Flight delay and cancellation compensation, KLM/AF ONLY

2sides2everystory · 17 February 2013 at 12:50PM

Just thought I would log back in to advise how the journey from Barcelona ended 3 days ago (last post #50). After a lot of hassle with me several times banging heads with Cygnific on the phone and the travellers themselves encouraging SAS representatives in Brussels (no KLM desk there?) to swap the final SAS flight on the re-route to an airport closer to home, we finally got them home indoors approximately 5 hours after they originally expected rather than 6 or 7 hours later than expected.

We are not actually planning to claim against KLM on this one as ultimately we were quite pleased with ourselves in managing to change the re-route (the final destination) to suit us better, but for the sake of general understanding, do we think it qualifies as a valid EU 261 claim for 250 euros per person?

2sides2everystory · 18 February 2013 at 3:39PM

Centipede100 wrote: »

Not if the initial delay was due to snow at AMS

Well as per MissBailey above, it couldn't easily be argued that it was AMS snow, especially as I think that the aircraft operating KL1672 originated in AMS as KL1671 and according to flightstats, that landed in Barcelona on time! Does flightstats keep a note of the aircraft registrations? I know that flightradar24.com does - and so I have established that 737 PH-BXF was indeed the aircraft used for both flights!

KL1672 ultimately took off 76 minutes late last Thursday - we don't know exactly why but we do know that it was not because the aircraft itself was delayed arriving at BCN!

KLM had nevertheless foreseen that the connecting flight would be missed and pulled my friends off it. They were indeed told that it was because of snow at AMS!

I think we have reason to believe that airlines are currently engaged in a great deal of fraud in evading their legal obligation to accept delay claims. There is no nicer way of putting it and indeed we should not be nice !

vvkmft2001 · 18 February 2013 at 3:59PM

***************CENTIPEDE 100 SUGGESTION PLEASE"""""""""""""""""""""
Hello, Need your help here. I travelled from Manchester to Bangalore on 4th Nov 2011 in Air France. Below is the information derived from Flightstats.

06.50 MAN to 08.50 Paris - Flight was on time.
Connecting flight - 10.35Am Paris to Bangalore - Flight was delayed to 12.11pm but still we were put in a hotel till next day 10.35AM flight.

Can I claim for me being made to stay in Paris for a day and if yes, by how much?

Thanks.

2sides2everystory · 18 February 2013 at 5:22PM

With vvkmft2001' s last post, is this beginning to sound like the AirFrance/KLM connecting flight experience - i.e. they don't know their a$$ from their elbow?

We have just discovered, after my friends on Thursday were pulled off a flight which ultimately left 76 minutes late and were put on a circuitous route that got them home about 5 hours late, that if they had been left on the original routing they would have arrived just 146 minutes late!

Do KLM actually have a clue about connecting flights any longer or do they see it as an opportunity to have a laugh on us?

Despite suggesting otherwise earlier in the thread, I feel a claim coming on now not for borderline unforeseen circumstances but for a complete and utter b@lls up!

vvkmft2001 · 18 February 2013 at 10:21PM

Thanks for your reply.

It was one booking and below was the schedule:

Manchester to Paris: (Air France operated by Flybe)
Departing: 06:15 Fri 4 Nov 2011
Arriving: 08:50 Fri 4 Nov 2011

Paris - Bangalore (Air France)
Departing: 10:35 Fri 4 Nov 2011
Arriving: 00:25 Sat 5 Nov 2011 Next day arrival

The flight from Manchester departed 45 mins late and so was told that I had missed the connection flight on arrival at Paris. We were given accommodation with food at Paris for the day and I had to take the next day's flight (since only one AF flight a day to Bangalore from Paris).

I checked flight stats before posting this and it says, my flight to Paris was on time (4 mins late) and the flight from Paris was also delayed (the one I missed) by 2 hours. Not sure why its saying different.

But in any case, it was one booking and I had to miss the connection due to delay at Manchester (and thats what the airline told me at that time) and had one day stay at Paris.

So can you please suggest next steps?

Centipede100 wrote: »

More details please?

