Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

Goniners

David_e wrote: »

I'll defer to the more expert on here but my thoughts:

Para 37 of Wallentin says:

"... the frequency of the technical problems experienced by an air carrier is not in itself a factor from which the presence or absence of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ ... can be concluded"

Now, as we have seen reported, some judges seem to be have an imperfect understanding of the law - including Wallentin. That being the case, having some statistics that show hydraulics fail frequently might be in your favour. Conversely, if the airline shows that these things fail very rarely, the judge may (mistakenly!) say that the event was therefore extraordinary, for the purpose of the Reg's. The point I am making is that bringing frequency into the case is (as far as I can see) not strictly relevant but if it is used, it may (incorrectly) influence the judge for but, equally, potentially against you.

In so far as there is any definition of EC, I think it's summarised in Para 34 of Wallentin.

" a technical problem … is not covered by the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ … unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control"

What was the event that caused the problem with the hydraulics? If it was wear and tear or even random failure (short of a known/reported manufacturing fault) then that is clearly something "inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier". Parts fail in complex machines, to paraphrase Para 24.

NoviceAngel suggests asking for maintenance records. Again, Wallentin is quite clear (as I read it, at least) that compliance with servicing schedules is not an excuse against EC. The danger is that a judge may rule otherwise and say, "they did all they could" therefore it was extraordinary.

What do others think? Should you introduce this information or is it prefereable to stick closely to Wallentin to avoid inadvertently giving the defence some potential ammunition (if faced with an underinformed judge)?

Thank you for that excellent post. I've been pondering all that stuff too. I think we should stick closely to Wallentin. I don't want to get into an argument about what I, they, the judge or the man on that omnibus think. It is not our opinions that matter in this case. The decision was made by those EU judges. I think we should all stick with their opinion.

David_e

Goniners wrote: »

Thank you for that excellent post. I've been pondering all that stuff too. I think we should stick closely to Wallentin. I don't want to get into an argument about what I, they, the judge or the man on that omnibus think. It is not our opinions that matter in this case. The decision was made by those EU judges. I think we should all stick with their opinion.

You're welcome. I did it partly for my own benefit! Sometimes writing it down helps get it a bit clearer. And it's always useful to hear other views

Unfortunately, the conclusion seems to be that even when you have the law on your side, there is a chance that the judge may not have sufficient knowledge to apply it correctly. Let's hope that they read this forum to get themselves up to speed!

laptopdog78_2

Just a test post.:mad:

Laptopdog78

I have just found this forum and am looking for advice to my situation. I now realise i have wasted time sending letters back and forth to jet2, but, here goes.

We were due to fly from Tenerife south back to Leeds/Bradford airport at 19.30 on Friday 2nd August 2013.
We were delayed 19hrs, and actually flew at 14.30 on Saturday 3rd August.

This was due to an incoming flight from England, which was going to be used for our return home, having a radio fault that could not be fixed.
This led to a different aircract being flow over but by this time our flight crew were out of flying hours.

Without going into every detail on here yet regarding our complaints at things during the delay, i just want to post the steps we have taken regarding a compensation claim to Jet2.

Step 1 - We sent a letter to jet2 detailing our complaints, and all flight details.
JET2 Response - We were asked for more details, which we provided. We were then sent the correspondence is in date order letter.
We then recieved a lengthy letter, with the main part stating, "On investigation, extraordinary circumstances led to the delay of your flight. Compensation for delays caused by extraordinary circumstances are excluded under regulation 261/2004.
More specifically the delay was caused by an unexpected flight safety shortcoming. Consequently, there is no entitlement to compensation on this occasion.

Step 2 - We sent a letter describing our dissatisfaction, and stating some facts regarding EU rules that apply to all EU regulated flights. "aeroplanes unable to fly due to the crew being out of flying hours is not deemed to be exceptional circumstances".
We also stated that if we did not recieve a satisfactory outcome, we would refer this case to the CAA.
JET2 - The main part of the letter read, "I can confirm that your delay was caused by a communications system fault. This was an extraordinary circumstance which could not have been forseen, and which was beyond jet2.coms control.
As a direct consequence of this the crew went outside of their flight time hours, this was not however the root cause of the delay. Despite taking all reasonable measures to avoid the delay, jet2 was unable to do so.
Under regulation EU 261/2004, airlines are not liable to pay compensation if the delay was the result of an extraordinary circumstance.

