Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Easyjet ONLY

Vauban

Mollypop wrote: »

I have found a no win no fee company who say they can claim for technical faults caused by lightning strike and was wondering if anyone had experience/success with this. Or any other advice. Thank you.

But you can also claim directly too - and without having to hand over some of your compensation to another company! Tell easyjet that if they are refusing to pay your claim you will take it to their adjudication service provided by CEDR - who should find in your favour. You can find all about CEDR by searching the posts on this thread - and also by googling them.

legal_magpie

I would not recommend using a no win no fee company because their regulation is very limited. If you don’t want to take the claim yourself you would be better off using a solicitor specialising in airline claims as although they will take a slice of your winnings you won’t pay anything if you lose and they are subject to regulation by the SRA

Watermelon89

Hi. I need advice whether my friend and I should appeal for a cancelled EasyJet flight.

Basically our flight got cancelled from Berlin to London at the last minute. We did put on a claim but EasyJet say that it was caused by Air Traffic Control Restriction. However it doesn't make sense since all the flights before us took off normally. Our flight was the last one and from our understanding the airport shuts down at 11pm (flight was to leave at 11:55pm). So in our eyes EasyJet is at fault for not getting the flight ready to leave on time.

Their explanation: [FONT=verdana,geneva]ATC restrictions on previous flight sectors had resulted in your flight missing its flight slot or curfew at Berlin Schoenefeld. This information was provided from the airport via our Flight Disruption Report.[/FONT]

Vauban

Watermelon89 wrote: »

Hi. I need advice whether my friend and I should appeal for a cancelled EasyJet flight.

Basically our flight got cancelled from Berlin to London at the last minute. We did put on a claim but EasyJet say that it was caused by Air Traffic Control Restriction. However it doesn't make sense since all the flights before us took off normally. Our flight was the last one and from our understanding the airport shuts down at 11pm (flight was to leave at 11:55pm). So in our eyes EasyJet is at fault for not getting the flight ready to leave on time.

Their explanation: [FONT=verdana,geneva]ATC restrictions on previous flight sectors had resulted in your flight missing its flight slot or curfew at Berlin Schoenefeld. This information was provided from the airport via our Flight Disruption Report.[/FONT]

If an earlier delay meant the flight couldn't leave before the airport closed, then you have a claim. See my advice two posts above yours on what to do!

Justice13075

To start with put your flight details into bottonline and then euclaim and see if they think you are due any compensation

Mollypop

Vauban wrote: »

But you can also claim directly too - and without having to hand over some of your compensation to another company! Tell easyjet that if they are refusing to pay your claim you will take it to their adjudication service provided by CEDR - who should find in your favour. You can find all about CEDR by searching the posts on this thread - and also by googling them.

Thank you. Easyjet actually suggested that I should refer my complaint to CEDR Services and mentioned there was a charge for it. Do you have any idea how much the charge is? Will have a search and google also, thank you.

Mollypop

Ok, submitted dispute to CEDR so fingers crossed they find in our favour. Thanks for your help people.

knack92

Flew Dubrovnik-Edinburgh on 7th October which arrived about 3:30 late due to diversion of the earlier Edinburgh-Dubrovnik flight. Apparently the incoming plane couldn’t land due to high winds despite multiple attempts.

I’ve put the details into EU Claim who say ECs apply in this case however I’m confused by this as the weather did not directly affect my flight. Also, many other flights managed to land around the time of the incoming flight which suggests to me this wasn’t just down to the wind.

Do others agree I have a claim worth pursuing?

gmcr81

Tyzap wrote: »

Hi gmcr81,

The following two extracts are from the following EC document...

This document attempts to expand upon the EC261/2004 flight delay regulations and has some useful sections that you could use.

e. Reasonable measures an air carrier can be expected to take in extraordinary circumstances.

Whenever extraordinary circumstances arise an air carrier must, in order to be released from the obligation to pay compensation, show that it could not avoid them even if it had taken all reasonable measures to this effect.
Furthermore, the Court52 has found that under Article 5(3) of the Regulation, an air carrier can be required to organise its resources in good time so that it is possible to operate a programmed flight once the extraordinary circumstances have ceased, that is to say, during a certain period following the scheduled departure time. In particular, the air carrier should provide for a certain reserve time to allow it, if possible, to operate the flight in its entirety once the extraordinary circumstances have come to an end. Such reserve time is assessed on a case-by-case basis. However, Article 5(3) cannot be interpreted as requiring, as a ‘reasonable measure’, provision to be made, generally and without distinction, for a minimum reserve time applicable in the same way to all air carriers in all situations when extraordinary circumstances arise. In this regard available resources will generally be higher at the home base compared to outbound destinations thereby giving more possibilities to limit the impact of extraordinary circumstances. The assessment of the air carrier’s ability to operate the programmed flight in its entirety in the new conditions resulting from the occurrence of those circumstances must be carried out in such a way as to ensure that the length of the required reserve time does not result in the air carrier being led to make intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time.

Also the following instructs that, in circumstances such as yours, the regulations "must be interpreted strictly". It is important to highlight this to a judge imo. It may just give you the edge.

A given extraordinary circumstance can produce more than one cancellation or delay at final destination, such as in the case of an Air Traffic Management decision as referred to in Recital 15 of the Regulation.
As derogation from the normal rule, i.e.: the payment of compensation, which reflects the objective of consumer protection, it must be interpreted strictly46. Therefore all the extraordinary circumstances which surround an event such as those listed in Recital 14 are not necessarily grounds for an exemption from the obligation to pay compensation, but require a case-by-case assessment47.

Remember that you can request information that you require from EJ who are obliged to supply it as part of the court protocols.

Good luck.

Thanks for the reply Tyzap, I'll use that in my response. Doing some research I've come across a good article in the Guardian a few months ago which I'm hoping will sway the judges view and may be helpful for others where easyJet are trying the same excuse. The site won't let me post links but if you google 'French pilots claim easyJet is risking safety by scheduling too many flights' you'll easily find it. For anyone that's interested it basically backs up the point that their scheduling on French routes is inadequate in summer months and the HR team in Luton haven't got a clue! The open letter from the pilots union referred in the article provides some fairly damning quotes too (again just google 'SNPL easyjet open letter' and you'll find a copy).

Tyzap

gmcr81 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply Tyzap, I'll use that in my response. Doing some research I've come across a good article in the Guardian a few months ago which I'm hoping will sway the judges view and may be helpful for others where easyJet are trying the same excuse. The site won't let me post links but if you google 'French pilots claim easyJet is risking safety by scheduling too many flights' you'll easily find it. For anyone that's interested it basically backs up the point that their scheduling on French routes is inadequate in summer months and the HR team in Luton haven't got a clue! The open letter from the pilots union referred in the article provides some fairly damning quotes too (again just google 'SNPL easyjet open letter' and you'll find a copy).

Hi gmcr81,

I think this is the article you are referring to....

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/aug/15/easyjet-scheduling-flights-french-pilots

I feel that is just background information that can 'perhaps' lend further support the main points that I linked to previously.

You don't want to get into an argument about possible safety issues in a courtroom with a lawyer who knows his stuff. Try to keep it simple and to the point, use the wording from the regulations as your evidence and previous case evidence about 'knock on's' etc.

I don't want you to 'bite too much off' unless you really feel that you can force that point home in a court.

Good luck