Are you saying that despite arriving in CDG ontime for your connecting flight due to depart at 10.35am (which was itself delayed until 12.11pm the same day, that you were put on the following day's flight instead?

What was the airline's reason at the time? Did they pay for your hotel/meals whilst waiting for the next day's flight? Was this all on one single reservation or were the flights booked separately?

vvkmft2001 · 19 February 2013 at 12:55PM

Centipede,

Thanks for your suggestion and I will proceed with the claim with Flybe.

Will keep everyone posted on how the claim process goes.

Centipede100 wrote: »

Make your claim for delay compensation from Flybe since they were the operating carrier who so delayed your arrival into CDG that you missed your connecting flight. The compensation is 600 euros per passenger.

val_Burden · 19 February 2013 at 12:58PM

Thank you for taking the time to contact us in respect of your flight.

I am sorry to learn of the disappointment that prompted your
correspondence. Providing our passengers with safe and efficient
service is our first priority. I would like to reassure you that every
reasonable effort is made to ensure the flights depart on time and in
the unlikely event we are unable to do so, we aim to get you to your
destination at the earliest opportunity. That said, our ability to keep
disruption to a minimum is always dependant on the resources available
to us on the day.

In some circumstances, passengers may be entitled to compensation under
European Union laws. However, any monetary payments are subject to
certain criteria being satisfied. Where the disruption is caused by an
'extraordinary circumstance' which the airline was reasonably unable to
prevent, the carrier is not obliged to pay compensation. Extraordinary
circumstances have been defined by the courts and the European
Regulations themselves provide a non-exhaustive list of which
circumstances can indeed be categorised as extraordinary.

Our records show that the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight
suffered damage to an engine C-duct gas generator fairing. The aircraft
was therefore declared unserviceable and unsafe to operate your flight
until the necessary rectification had been completed. As a consequence
and in order to reduce the length of your delay, passengers were
transferred to the first available aircraft from within the Monarch
fleet. This replacement aircraft had a smaller seating configuration
and it was necessary therefore for a number of passengers to travel on
alternative flights. Unfortunately, despite Monarch's best efforts
there was no availability to transfer your flight to an aircraft
chartered from a third party operator.

Having considered the factual background of this incident, I am
satisfied that this was indeed an extraordinary circumstance that could
not have reasonably been prevented by Monarch. Therefore I am unable to
agree to your claim for compensation.

Yours sincerely,

EU Claims

Monarch Airlines

Tel : 01582 531712

val_Burden · 19 February 2013 at 1:00PM

We are now taking this to the next step

cjkeeko · 20 February 2013 at 7:58PM

cjkeeko wrote: »

We were flying from Dubai to Glasgow with a connection in Amsterdam. The flights were booked directly with KLM and both flights were on the one boarding card. We experienced a one hour delay in getting to Amsterdam due to a technical fault and this resulted in us missing our connecting flight. KLM customer service at Amsterdam was very poor, we were put on an alternative flight and arrived in Glasgow over six hours late. I sent the compensation template letter to KLM last week and received a reply to say that we were ineligible for compensation as our actual flight delay was only an hour. I have written back to say that I believe they are misinterpreting the legislation as it is the delay arriving at your final destination that counts. I am awaiting a response but just wanted to check that I am right in my understanding that when connecting flights are booked with the carrier and on the one boarding card it is the arrival at final destination that counts.

I have received the following response from KLM regarding the claim above, relating to two flights booked through KLM and on the one ticket number.

" Having carefully reviewed your claim, I regret to inform you that it is not possible to alter our position. I should explain that in accordance with established caselaw, namely the ruling of the European Court of Justice in the case of Shenkel -v- Emirates, a flight is a unit of carriage for the purpose of EU Regulation 261/04 and not a succession of flights. Subsequently, as your flight KL 430 from Dubai to Amsterdam on the 3rd of January was not delayed by three hours, cash compensation is not applicable. I am sorry for any disappointment this may cause you."

As previously discussed in the thread it it the final destination arrival that counts and I now wish to pursue this through the legal channel however The link to European court claims doesn't seem to be working for me. Centipede100 could you please advise me of the best way to take this forward, I may have legal cover with my travel insurance policy if not I will take forward myself.