Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

howticklediam

NoviceAngel wrote: »

The wording 'Vacated' worries me a little does it definitely say just the hearing has been vacated and your case has been 'STAYED' ?

Good result, I know that's what you wanted until outcome of the Gledhill appeal.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

It's vacated. I need to apply and pay an application fee to get a new date or judgment in default.

y-o-r-k-y

y-o-r-k-y wrote: »

Jet2 flight LS476 Dalaman to LBA 24th September 2010. Arrived at LBA almost 7hrs late after actually flying to Manchester and busing to LBA.
Firstly I emailed them with my claim and full details. Next they asked for a claim by letter. I again sent this with full details. Next they asked for full details again but requesting the actual booking confirmation, even though they had already been given the booking reference twice. Luckily I still had email on my computer.
I now have a responce from them. After wrongly quoting the date and destination of the flight concerned and the usual customer service splurge this is the body of their answer.
' Turning to your request for compensation under Regulation 261/2004, while Jet2.com endeavours to arrive on time, you will no doubt appreciate that we have occasions where this is not possible. On investigation, extraordinary circumstances led to the delay of your flight. Compensation for delays caused by extraordinary circumstances is excluded under Regulation 261/2004. More specifically the delay was caused by an unexpected flight safety shortcoming. Consequenty , there is no entitlement to compensation on this occasion.'

I have now written back to Jet2 saying that their letter gives no evidence of such extraordinary circumstances and given that they even got the flight details wrong can their judgement even be trusted.
' Please now provide a full and detailed explanation of the extraordinary circumstances that caused the delay to this flight so that I may pass these onto the CAA for their interpretation. You can not unilaterally classify a delay as such without a full and detailed explanation so others can also judge. Please provide this evidence within 14 days'

I'll report back on the reply I get.

I resubmitted my claim to Jet2 after the Hussar ruling and this time they have rejected it Quoting their 2 year rule. They never even mentioned this rule in the previous 2 years or so I've been flighting this claim. They also originally refused to disclose the reason for the delay. After this last rejection I contacted the CAA again asking for the reason for the delay? + Was the delay considered extraordinary? + was the 2 year rule being imposed by Jet2 legal? I also contacted Bott and Co with my case but they seemed to think the delay was extraordinary and refused to take me on.
I have now had a further reply from the CAA basically just forwarding me a spread sheet about the flight. One section of this says '
On touchdown at ACE, the EICAS gave a 'F/O Pitot' message, meaning a fault with the pitot heater. Parts and an engineer were positioned to ACE, and on arrival the fault was identified as the F/O's pitot heater having failed. This was a random failure of a part, which could not have been anticipated and therefore constitutes an extraordinary circumstance'.
I am of the opinion that this is an old quote and the fault would not now be considered extraordinary. The fault also occurred on a flight to Lanzarote , not the out bound flight to Dalaman which would have taken us back to Leeds Bradford.
Dose anyone think I still have a claim , given the above ? I have asked the CAA for clarification but it will take ages. Plus I've still got to sort out Jet2's two year rule.
Any help appreciated .

stevemej

howticklediam wrote: »

My hearing has been vacated. So I wait until the two-year time bar is settled in higher courts and then apply for a judgment I guess. The order doesn't say anything about time limits so I assume it's open ended. Also the defendants still have time to object, presumably they can argue that the case still goes ahead. I don't care either way.

is the Gledhill case the Bradford case that j2 are appealing?

also don't you have issues with the 3rd party and arent they also claiming a hidden defect.

trouble with j2 is they have half a dozen reasons not to pay you. i cant imagine them leaving it at that!

howticklediam

stevemej wrote: »

is the Gledhill case the Bradford case that j2 are appealing?

also don't you have issues with the 3rd party and arent they also claiming a hidden defect.

trouble with j2 is they have half a dozen reasons not to pay you. i cant imagine them leaving it at that!

It's up to them now, once the two-year issue is settled beyond doubt I apply for an other hearing.

stevemej

howticklediam wrote: »

It's up to them now, once the two-year issue is settled beyond doubt I apply for an other hearing.

so IS the gledhill case the bradford appeal?

stevemej

y-o-r-k-y wrote: »

I resubmitted my claim to Jet2 after the Hussar ruling and this time they have rejected it Quoting their 2 year rule. They never even mentioned this rule in the previous 2 years or so I've been flighting this claim. They also originally refused to disclose the reason for the delay. After this last rejection I contacted the CAA again asking for the reason for the delay? + Was the delay considered extraordinary? + was the 2 year rule being imposed by Jet2 legal? I also contacted Bott and Co with my case but they seemed to think the delay was extraordinary and refused to take me on.
I have now had a further reply from the CAA basically just forwarding me a spread sheet about the flight. One section of this says '
On touchdown at ACE, the EICAS gave a 'F/O Pitot' message, meaning a fault with the pitot heater. Parts and an engineer were positioned to ACE, and on arrival the fault was identified as the F/O's pitot heater having failed. This was a random failure of a part, which could not have been anticipated and therefore constitutes an extraordinary circumstance'.
I am of the opinion that this is an old quote and the fault would not now be considered extraordinary. The fault also occurred on a flight to Lanzarote , not the out bound flight to Dalaman which would have taken us back to Leeds Bradford.
Dose anyone think I still have a claim , given the above ? I have asked the CAA for clarification but it will take ages. Plus I've still got to sort out Jet2's two year rule.
Any help appreciated .

