Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

ben2909

Tyzap wrote: »

Hi Ben,

In your previous post you stated...

"I had a flight delay on 7/9/14 which was due to 'unavoidable operational reasons'."

What were these reasons and who told you? Have Jet2 change the reason given?

Don't worry about the AESA bit, that is a red herring. If you asked AESA to investigate your case and they found in your favour Jet2 would just ignore it, as it is not enforceable. The process would just slow your down your claim.

If you can give some more details it will help.

Flight from Palma to Manchester 7/9/14 was delayed by 323 mins. The only reason I have been told was in this last letter stating 'technical defect' from Jet2.

Do I write and ask for technical reason.
Cheers

111KAB

ben2909 wrote: »

Do I write and ask for technical reason.
Cheers

No point - as Caz said read Vauban's guide then decide when you take them to court as you have a valid claim.

supermac9

Caz3121 wrote: »

grab a coffee and have a good read of Vauban's guide. You will see, if you have read this thread that they are not playing ball with anyone. They are wanting to use a Dutch case early next year to try and get out of paying for technical delays...all covered in the guide, you can start court proceedings but it will likely be stayed awaiting the outcome of the case being held in Feb at Liverpool court

I hope and pray that no one else decides to follow the Van der Lans case and give Jet2 another excuse to drag things out. They obviously don't respect the decision of the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, so why should they take any notice of the Allen case in February?

supermac9

dino25uk wrote: »

So we are waiting for yet another test case. I don't know whether is is a case of Jet2 being arrogant or being badly advised by 2B's.

Arrogant definitely, and probably badly advised.

JPears

Les 2 oiseuax - kerching £!

BigJock_72

Had 2 replies, via my MP, from Andrew Haines Chief Executive of the CAA and from Jet2. The Jet2 one is pretty much a standard holding letter apart from the fact that they say they will "look into the issues he(my MP) has raised and will respond in due course". So if they fail to get back to him, hopefully he will take it further.
The letter from the CAA states as follows(apologies if its long winded):

" I thought it might be helpful to begin by explaining the legal powers provided by Regulation EC261/2004 for enforcement bodies such as the CAA. There is an enforcement body in each of the 28 EU Member States and they are responsible for enforcement relating to flights departing from their own country and to returning flights from a non-EU country on EU airlines. As Mr Pearce's flight departed from Spain, it is the Spanish authorities, not the CAA, that are responsible for ensuring compliance with Regulation EC261/2004 for flights departing that country.
As we understand it, the Spanish authorities are in a similar position to the CAA in that they do not have ombudsmen type powers and are unable to issue binding decisions on airlines. They provide their view to passengers on whether compensation is due, however, if the airline disagrees, passengers would need to consider taking their own small claim action in the courts.
I should also mention that the Supreme Court decision that Mr Pearce refers to(as well as the earlier Court of Appeal judgement Jet2 vs Huzar, which dealt with claims for financial compensation for delays and cancellations due to a technical fault with the aircraft) applies only in England and Wales. Spanish law may treat such claims differently and therefore, as far as the Spanish authorities are concerned, compensation may not be due in this case.
That said, passengers who are considering taking court action can choose to issue their claim in the country where their flight departed or where it arrived. In this case,therefore, Mr Pearce should be able to issue his claim in a county court in the UK and thereby 'access' the Court of Appeal judgement Jet2 vs Huzar.
We take compliance with the Regulation seriously and we seek to ensure that all airlines flying from the UK are aware of their legal obligations and have the right processes in place to comply."
My flight was delayed due to the outbound flight to Alicante breaking down on the runway at Lba, hence Jet2 had to find a replacement aircraft which caused us a delay of over 5hrs in Alicante airport. Anybody offer any thoughts on what they have put in this letter? I need to reply to this but i'm pretty vague on the exact legal position.

111KAB

BigJock72 - standard copy n' paste reply many of us have had over the years with the latest editions mentioning Huzar. Quite honestly there is no point in replying. I also, very much doubt your MP will get anywhere either.

len49

Hi Big Jock

If you haven’t already raised a court action you need to do so. That’s what it takes to get a result.

In my own case, after an initial light sparring with Thomas Cook they blanked my further attempts at communication for two and a half years. In the meantime, I approached the Spanish National Enforcement Body, AESA, who ultimately told TC to pay out. However, TC cited the pending Sturgeon case, which they claimed, would influence their decision making.

After the Sturgeon ruling TC blanked me again so I took them to court. They defended with blazing guns and two “expert” (ha ha) witnesses. We ran out of time to complete on the first day in court when our best ally was TC expert witness no.1. I have no doubt we would have won that day but the clock ran down. On the Second day in court three months later TC asked for a sist (stay in Scotland), which was granted, pending Huzar appeal outcome.

After the Supreme Court buried Jet2.com’s permission to appeal application. I asked if TC would now settle. No surprise that they blanked me again. I then applied to the Sheriff Court to recall the sist and proceed with the action. The court set a hearing date to decide the next step and lo and behold, before that date arrived, a settlement offer came through from TC’s lawyer which I accepted.

It was more than four years of hard work but ultimately satisfying and I would guess that my wife and I, with the fantastic help of the resident blog experts, may have been the only passengers on the flight in question who took on the effort required to win. In a nutshell, that’s why the airlines will continue to make it difficult and won’t roll over too easily. My advice is that, if you haven’t already done so it’s time to take them to court. If you’re not up for the hassle yourself then use a NWNF solicitor.

Good luck and have a great Christmas

len

BigJock_72 wrote: »

Had 2 replies, via my MP, from Andrew Haines Chief Executive of the CAA and from Jet2. The Jet2 one is pretty much a standard holding letter apart from the fact that they say they will "look into the issues he(my MP) has raised and will respond in due course". So if they fail to get back to him, hopefully he will take it further.

JGJackson

I've been "talking" to Jet2 for over 1 year now and then last month after they ignored an October letter I sent, I re-sent it asking them to give me the courtesy of a reply. The reply asked me to give them all the details of the claim - all of which they'd obviously had for ages. Anyway, after a phone call to them which did nothing, I went to the CAA. They replied saying that Jet2 had been spoken to and that they would now "continue" with my claim.

FYI, this was a trip in Aug 2011 between Newcastle and Ibiza with family including 2 children, that started on time at 1.30pm one day and ended on arrival at our hotel at 5am the next day with 3 planes involved plus 7 hours at Manchester airport. Jet2 are resisting the claim quoting the 2 year limit and "extraordinary circumstances" all of which are now invalid reasons for not paying compensation as I understand from here.

Anyway, a letter was received today but it's confusing as one part states yet again that I'm out of time and they quote "extraordinary circumstances" and says that neither falls into a valid claim and referring to EC261/2004. However, at the end it states that the EC status has been referred to the CJEU and then they say that it is not appropriate to assess my claim /"/at this time".

I am now not sure whether they've told me it's not a claim they are following up or whether they are awaiting a result of a court hearing. Amazing - it's back to the CAA after Christmas I think.

dizdog

Hi ALL
Our flight was delayed from Mexico sent one letter to Thomson got a reply saying swamped with enquires and then nothing, until today when i got a cheque for just short of £1900 for 4 flights , So many thanks to this site would not have bothered without it.
PS i had very little paperwork and no boarding passes