Step 3 - We sent a letter detailing some facts we believe are true. This is that 261/2004 deems extraordinary circumstances to be, Extreme weather, Unanticipated strike action, Security risks, political instability, riot, civil war.
JET2 - The main part of their response read, "The national enforcement body (NEB) who enforce regulation (EC) 261/2004 state in paragraph 25 what they deem to be extraordinary circumstances".
The list named many aeroplane faults in the letter.They then say "We also firmly believe, that as in over 90% of claims that have reached trial to date, the court will agree that jet2 could not have avoided the delay, even if all reasonable measures were taken.
We therefore maintain our stance that compensation is not payable on this occasion.

STEP 4 - We then drafted another letter but have not sent it, as i now realise it is a waste of time.
I have two questions to this forum.

1- Are jet2 in the wrong here? (I cant get out of my head the fact that the original fault was not even our flight)
2- What is our best course of action from here?

Many thanks for any advice.

DrA_Harrogate

Laptopdog78 wrote: »

I have just found this forum and am looking for advice to my situation....

Many thanks for any advice.

Greetings!

Step1: Go to 1st page of this forum, follow ALL the links to the Euro caselaw etc. Familiarise yourself, by making notes etc, until you, and you alone, feel you have a grasp of the issues (they are all there).

Step 2: Ask any remaining questions.

It looks like you have a good case, but Jet2 will fight all the way - by the way their stats are wrong - we the people win most cases!

JPears

1. Most likely, only the judge can decide.
2. Court to see said judge...

JPears

DrA_Harrogate wrote: »

Greetings!

Step1: Go to 1st page of this forum, follow ALL the links to the Euro caselaw etc. Familiarise yourself, by making notes etc, until you, and you alone, feel you have a grasp of the issues (they are all there).

Step 2: Ask any remaining questions.

It looks like you have a good case, but Jet2 will fight all the way - by the way their stats are wrong - we the people win most cases!

And hopefully those stats will improve next week!

NoviceAngel

JPears wrote: »

And hopefully those stats will improve next week!

Good Luck DrA:beer:

Yes, interesting stats that Jet2 are spouting, I don't know where they are getting them from, I think it's about a 90%+ success rate on here against the airlines.

Anyone counting the specific Jet2 rate, I know of a handful of successes and just a couple of failures myself?

Just heard from the Birds, they want my case listed for 3 hours! - Still no date yet though, judge ordered case management directions, and to be fair Bird & Bird have drafted a very short document listing the expected hearing length and just saying we should exchange documentation that we intend to rely on in court 2 weeks prior to hearing which all seems fairly standard.

Something that I keep forgetting to add to posts for others, not seen it mentioned, but you don't have to mail all documents to the Birds, they normally accept service by email with prior agreement and just found out the other day that the courts do accept service by email, saves the trees and your own ££ LEEDS County Court email for service is e-filing@leeds.countycourt.gsi.gov.uk.

Cheers

NoviceAngel

David_e

NoviceAngel wrote: »

Anyone counting the specific Jet2 rate, I know of a handful of successes and just a couple of failures myself?

I can't think why Jet2 should have any better or worse court experience than other airlines and I've not seen anything to suggest 90%+ cases generally are decided for the airlines - although there does seem a worrying recent trend towards, what appear to be, bad decisions.

Maybe a Freedom of Information request might yield some data? I wonder if national figures are available?

NoviceAngel

David_e wrote: »

Maybe a Freedom of Information request might yield some data? I wonder if national figures are available?

I agree with you over the success rate Jet2 are quoting, I think they're just scare tactics to try and dissuade the customer against taking Court action.

As far as I'm aware Freedom of info can only be used to gain info from Government bodies, so the airlines wont be telling.

Cheers

NoviceAngel