due to.


Anyhow I've sent a message to Manchester airport asking what time and if it left, but in reality you have already confirmed that it did leave, albeit later than it should have. The question is now, where did it land?


If it had landed at Valencia then I guess there might have been the possibility of it flying back to Barcelona once the weather issue had abated. It's a simplistic view I know.


By the way I didn't see any thunder when I was at Barcelona el Prat, but a fellow passenger reported that there was some at the time. Though I accept that there may have been some in the vicinity that might have served to prevent it from landing.

razorsedge

Steve_xx wrote: »

Yesterday their response simply stated "Your flight was cancelled due to a previous diversion caused by adverse weather conditions (thunderstorms) at Bacelona El Prat."

It has often been the mantra on this forum that the Reg EU261/2004 is quite clear when talking about weather problems. Recital 14 states:

'meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned'

So, as Ryanair have already admitted that the weather affected a previous flight, regardless of where it ended up, in my opinion, you should have a legitimate claim for compensation.

[Deleted User]

2 week ago, my Ryanair flight from CIA to STD has been delayed by 3 hours. 2 hours in the airport, another hour in the plane before take off.
At some point Ryanair propose some water for free.

At arrival, I received a couple of emails confirming the 3 hours delay but that Ryanair is not responsible for it, any compensation should be dealt with our own insurance company

Following some good reading on this forum, I sent a formal letter, using the EU template for passenger compensation. Then I received the following answer:

"We note that refreshment vouchers were issued according to the time of delay"

They only provided water if you ask for it, in the plane before take off for free, they never told about the vouchers.

"If you incurred any additional reasonable receipted expenses during the delay, then please forward copies of these receipts so we may consider them."

I don't have any expense to claim (exept the cab) as there was no other transportation mean at the time we landed (after midnight). In addition EU law stipulates that we don't have to proof the expenses as there is a forfeit amount in case of delay.

"However, as this delay was unexpected and therefore outside Ryanair’s control (extraordinary circumstances*) we regret to advise that no monetary compensation is due under EU Regulation 261/2004"

I really wonder what are the extraordinary circumstances in this case to say that they are not reponsible for the delay. The sky was clear in Italy. I really want to challenge their claim.

It leaves me with more questions than answers:
1-Is it worth to go to court and challenge their claim?
2-How to go to court in the UK?
3-Would you recommend a No Win No Pay solicitor?

Any advice would be appreciated
Thank you

inglorius

FinancialED wrote: »

I really want to challenge their claim.

It leaves me with more questions than answers:
1-Is it worth to go to court and challenge their claim?
2-How to go to court in the UK?
3-Would you recommend a No Win No Pay solicitor?

Any advice would be appreciated
Thank you

1. Have had similar experiences with Ryanair, with them refusing my claim giving the stock answer of technical difficulties beyond their control. The only way to get them to show you their evidence of this is to take them to court, which they are banking on you not doing.
2. You can issue proceedings through the Small Claims Court, Google this
3. Depends if you win - 70% of something is better than nothing at all if you represent yourself and lose

Dr_Watson

inglorius wrote: »

1. Have had similar experiences with Ryanair, with them refusing my claim giving the stock answer of technical difficulties beyond their control. The only way to get them to show you their evidence of this is to take them to court, which they are banking on you not doing.
2. You can issue proceedings through the Small Claims Court, Google this
3. Depends if you win - 70% of something is better than nothing at all if you represent yourself and lose

Answer to question 1- totally correct.
Answer to question 2- Small claims court...hmmm yes but using the ESCP.
Answer to question 3- If you represent yourself and lose all you would lose is your court fee. If after a good NWNF company, you could try the guys who played a good game in the Huzar and Dawson cases.
Lastly read post 569 on this thread.

austin9658

FinancialED wrote: »

It leaves me with more questions than answers:
1-Is it worth to go to court and challenge their claim?
2-How to go to court in the UK?
3-Would you recommend a No Win No Pay solicitor?

Any advice would be appreciated
Thank you

1. Of Course you should claim for compensation. You have rights to claim.
2. You can start proceedings through European small claims procedure. You can google this for better answer.
3. It is definitely the best idea to hire an NWNF solicitor. Because if you represent yourself and lose, you would loose the court fees as well. It would lead you to double lose. So, to hire a NWNF is the best idea.

Vauban

austin9658 wrote: »

1. Of Course you should claim for compensation. You have rights to claim.
2. You can start proceedings through European small claims procedure. You can google this for better answer.
3. It is definitely the best idea to hire an NWNF solicitor. Because if you represent yourself and lose, you would loose the court fees as well. It would lead you to double lose. So, to hire a NWNF is the best idea.

It is not always best to hire a NWNF lawyer - since it costs you, if successful, about a third of your claim. You need to balance the risks of the costs and the effort required versus the overall reward you get (70% vs 100%).

austin9658

Vauban wrote: »

It is not always best to hire a NWNF lawyer - since it costs you, if successful, about a third of your claim. You need to balance the risks of the costs and the effort required versus the overall reward you get (70% vs 100%).

Yeah! Definitely, But after being successful it costs 30% of claim. So it is better to get 70% rather than nothing. and if someone represent oneself and lose, he will lose the court fees as well on the other hand if NWNF lawyer lose he will not have to pay any single penny.

Vauban

austin9658 wrote: »

Yeah! Definitely, But after being successful it costs 30% of claim. So it is better to get 70% rather than nothing.

Yes but it's better to get 100% than 70% ...

It all depends on the individual and their circumstances: NWNF isn't always the best option for people. (In my case, my claim was worth £2500 - so 30% would have been £750! In the event, I did it myself, and kept it all.)

111KAB

Vauban wrote: »

Yes but it's better to get 100% than 70% ...

It all depends on the individual and their circumstances: NWNF isn't always the best option for people. (In my case, my claim was worth £2500 - so 30% would have been £750! In the event, I did it myself, and kept it all.)

Plus this website is geared towards money saving hence MSE - so why use a NWNF when you can DIY.