Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

NoviceAngel

Taken from the CAA Website full document here :- http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=6680

Jet2.com

1. Following the Jet2 v Huzar judgment the CAA published updated guidance (CAA List) on the incidents that could be considered to be an ‘extraordinary circumstance’. Please confirm that you apply this guidance when considering compensation claims.

We consider the list of extraordinary circumstances published on the CAA's website as well as the wording of the EC Regulations and the relevant CJEU and English court decisions.

2. Are you paying passenger claims for compensation that fall within the scope of the Jet2 v Huzar judgment?

We are paying claims for compensation where the sole cause of the delay is a technical defect within the scope of the Jet2.com v Huzar judgment. Following the judgment of the Liverpool County Court on 26 February 2015 in the case of Allen v Jet2.com we are not currently issuing new applications to stay proceedings pending the outcome of van der Lans v KLM.

3. If you are not paying passenger claims, please explain what approach you are taking to these claims and your reasoning for not paying.

Not applicable for the reasons given above.

4. The Dawson v Thomson Airways judgment confirmed that the limitation period in the UK for taking a case to court in respect of the Denied Boarding Regulations is 6 years. Please confirm that you apply this limitation period.

Jet2.com applies a contractual limitation period of two years as clearly set out in its conditions of carriage, which are incorporated into every contract with passengers. The Dawson judgment did not consider the effect of contractual time limits which are incorporated into conditions of carriage and only dealt with the question of the general limitation period. In Jet2.com’s case there is an overriding contractual limitation period of two years. Further detail on the reasons for Jet2.com’s approach are set out in paragraph 5 which follows.

5. If, for any reason, you apply a different limitation period, please explain what it is, how you apply it in practice (for example through your Terms and Conditions), and why you consider it is not in conflict with the Dawson v Thomson Airways judgment.

(a) The Court of Appeal in Dawson made it clear that the domestic law should apply to the time limits in which claims for compensation pursuant to the Regulation should be made. As a matter of domestic English law, it is entirely permissible to have a contractual limitation period for claims in contract or tort. Provided that the conditions of carriage are incorporated into the contract with the passenger, and the period is not unreasonable, an airline has a defence to a claim if it is commenced in the courts after the expiry of that shorter contractual period. There is nothing in the Dawson case which states to the contrary.

(b) Jet2.com's conditions of carriage, which are incorporated into every contract, provide for a 2 year contractual limitation period. A 2 year limitation period cannot be considered to be unreasonable given that it is the same period as is provided for in the Montreal Convention in respect of much more complex and serious causes of action. Indeed it is a generous period when one considers that in a flight delay claim, the passenger immediately has all of the information and evidence he or she needs to lodge a claim.

(c) Such 2 year contractual limitation periods have been upheld by the courts, for instance in the cases of Pickard v Ryanair and Clissold v Ryanair. In both cases, the Claimants' claims were dismissed as the claims had not been commenced within the adjudged "fairly imposed" two year limitation period in accordance with the airline’s terms and conditions. In addition, the Liverpool County Court, where the majority of "Flight Delay" claims are allocated, has struck out claims of its own volition on the basis that, by entering into a contract with our client, the passenger agreed, under the relevant clause of Terms and Conditions, that the limitation for claims would be reduced to two years.

(d) For completeness, we note that it has been suggested recently that Article 15 of the Regulation limits an airline's entitlement to agree a period shorter than the normal contractual time limit. Article 15 does not have this effect. It prevents an airline from limiting or waiving "obligations". The only relevant obligation in the Regulation is the obligation of the airline to pay compensation in the sums set out in Article 7. Article 15 prevents an airline from imposing a term which reduces the extent of its obligation to pay compensation; it does not prevent it from setting a reasonable period for the lodgment of claims. We are unaware of any court decision to the contrary.

NoviceAngel

Taken from another forum for pilots, look what they think of Jet2 passengers:-

"the CAA are not targeting low cost airlines or Jet2 their compliance action also targeted Aer-Lingus who are a scheduled carrier.

The enforcement action against Jet2 is because Jet2 have NOT complied with the rules, simples......whether you or Jet2 agree with the law is not relevant.

Jet2 go to considerable lengths to ensure they can recover from delays including aircraft and crews on standby in Spain and that is commendable.

