Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

JPears

NoviceAngel wrote: »

Just a quick update on my progress:-

Still waiting for an actual court date, had a letter from the Birds refusing court arranged mediation

Although they are going for Leeds CC. I hope that's not a bad omen

Depends on the judge Is that your local court Novice?

NoviceAngel

JPears wrote: »

Depends on the judge Is that your local court Novice?

Yes, convenient for both, I wonder if the Birds fly all the way from London :beer:

JPears

Not with u know who
Let me know the date, I may come along and heckle

Goniners

I am pursuing a claim against Jet2 for a delayed flight (LS 391 from LBA to BGY) on 15/09/2012. I travelled with 2 friends. It seems sensible for me, the lead passenger, to pursue the claim on behalf of us all. I have found out that I cannot use MCOL because there are more than one claimants. I cannot find anything in the FAQs about how to proceed. Any advice, please?

NoviceAngel

Goniners wrote: »

I am pursuing a claim against Jet2 for a delayed flight (LS 391 from LBA to BGY) on 15/09/2012. I travelled with 2 friends. It seems sensible for me, the lead passenger, to pursue the claim on behalf of us all. I have found out that I cannot use MCOL because there are more than one claimants. I cannot find anything in the FAQs about how to proceed. Any advice, please?

Hi Goniners,

You can manually (the old paper way) make a small claim to your local court with multiple Claimants.

However, I'm making the claim as the 'lead passenger' sure Jet2 are quoting locus standi in return. This has been mentioned many times before earlier in this thread with plenty of advice start from page 1 and all the help and advice is here!

Regards,

NoviceAngel

kimberleyallen

I have had a reply. It might be of interest to some of you pursuing claims. I have checked the data on the link they included and it seems that I don't have a case. My only quibble is that he states that the fault occurred just before take off which implies we had boarded and had to disembark. That wasn't the case. Anyway it seems to be that if there is a technical fault they are now covered under the extraordinary circumstances clause and I don't see how I can go any further with this!

Re the link: It won't let me post it. Just put http:// before the address

Here's the response I received...


Thank you very much for your email. Although we would maintain our position on the [2 year] time limit, I do appreciate your comments and quote from the Civil Aviation Authority and value this feedback. I understand this claim is now resolved and please allow me to turn to the second claim. If I can clarify that technical faults can constitute extraordinary circumstances and it would depend on the individual delay.

The cause of the delay to this flight, LS809 on the 26th March 2013 was a Flap Slat fault on the aircraft due to operate your flight, which occurred just prior to take off. We sourced the nearest available aircraft to operate your flight and everything possible was done to minimise disruption to the flight.

We believe our conclusion is fortified by a recent publication by a working group of the National Enforcement Bodies (NEBs) which are responsible for the enforcement of Regulation (EC) 261/2004, of a non-exhaustive list of matters that they consider to be extraordinary circumstances. Paragraph 25 of the List confirms that the NEBs consider “Failure of necessary or required aircraft systems (for example the cooling system, avionics system, flight control system, flaps, slats, rudders, thrust reverser, landing gear) either immediately prior to departure or in-flight (where those systems had been maintained in accordance with the required maintenance programme” constitute extraordinary circumstances. This has been published on both the European Commission and Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)’s websites. For ease of reference, please find the relevant website link below:

ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/passengers/air/doc/neb-extraordinary-circumstances-list.pdf

As the delay to your flight was the result of a Flap Slat fault which occurred just prior to take off, we believe that, in accordance with paragraph 25 of the NEB List, your delay was caused by an extraordinary circumstance. We also firmly believe that, as in over 90% of claims that have reached trial to date, a Court would agree that Jet2.com could not have avoided the delay, even if all reasonable measures were taken. I can therefore only maintain that my previous response was correct and as your delay was the result of extraordinary circumstances no compensation is payable on this occasion.

I hope to have clarified our position and would like to thank you once again for taking the time to contact me.

111KAB

kimberleyallen wrote: »

I have had a reply. It might be of interest to some of you pursuing claims. I have checked the data on the link they included and it seems that I don't have a case. My only quibble is that he states that the fault occurred just before take off which implies we had boarded and had to disembark. That wasn't the case. Anyway it seems to be that if there is a technical fault they are now covered under the extraordinary circumstances clause and I don't see how I can go any further with this!

So they spin you a yarn and you believe them! If you do believe them rather than walk away you should use a no win no fee firm.

kimberleyallen

Why is it a yarn? Surely they wouldn't lie as they would be exposed if I chose to take it to court and that would be catastrophic for them. I would imagine as a professional business they wouldn't be so stupid.

NoviceAngel

kimberleyallen wrote: »

Why is it a yarn? Surely they wouldn't lie as they would be exposed if I chose to take it to court and that would be catastrophic for them. I would imagine as a professional business they wouldn't be so stupid.

This is why it's a yarn....

taken from an earlier post talking about the NEB list

JPears wrote: »

Ignore paragraph 2.. this is a wish list from the NEBs, merely proposals for discussion. It has not been accepted or ratified or agreed on by the EC, is not binding or law and contradicts the current Reg 261/2004 and amended proposals to Reg 261/2004 which have been drafted by the EC.

111KAB

kimberleyallen wrote: »

Why is it a yarn? Surely they wouldn't lie as they would be exposed if I chose to take it to court and that would be catastrophic for them. I would imagine as a professional business they wouldn't be so stupid.

Please read through the Jet2 and other threads and you will realise they (and other airlines) are 'economic' with the truth. In my own case against Monarch their barrister IN COURT told the Judge that Monarch generally took 5 hours to turn a plane around ..... it actually takes them one hour!