Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

stuco

We won. http://Jet2.com 's application to stay our client's court case was rejected by Mansfield County Court today!!!!

A tweet from EUDelay.

JPears

This 2 year time limit is up for debate.
1. The whole concept stinks, that an airline can elect, unilaterally, to considerably reduce your statutory rights (and their obligations)
2. The definition of "action" as per their terms and conditions. If you have made a claim within this 2 year limit, irrespective of any legal recourse, you have complied with their sham terms and conditions. IMHO.
I am sure any Judge would agree.

Vauban

JPears wrote: »

This 2 year time limit is up for debate.
1. The whole concept stinks, that an airline can elect, unilaterally, to considerably reduce your statutory rights (and their obligations)
2. The definition of "action" as per their terms and conditions. If you have made a claim within this 2 year limit, irrespective of any legal recourse, you have complied with their sham terms and conditions. IMHO.
I am sure any Judge would agree.

Well, I've been doing a bit of digging on this ...

The long and short of it is that it's complicated. It's been before a few County Courts and most - but not all - have found for the claimant. But I understand Jet2 have had success in court with this argument and that it is likely to be appealed further up the chain.

Having read around I have come to the (very inexpert) conclusion that Jet2.com cannot do this. Apparently, contracts which deviate from statutory norms are only really acceptable if they are a) made between parties of equal standing and b) the product of a genuine negotation (not a tick the T&Cs job). It fails both tests in this instance, and so is likely - though not certain - to be regarded by a judge as an unfair term.

mrtonygibson

Eudelay won their case at Mansfield today preventing Jet2 staying cases due to Van der Lans. For anyone following my case which was due to be heard at Mansfield before the Liverpool cases, this has now been stayed until a decision/direction has been established in the Liverpool County Court.

Vauban

mrtonygibson wrote: »

Eudelay won their case at Mansfield today preventing Jet2 staying cases due to Van der Lans. For anyone following my case which was due to be heard at Mansfield before the Liverpool cases, this has now been stayed until a decision/direction has been established in the Liverpool County Court.

I wonder why your Mansfield judge opted for the stay before Liverpool, whereas the Mansfield judge today was less patient? The seemingly random nature of the small claims track perhaps.

mrtonygibson

I think the judge realised a bit late that the "main actors" were fighting it out at Liverpool so therefore took the sensible and easy option of letting the more experienced aviation judges take the lead, even though it should be a foregone conclusion and a simple task to follow the Supreme Court ruling and once and for all make Jet2 pay up.

Vauban

HELDEN wrote: »

Jet 2 still continue to deny responsibility for our delay of 8 and a half hours(Barcelona to Leeds 18th March 2013)and are now awaiting another European Court decision which they tell me will take 12-18 months. AESA (the Spanish CAA) have already written to me and advised that I should get compensation for our flight delay, but Jet 2 refuse to pay. I have recently (Jan 2015) sent all my details to Bott and Co as suggested by Martin to be reputable and good at this - they will not help. They say that there was bad weather at both airports on the day/night of our flight which having been there, I can absolutely say is not true. What the heck do I do now?? :mad:

If you search flightstats for planes arriving in Leeds that day almost all of them are very delayed. So clearly there was something affecting many flights, which would suggest a weather or ATC problem - both of which are classed as extraordinary. I don't think you have a claim, I'm afraid.

howticklediam

Vauban wrote: »

Well, I've been doing a bit of digging on this ...

The long and short of it is that it's complicated. It's been before a few County Courts and most - but not all - have found for the claimant. But I understand Jet2 have had success in court with this argument and that it is likely to be appealed further up the chain.

Having read around I have come to the (very inexpert) conclusion that Jet2.com cannot do this. Apparently, contracts which deviate from statutory norms are only really acceptable if they are a) made between parties of equal standing and b) the product of a genuine negotation (not a tick the T&Cs job). It fails both tests in this instance, and so is likely - though not certain - to be regarded by a judge as an unfair term.

Thanks for that very informative reply and for taking the time to do a bit of reading. I read about the "equal standing" agreement also but it was in relation to construction so I was unsure if it applied. Jet2 have quoted a couple of cases they won on these grounds, but they would wouldn't they. I think I have a chance at winning this one, but it's not clear cut, so I'm not sure yet whether I'm going to risk the court fees to take that chance.

howticklediam

It's also interesting that my copy of the Conditions of Carriage sent to me at the time of the booking does not have that clause. Only the online version, which is subject to change.

Vauban

howticklediam wrote: »

It's also interesting that my copy of the Conditions of Carriage sent to me at the time of the booking does not have that clause. Only the online version, which is subject to change.

Well I think that's a slam dunk argument - if the T&Cs provided to you in hard copy do not include that caveat, I don't see how it can stand.