Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

blondmark

kuepper wrote: »

thanks ive changed that link if you want to edit itout of your post- apologies. Do you think I should quote those cases in my initial letter?

Yes definitely, although they may not roll over and die until a court hearing is around the corner ...

blondmark

kuepper wrote: »

I see on the CAA website it says they may take up cases if the airline refuses to pay after sending an initial letter. Isn't this a more painless way to proceed?

Yes, probably painless and quite possibly useless too, but certainly exceptionally time-consuming. The CAA won't take up your case in court; it has no real powers and can only make suggestions to the airlines (who also happen to fund the CAA's existence). There's nothing much the CAA can do if they're ignored or if their suggestions aren't followed.

A court on the other hand ...

kuepper

Centipede100 wrote: »

Up to you whether you involve the CAA or not. Insofar as MCOL is concerned, you should issue your legal claim against Jet2 at their registered office address:

Jet2.com Limited
Low Fare Finder House
Leeds Bradford Airport
Leeds
LS19 7TU

should this address be used for an initial letter or the customer care PO Box address?

blondmark

kuepper wrote: »

should this address be used for an initial letter or the customer care PO Box address?

You can send a Letter Before Claim to the Registered Office straight away providing 14 days notice of the service of proceedings.

kuepper

blondmark wrote: »

Yes, probably painless and quite possibly useless too, but certainly exceptionally time-consuming. The CAA won't take up your case in court; it has no real powers and can only make suggestions to the airlines (who also happen to fund the CAA's existence). There's nothing much the CAA can do if they're ignored or if their suggestions aren't followed.

A court on the other hand ...

My worry about court is actually winning the case but jet2 appealing it and winning on appeal and my being financially ruined by being made to pay their costs

Mark2spark

blondmark wrote: »

The first letter is essentially a superfluous step and an unnecessary duplication in the process of making any claim. If you have a claim relating to a flight delay or cancellation, then the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct only requires that you exchange information about the issue (s.1.1(1)) providing sufficient information to enable the other party to understand the issues (s.4.4(1)).

"Exchanging Information before starting proceedings"

7.1 Before starting proceedings –

(1) the claimant should set out the details of the matter in writing by sending a letter before claim to the defendant. This letter before claim is not the start of proceedings; and

(2) the defendant should give a full written response within a reasonable period [normally 14 days], preceded, if appropriate, by a written acknowledgement of the letter before claim.

(3) where a matter requires the involvement of an insurer or other third party or where there are issues about evidence, then a full response should normally be provided within 30 days;

So the legal requirement expected by the courts is one letter before claim providing 14 days notice of proceedings, or up to 30 days where the other side requests further time to locate evidence.

Thanks for this. I shall amend the FAQ's to include this.

Mark2spark

blondmark wrote: »

The first letter is essentially a superfluous step and an unnecessary duplication in the process of making any claim. If you have a claim relating to a flight delay or cancellation, then the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct only requires that you exchange information about the issue (s.1.1(1)) providing sufficient information to enable the other party to understand the issues (s.4.4(1)).

"Exchanging Information before starting proceedings"

7.1 Before starting proceedings –

(1) the claimant should set out the details of the matter in writing by sending a letter before claim to the defendant. This letter before claim is not the start of proceedings; and

(2) the defendant should give a full written response within a reasonable period [normally 14 days], preceded, if appropriate, by a written acknowledgement of the letter before claim.

(3) where a matter requires the involvement of an insurer or other third party or where there are issues about evidence, then a full response should normally be provided within 30 days;

So the legal requirement expected by the courts is one letter before claim providing 14 days notice of proceedings, or up to 30 days where the other side requests further time to locate evidence.

I've been thinking about this. The 'problem' with this approach is that some of the airlines, such as BA, are paying out in as little as 6 weeks. So if one goes gung ho to the court without giving the airline a little leeway, you could lose the court fee.
You might be best off just making a claim and seeing if it's approved in a short space of time?
Obviously not with Monarch, Jet2, or Thomas Cook :cool:

P_Doff

Currently awaiting the postman's arrival to see whether Jet2 have sent me the evidence of extraordinary circumstances. If not I'm off to the post box to send the claim to CCMCC with the court fee.
As a testimony to the uselessness of the CAA, to whom I had written seeking assistance in establishing from Jet2 whether in their opinion ECs applied, I quote their response:-
RE: Jet 2


"Thank you for your recent letter.


I would like to explain that, as your flight involves EC Regulation 261/2004 and you departed from another European country or from an airport outside Europe to an airport in another European country, I am afraid that we are not in a position to assist. This is because every Member State is required to have a body to receive complaints that fall under the Regulation. These bodies deal with complaints about flights from airports within their country and within their jurisdiction. You should therefore address your complaint directly to the relevant National Enforcement Body (NEB). I am attaching contact details for NEBs.


May I also advise you that it is up to the individual NEB how they deal with your complaint. We have found that some of them may take enforcement action against airlines in cases of proven infringements of the Regulation but they may not obtain redress for individual complaints. Whilst we do not want to pre-empt their actions we felt we should let you know you may have to pursue your individual claim legally to seek redress. However the NEB should advise you further of their findings, which will help you build your court case, and your next course of action once they have reviewed your complaint.


Yours sincerely, "

blondmark

Mark2spark wrote: »

I've been thinking about this. The 'problem' with this approach is that some of the airlines, such as BA, are paying out in as little as 6 weeks. So if one goes gung ho to the court without giving the airline a little leeway, you could lose the court fee.
You might be best off just making a claim and seeing if it's approved in a short space of time?
Obviously not with Monarch, Jet2, or Thomas Cook :cool:

You may have a point (about nice airlines who play fair) although the issue fee is recoverable from the defendant if they did not settle prior to the issue of proceedings.

But why on earth is Ryanair's name not on the list of scoundrels?!

P_Doff

blondmark wrote: »

You may have a point (about nice airlines who play fair) although the issue fee is recoverable from the defendant if they did not settle prior to the issue of proceedings.

But why on earth is Ryanair's name not on the list of scoundrels?!

Probably because 98% of their flights arrive on time!