You shouldn't take any notice of anything J2 say. They are strangers to the truth and they were born out of wedlock.

I dont understand why bott and co think it might be extraordinary. i'd be worried about this.

if its a regular tech fault I dont think it will be an ec tho.

afik j2 wont pay up without taking them to court for claims older than 2 years .

razorsedge

y-o-r-k-y wrote: »

I resubmitted my claim to Jet2 after the Hussar ruling and this time they have rejected it Quoting their 2 year rule. They never even mentioned this rule in the previous 2 years or so I've been flighting this claim. They also originally refused to disclose the reason for the delay. After this last rejection I contacted the CAA again asking for the reason for the delay? + Was the delay considered extraordinary? + was the 2 year rule being imposed by Jet2 legal? I also contacted Bott and Co with my case but they seemed to think the delay was extraordinary and refused to take me on.
I have now had a further reply from the CAA basically just forwarding me a spread sheet about the flight. One section of this says '
On touchdown at ACE, the EICAS gave a 'F/O Pitot' message, meaning a fault with the pitot heater. Parts and an engineer were positioned to ACE, and on arrival the fault was identified as the F/O's pitot heater having failed. This was a random failure of a part, which could not have been anticipated and therefore constitutes an extraordinary circumstance'.
I am of the opinion that this is an old quote and the fault would not now be considered extraordinary. The fault also occurred on a flight to Lanzarote , not the out bound flight to Dalaman which would have taken us back to Leeds Bradford.
Dose anyone think I still have a claim , given the above ? I have asked the CAA for clarification but it will take ages. Plus I've still got to sort out Jet2's two year rule.
Any help appreciated .

Jet2 recently updated their T&C's to try to circumnavigate the Dawson ruling and are now quoting the updated ones to fob people off. However back in 2010 you probably would have had a different set of T&C's that only quoted 2 years to claim in the 'damaged baggage section'.

You can use this website to find old web pages.
http://archive.org/web/
Just type in the current webpage for J2's T&C's
http://www.jet2.com/Terms.aspx
Then look back through the years to the date they have nearest to your booking date for a snapshot of the webpage on that date.

Good Luck with the CAA!!

stevemej

razorsedge wrote: »

Jet2 recently updated their T&C's to try to circumnavigate the Dawson ruling and are now quoting the updated ones to fob people off. However back in 2010 you probably would have had a different set of T&C's that only quoted 2 years to claim in the 'damaged baggage section'.

You can use this website to find old web pages.
http://archive.org/web/
Just type in the current webpage for J2's T&C's
http://www.jet2.com/Terms.aspx
Then look back through the years to the date they have nearest to your booking date for a snapshot of the webpage on that date.

Good Luck with the CAA!!

The CAA have confirmed that they are in the process of taking enforcement action against J2:

The CAA has commenced enforcement action against Jet2, as well as two other airlines,

using our formal powers under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002 to ensure that airlines

operating in the UK treat passengers fairly when adhering to the requirements under

Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 (“EC 261/2004”). More information can be found on our

website at

http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=14&pagetype=65&appid=7&newstype=n&mod

e=detail&nid=2437


.

The CAA wrote to Jet2 on 22 December 2014 regarding its compliance with EC 261/2004,

including its contractual terms imposing two-year time limits for passengers to take

compensation claims to court, and has since exchanged a series of letters with Jet2.

Glances

Please do excuse any problems with this post. I'm on a tablet.

So, literally a day after the Huzzar ruling, I emailed Jet2 politely pointing out that their argument about "extradinary circumstances" was moot, ect ect. I honestly thought that I "had them" this time. Alas. I received this response today:

"I can only reiterate that, as we have previously explained, the national enforcement body recognisable for the rights of passengers from Spain is Argencia Estatal de Seguridad A!rea (AESA), the Spanish civil aviation authority. the official list of extraordinary circumstances published and enforced by national enforcement bodies including AESA confirm that a technical default such as the one which caused the delay in this instance is an " extraordinary circumstance" and for this reason compensation is not payable".

I don't get angry often, but good grief. This has done it!

EDIT: I mean Allen, not Huzar.

NoviceAngel

Glances wrote: »

Please do excuse any problems with this post. I'm on a tablet.

So, literally a day after the Huzzar ruling, I emailed Jet2 politely pointing out that their argument about "extradinary circumstances" was moot, ect ect. I honestly thought that I "had them" this time. Alas. I received this response today:

"I can only reiterate that, as we have previously explained, the national enforcement body recognisable for the rights of passengers from Spain is Argencia Estatal de Seguridad A!rea (AESA), the Spanish civil aviation authority. the official list of extraordinary circumstances published and enforced by national enforcement bodies including AESA confirm that a technical default such as the one which caused the delay in this instance is an " extraordinary circumstance" and for this reason compensation is not payable".

I don't get angry often, but good grief. This has done it!

Blimey, your getting angry and you haven't even commenced Court proceedings?

Just follow Vaubans guide, issue the NBA, then submit form N1, trust me, it's quite enjoyable once you get into the swing of things.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel