Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

dunkertruck

actually the link is fine (sort of) you just have to remove the SPACE between the 1 and the 5 right at the end. There should never be a space on an URL.

howticklediam

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-34140835

Philip Meeson, the airline's executive chairman said: "This is an exciting time in Jet2.com's history as we invest in our next phase of growth and development with this order."

He said the new aircraft would increase capacity and improve customers' experience.

That's nice!

howticklediam

This caught my attention as I continue to read up on CPR rules:

Standard disclosure – what documents are to be disclosed
31.6 Standard disclosure requires a party to disclose only–
(a) the documents on which he relies; and
(b) the documents which –
(i) adversely affect his own case;
(ii) adversely affect another party’s case; or
(iii) support another party’s case; and
(c) the documents which he is required to disclose by a relevant practice direction.

So does that mean that if a party to a case is in possession of, or aware of, a document that would be detrimental to their case that they must disclose it?

Legalese is not my strong point.

---

edit

---

This would suggest they should disclose documents if they are aware of them:

http://www.fieldfisher.com/PDF/Briefing-paper-2005-07-01-36aaab6c-959d-4c52-9411-f0c5ae27b18c.PDF

legal_magpie

This doesn't apply to the small claims track

howticklediam

I have a feeling j2 are going to try to argue the following when I go to court in November as there is almost five years worth of interest at stake.

We reject your claim for interest on the basis that this is a claim for fixed compensation under EU Regulation 261, and is thus not a claim for debt or damages under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1969.

So my counter argument would be that my claim was valid in 2011 (as it is now) and they refused to pay.

And when they refused to pay it became a debt that they owed and therefore I am entitled to claim interest on that debt from the date of my first claim.

Has any one else got an angle on this? I know interest is awarded in flight delay cases all the time, so it is an entitlement, but I just want to get my position clear for the court.

howticklediam

Similarly, for exchange rate there are arguments for applying it:

1) at the time the first claim was made to the airline
2) the time that claim was filed in court
3) or the time of the settlement.

I favour the first as this is when the claim should have been paid and the debt became due. So effectively the claim is for the amount due if it had been converted to GBP at that time.

The second has been ruled before in Blake v Easyjet, HH Judge Jenkinson in Liverpool, so might be the easiest to argue.

The third I would argue doesn't make sense because the date of settlement is totally arbitrary and not related to either the date that the claim/debt became due or was claimed.

So it seems to be a bit of a grey area.

NoviceAngel

I would argue the second, DJ Jenkinson also stipulated that the time you commenced Court proceedings is the time that the Euro conversion should take place, I would get those Jugements and reference them both in your case.

I've heard the first argument (about section 69)before and there has been limited success with it, but plenty have been awarded interest.

The point I would make is that although NOT binding DJ Jenkinsons rulings are from a flight delay expert based at Liverpool that has a particular expertise in these cases, so IMHO his rulings should be taken into consideration by other DJs ...

As ever, good luck

NoviceAngel

legal_magpie

Good reply to the point about interest would be "bo--ocks". It became a debt when they didn't pay. You are entitled to interest under CCA

*max*

I just wanted to say, I used the template provided here to send my letter to Jet2 about a 3+ hours delay in 2011, about a month ago. I received a letter of acknowlegement a week later, and today I got a cheque for £187 (250 Euros) in the post! I can't believe how easy it all was. I was expecting to have to write back and forth, but no, easy peasy. Very happy!

Tyzap

*max* wrote: »

I was expecting to have to write back and forth, but no, easy peasy. Very happy!

Perhaps it's because Jet2 have lost just about every court case they have been involved with and now have the CAA using the Enterprise Act to force them to comply.

Jet2 signed a legally binding document agreeing not to reject compensation claims for disruption caused by technical faults, and agreeing not to impose a two year time limit on claims. It also agreed to proactively give passengers information on their rights during disruption.

Which is a quote taken from....

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/travel/2015/09/ryanair-faces-legal-action-for-wrongly-rejecting-flight-delay-claims?_ga=1.257743875.969737047.1432498792

It's not that Jet2 want to comply, they have to! the law, the CAA and thousands of angry passengers say so.