Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

111KAB

http://www.ttgdigital.com/news/jet2com-reserves-17m-for-passenger-compensation/4694418.article

supermac9

What a complete shambles Jet2 are - they are encouraging people to take them to court rather than just accepting the decision of the Supreme Court and paying out.

Tyzap

supermac9 wrote: »

What a complete shambles Jet2 are - they are encouraging people to take them to court rather than just accepting the decision of the Supreme Court and paying out.

Exactly, that's why its not worth !!!!! footing with them. Just take them to court to get the compensation that the law says you are due.

If they want to keep showering themselves with bad publicity then so be it.

If anyone cuts them any slack they will take advantage of you, don't give them the chance.

NoviceAngel

111KAB wrote: »

Given Jet2's attitude to claims I would go N1 (paper) as they will look for ANY excuse not to consider.

Exactly, they claim locus standi basically the rules of MCOL mean there can be only one claimant - however, this theory has yet to be tested fully, but 111KAB is as usual 100% correct, go the paper route just in case.

DrA_Harrogate

Fellow sufferers...


As expected the nice people at 2birds (that's not ironic - we are on first name terms now!) have sent 'the letter' to my Court asking for the stay. It's in full elsewhere but essentially quotes the Dutch case.


Re-reading the letter the Court sent to me there is an implication that they will either ask me what I think or get us all back to Court (can they do that?). In which case, it would be nice to quote the bit in the Supreme Court transcript, if there is such a thing, dismissing the Dutch angle.


I shall post all developments.


AS

NoviceAngel

What a surprise DrA,

Yes totally expected, I think it's unlikely that your matter will be returned to the Court for you to discuss if the stay should remain, there are a few suggested replies to 'the letter' - (longer than the obvious 4 letter ones) in the Huzar thread, myself and batman quickly put something together but it was the consensus of opinion that it needed to be shortened- if you do that then just email it to the Court, then hopefully the Judge will make the right decision.

Can't wait for the next instalment!

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

NoviceAngel

Following my post above......

DrA_Harrogate wrote: »

Fellow sufferers...

it would be nice to quote the bit in the Supreme Court transcript, if there is such a thing, dismissing the Dutch angle

AS

Yes, I've seen that mentioned but not seen any links to the actual transcript

111KAB

DrA I presume you have seen the actual refusal of permission to appeal?


https://www.facebook.com/MonarchComplaints/posts/342447962583260:0


I was not aware of any transcript but if anyone has grateful for a pointer!

NoviceAngel

111KAB wrote: »

I was not aware of any transcript but if anyone has grateful for a pointer!

Im not sure it was a transcript as such, I'm sure I've read on here that the Dutch case was part of Jet2s appeal to the Supreme Court and was subsequently dismissed.

So if Jet2s submission to the SC is a public document it should be in there

EDIT - I'm shaking my brains and I think that info came from Bott, but not directly- just referenced to.

batman44

NoviceAngel wrote: »

Im not sure it was a transcript as such, I'm sure I've read on here that the Dutch case was part of Jet2s appeal to the Supreme Court and was subsequently dismissed.

So if Jet2s submission to the SC is a public document it should be in there

EDIT - I'm shaking my brains and I think that info came from Bott, but not directly- just referenced to.

No documents yet from the 2 birds submission to the SC maybe someone would be so kind to post it for us or Jet2 claimants.

If was referenced in the Moneybox programme by Bott & co last week Vauban posted the link. I would suggest you download the podcast before it goes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04p53k7