Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Virgin Atlantic ONLY

lexie167

Natony46 wrote: »

Seems like there are going to be multiple hearings at multiple courts concerning VS074 (delayed flight from Orlando 7th June 2013). does this mean that VAA are going to take a huge gamble on their EC for pilot illness or try and scare a few off with bully tactics.......no mediation - straight to court hearing. Thoughts please.

I was on this flight with friends and family and I have been told off them that they wont be paying us compensation, I was wondering if I would just be better off going down the court route instead of all the tooing and frowing

Oak1_2

Struggled to find this info elsewhere so posting here and hopefully will help others once they get to the MCOL stage:-

I just spoke to a very helpful chap at the Money Claims Centre as I am looking to initiate court proceedings against Virgin Atlantic on behalf of myself, my wife, and 2 young children for the VS74 Orlando to Manchester delay on June 7, 2013.

He advised the following:

- I cannot claim for all using MCOL (online), must use N1 form and send by post
- Can include wife and 2 children as claimants on one single N1 claim form
- Need to sum the total claims sought (eg 4 people * 600 Euros) and pay one single fee for the total amount
- Should convert Euros amount into Sterling and stating the date of the conversion rate you are using (presumably the one that suits you best out of either today or the date of your delay ?)
- Include a covering letter saying the claim is for 4 claimants, 2 of whom are children

Nothing further necessary at this stage

David_e

Oak1 wrote: »

Nothing further necessary at this stage

I replied to your identical posting on the Taking The Airlines To Court thread. In case it helps anyone, I'll just repeat what I said there that the advice from MCOL wasn't quite complete (in my view)

Kevtamuk

Well, we had our day in court and it did not end well. To be fair, the beginning and the middle didn’t go too well either!

Some background:
We (4 family members) were on a Virgin Heathrow to New York flight in 2007. The aircraft boarded normally and pulled back from the terminal before taxiing out to the runway. Here it stopped for approx an hour. The pilot said there was a computer fault and we returned to the stand. The engineers fiddled around a bit and announced it had been fixed. Again we taxied out only for the fault to reoccur. We once again returned to the stand where some more faffing about took place. The fault was once again reported as fixed and we managed to take off at the third attempt. This meant arriving in New York 3 hours 57 minutes late.

After recently reading about EU Regulation 261/2004 my wife declared that we should put in a claim to Virgin. I wasn’t too sure, but being a dutiful husband, agreed to proceed. As most of you know, claiming from the airlines without the threat of court proceedings is as much use as sheltering under a paper umbrella in a monsoon. So, the next step was to start court proceedings. Being naïve young things (oh alright – naïve old things) we thought that Virgin might well pay up just for the hassle factor involved in them going to court. Wrong! They decided to take it all the way and we subsequently received their defence.
They claimed that the fault was caused by a faulty Spoiler Servo Control and that the aircraft was less than one year old. The part had only been in use for 5,167 flying hours and that the average flying part for this part was 360,000 hours therefore it was an extraordinary circumstance. There was also a witness statement from an engineer backing this up. They also made great play (and included a copy) of the preliminary guidelines from the NEB meeting in April 2013.

Now, having read about a great many cases on these excellent forums, I had to admit we had one of the weaker cases, but, what the heck, in for a penny, in for a pound. Off we went to court.

Our hearing was set for 10.00am on Tuesday 22nd October and my wife and I arrived on time only for the Usher to inform us that Virgin had rung to say they were running late. They eventually turned arrived at 10.35am and we were called into the hearing at 10.45am. The Virgin team consisted of two ladies – the Claims Manager (who did all the talking) and another lady who seemed to be there to provide support only as she didn’t say much in the hearing at all.
The Judge was a lady and the first thing she did was ask Virgin where their Defence Bundle was as the court hadn’t received it and why their expert witness was not attending. At this point I thought we might have a chance.
She also told us that the claim was in my wife’s name and only she could claim. My wife should also do the talking at the hearing, as she was the claimant. She eventually reluctantly agreed that I could represent my wife. We then had to go outside for another 15 to 20 minutes while she read Virgin’s defence.
On re-entering the hearing room both sides were asked questions and had a chance to make their position clear. It was obvious at this point that the Judge was placing a lot of emphasis on the preliminary guidelines from the NEB meeting. I pointed out that this had no standing in law and the rulings of the European Court had clear priority. I also gave her a copy of the Proposal to Amend Regulation 261/2004 from the European Commission dated 13/3/2013 where it is made very clear that technical problems inherent in the normal operation of the aircraft are NOT extraordinary circumstances.
I also pointed out that Virgin’s case relied upon the assumption that the Spoiler Servo Control had been correctly maintained until failure. I asked Virgin for the maintenance schedule for this component and the service records for the aircraft to show it had been correctly maintained and serviced. Of course, they did not have this.
After a bit of too and fro-ing we left the room for the Judge to consider her verdict.

At 12.05pm we went back and the judge summed up. She basically reiterated Article 16 of the Regulation which states that ‘Each member state shall designate a body responsible for the enforcement of this Regulation’ and took this to mean that the CAA were the body to which we should turn for guidance on what is and is not extraordinary circumstances! She particularly focussed on sections 23 and 26 of the guidelines even though I’d pointed out to her that these were specific to ‘Unexpected Flight Safety Shortcomings’ which could not apply to this component failure as the aircraft flew for another 10 days before Virgin took it out of service to change.
The next part really flabbergasted me. She stated that she accepted that it was difficult for the expert witness to be there and she accepted his statement (fair enough) and that Virgin were a reputable airline and she had no doubt that the aircraft had been maintained correctly! She went on to say that she had to consider what was ‘inherent’ and that she did not consider early failure of a component to be ‘inherent in the normal activity of the air carrier’. She duly found for the airline.

