Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Easyjet ONLY

QuestionRequest

Caz3121 wrote: »

You need to split out your expenses to those that should be covered by the airline under EU261 and those that you will need to claim from your travel insurance
1) Hotel fees - in Palma whilst you waited for the new flight - EU261 duty of care claim from Easyjet
2) Car parking at Luton - Consequential loss - claim from Travel Insurance
3) taxi Stansted to Luton - should be covered by Easyjet
4) dog kennel fees - consequential loss - claim from travel insurance
5) food and substinance during delay - Easyjet (note many airlines will not reimburse alcohol)
6) Car rental to and from airport - travel from airport to accommodation and back should be covered under duty of care (although if having the car for 4 days was more than a taxi each way they may choose not to pay the full bill)

Hi,
Thanks for your response. I have laid out all the claims individually every time I contact them. Even if the 2 that may form consequential loss are taken out of the equation its still just over £1,000 and they do not respond and fob me off when I call them and actually finely get through after waiting on the phone for 30 mins plus every time.
Also, my travel insurance I had at the time of travel expired in May (after the journey) and I did not renew via them but an alternative company. Can I still claim via the insurance company 7 months after the incident as obviously I sent everything to Easyjet as obviously it was their fault we were delayed for so long in Palma?
Many thanks.
Alison.

JPears

Then my friend you need to start legal action through the smalls claims court. This may make them take notice and respond. Or it may not then you either get judgement by default or go to court.

fifeken

QuestionRequest wrote: »

. . . as obviously I sent everything to Easyjet as obviously it was their fault we were delayed for so long in Palma?

No, it was French Air Traffic controls fault, not easyJet's. That why the claim needs to be split as described.

windmill26

Can anyone explain this to me in simple words?
"AND UPON the Court noting the Defence of a delay of less than 3 hours".
Does it mean that the claim was put trough as a less than 3 hours delay?

Vauban

I think it means that the airline's defence is, at least in part, that the flight was delayed by less than three hours. but you might want to give the full paragraph for context, and explain what document you are quoting from.

windmill26

Vauban wrote: »

I think it means that the airline's defence is, at least in part, that the flight was delayed by less than three hours. but you might want to give the full paragraph for context, and explain what document you are quoting from.

It was sent to me by Bott after months of going back and fort and me chasing them. I think I have a claim against Easyjet .In Jan 2010 we were ready to board at Barcelona Airport when Easyjet told us to go back to the waiting area.The plane was delayed for hours (5) with no explanation.Just before 9pm we were told by Easyjet to go to another gate and board the last plane to London for the day.Easyjet has always stated that the delay was due to extraordinary circumstance until they could not get away with that "old chestnut" anymore.Now they are stating that because I never traveled on the original booked flight I have no claim.My question is "how I could have traveled on a flight that never left the Airport?".It is getting confusing and I think Bott are trowing in the towel because it is not easy money for them .Please note that I tried to claim with Easyjet myself even quoting Vauban etc. and I went with Bott just out of desperation.Any input?

Vauban

But what is the document that Bott have given you? It sounds like something from the Court.

windmill26

Vauban wrote: »

But what is the document that Bott have given you? It sounds like something from the Court.

An order from the Court which needs to be complied with by 26th November 2015 otherwise the claim will be struck out. Bott decided to throw the towel in last week and asked me if I want to carry on with the claim myself. The order from the Court is paperwork that they emailed me. What I don't understand is how Easyjet can claim that there was no delay of more than 3 hours.

Vauban

Not very good of Bott.

If you want help you need to post up all the Order - at the moment we just have a fragment.

windmill26

Vauban wrote: »

Not very good of Bott.

If you want help you need to post up all the Order - at the moment we just have a fragment.

Can I send it to you via PM?