They have the added problem that as an IT operator the responsibilities and costs when things go wrong is far higher than a pure LoCo operator that is not ATOL

They are operate at the bottom end of the market (buckets & spades) and that social group are far more likely to jump on the 'claims' band wagon, something for nothing to compensate that their £280 all in weeks holiday was wrecked by a delay of 3 hours.

xxxxx is also correct, if you choose to operate aircraft that are anywhere between 3 -6 times older than your peer group average you are going to get more tech problems and delays, its the other side of the savings coin on new aircraft.

Jet2 will/have attracted a lot more claims by the publicity surrounding their refusal to pay up."

denised

when is van der lans v klm case due to be heard.looks like jet2 still gona keep on fighting and arguing 2yr time barred.someone at court in scbrough tomorrow fingers crossed they win.

NoviceAngel

denised wrote: »

when is van der lans v klm case due to be heard.looks like jet2 still gona keep on fighting and arguing 2yr time barred.someone at court in scbrough tomorrow fingers crossed they win.

Fight2survive2013 I believe - Good Luck

It's not a case as such, it's a reference that's been made to the CJEU, in other words the local court in Amsterdam want help in interpreting the law. It is expected to take around two years, there's further info on this in the Judgement by DJ Jenkinson in the Allen case result thread.

The Van der Lans element is dead in the water as far as Jet2 are concerned now though, they are paying a small number of cases that are based on a 'tech' it's just the time barrred ones that they are sticking to and there's a Ryanair case appeal to be heard this Friday although not linked to Jet2 it will be interesting to read the Judgement.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

NoviceAngel

My advice would be to read Vaubans guide then come back and post, the guide will answer your questions.

stevemej

howticklediam wrote: »

I thought you were already some way down the line with a claim and knew what to do?????

I was parodying some of the idiots that appear on this forum.

stevemej

sailorbill wrote: »

Hi


The recent press coverage regarding the CAA and Jet2 has prompted me to get my backside into action and pursue a claim from last summer.


Two of us were on flight LS625 EMA/Heraklion on the 4/7/2014. It was initially delayed due to a tech problem and when we became airborne, we were told it had re-occurred which resulted in us flying in circles for a few hours to burn off fuel prior to landing in Manchester and changing planes. We arrived in HER well after the 3 hour delay mark.



I have read the sticky re FAQ etc and note it says the initial letter or contact should generally be made through the appropriate form generally available on the airlines website. I have trawled Jet2's site and can't find any contact form...do they have one or would an ordinary e-mail/hard copy letter be o.k.?


Also.. is anyone else actively pursuing this flight delay.


And finally a thought... as it has been shown on several occasions that Jet2 appear to be deliberately delaying and obstructing claims, even when they have little or no defence, do you experts out there think there would be any merit in chasing them for additional legal costs if I used a firm of solicitors and it could be shown that Jet2 had initially refused a claim when they had no grounds to do so?


And finally finally ... would it not be possible, via this site , to set up a list of flights/dates that are presently being pursued or where people have been successful ...or is that just too much logistically...


And well done to all those contributors who have provided so much useful information

If you want to shortcut to the chase there are already solicitors lined up dealing specifically with flight delays. They also have such a backlog that they are likely to have multiple claimants from some delays (ie the database you mentioned).

The company mentioned most on here and having had considerable success against jet2 is Bott & co. I think they take 27% of your claim and any interest.

denised

sailorbill I would just go on botts web page and fill form in they will let you know if you got claim.Ive been fighting jet2 to for 14mths getting know were,Ive been in touch with Spanish CAA, citizen advice and now botts they all say Ive got a claim. Or go on flight stats web and that will find you your flight details

DWU7

Hi, the positive attitude on this forum is awesome, I felt that if its any help to someone, I would just like to say that I was having no joy with Jet2 so, because I have a home insurance with legal protection on it, I have contacted them and they have assessed the claim and it has "a reasonable chance of success".
So no need to pay for legal or NWNF. Hope this helps someone.

NoviceAngel

DWU7 wrote: »

Hi, the positive attitude on this forum is awesome, I felt that if its any help to someone, I would just like to say that I was having no joy with Jet2 so, because I have a home insurance with legal protection on it, I have contacted them and they have assessed the claim and it has "a reasonable chance of success".
So no need to pay for legal or NWNF. Hope this helps someone.

Can you tell us a bit more please, are the insurance Company going to handle your legal case on an FOC basis?

Cheers,

NoviceAngel