I have to say that we came away from the hearing feeling more than a little despondent. I was quite prepared to lose – if Virgin had turned up with full maintenance records I would have had little argument, even though it would still have been counter to Wallentin-Hermann, but to accept that maintenance of the aircraft had been correctly carried out purely on the basis that ‘Virgin are a reputable airline’ is frankly laughable.
Also, the strong emphasis placed on the NEB guidelines does not auger well for future cases if other Judges take a similar stance.

To be fair, the Judge was quite friendly and it was not an unpleasant experience. We also chatted to the ladies from Virgin during the breaks and they were very nice as well. Please don’t let it put anyone else from starting Court proceedings, I just wanted to set out our experience so that others could learn from it and be forewarned.

Kev

David_e

Kevtamuk wrote: »

Well, we had our day in court and it did not end well. To be fair, the beginning and the middle didn’t go too well either!

Thanks for the very comprehensive write up. I'm very sorry to hear that you lost but I am fuming at what, in my view, is another bad judgement that just does not apply the law correctly.

normansbaby

111KAB wrote: »

Don't starve yourself whilst waiting for a positive result from any mediation as it is normally a waste of time.

Hi 111KAB, I wouldn't completely dismiss mediation. I've done it and had a satisfactory result and I'm aware of at least two other posters on here who also have,there may be more.
It's a simple and straightforward procedure, all I would say is you need to be willing to give a little. How much is an individual decision but I would think along the lines of the interest element!

111KAB

normansbaby wrote: »

Hi 111KAB, I wouldn't completely dismiss mediation. I've done it and had a satisfactory result and I'm aware of at least two other posters on here who also have,there may be more.
It's a simple and straightforward procedure, all I would say is you need to be willing to give a little. How much is an individual decision but I would think along the lines of the interest element!

Totally agree and I didn't dismiss but to me mediation suggests meeting somewhere in between your aspirations and what is justified. Monarch offered me FA (in fairness my court [£35] costs back) so I told them to Foxtrot Oscar and ended up with double my claim

vln

Natony46 wrote: »

It seems like VAA are struggling to find a viable defence in my opinion. The captain was ill, the crew knew they wouldn't be flying that evening and VAA did not "deploy all of it's assets" etc, etc. It also seems they want to brass it out as my court date is looming and I will shortly be paying my fees and entering my case as stipulated in the order I received a few weeks ago. Mediation out of the window!!
If however VAA decide to fold and pay up with the usual gagging order - I will not be best pleased after taking so much time and effort to prepare, only to be cast aside like an annoying itch. We are after all paying customers and expect a level of service parallel to the amounts of money we pay. I expect to be compensated when I don't get what I paid for. Nowhere in my holiday documents did it say " in the event of personnel sickness we will not be able to get you home on time" but alas it seems VAA have decided not to have a standby crew in one of their busiest destinations because "it would cost them too much to do so........." It must be a business mans logic because I don't understand it. Rant over.......

We have had the same court date and are preparing our case - however we have still had no guidance of what to prepare / what is expected of us yet.
Interestingly enough we have been told that we are only 1 of 2 cases being heard on this date and that this date may change because there is potentially not enough time that day to hear the 2??!!

I'm under impression reading other posts that over 200 people are claiming for this flight, this is why it was originally to be heard in Horsham before being moved up to Durham etc... Now being told 1 of 2. Where does the 200 claimants figure come from? Do others on this flight have court dates set? Clearly the first hearing is going to set precedent somewhat so would be interested to see who is up and when!!

flor2012

vln wrote: »

We have had the same court date and are preparing our case - however we have still had no guidance of what to prepare / what is expected of us yet.
Interestingly enough we have been told that we are only 1 of 2 cases being heard on this date and that this date may change because there is potentially not enough time that day to hear the 2??!!

I'm under impression reading other posts that over 200 people are claiming for this flight, this is why it was originally to be heard in Horsham before being moved up to Durham etc... Now being told 1 of 2. Where does the 200 claimants figure come from? Do others on this flight have court dates set? Clearly the first hearing is going to set precedent somewhat so would be interested to see who is up and when!!

I have just received my court date today for this flight which is a few weeks after yours. It's at my local court, which is a bit of a journey for Virgin so hoping it does not get transferred. The 200 claimants figure comes from some information provided to another passenger by a senior manager at Virgin. She basically said over 250 passengers had claimed so she was going to defend this flight all the way. I haven't heard of any other court dates earlier than yours so it would be interesting to hear of any as I agree the first hearing should set precedent. I have messed up a bit as I completed a MCOL so Virgin have confirmed in their defence I am unable to claim for the rest of my party. I am going to ring the court and see what I need to do to be able to claim on their behalf. They really seem to be digging their heals in with regard to this flight it is clear that the pilot took ill at the hotel some time before we were due to fly but yet they waited until after we were due to have taken off to inform us which was just the beginning of the disgusting level of customer service we received. To link the delay to someone taking seriously ill or dying on board does not make any sense. Hope you receive some further information soon:(

David_e

flor2012 wrote: »

Virgin have confirmed in their defence I am unable to claim for the rest of my party. I am going to ring the court and see what I need to do to be able to claim on their behalf.

As I understand it, you can apply to add claimants. I can't immediately recall which thread(s) this has been discussed on but try searching "locus standii" or maybe also try "locus standi".