Flight delay compensation, all other EU airlines

bendis

Thanks, I've just found it too, but it looks like they used a solicitor firm to get the compensation?!

Caz3121

bendis wrote: »

Thanks, I've just found it too, but it looks like they used a solicitor firm to get the compensation?!

because they originally received a rejection
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=59119231&postcount=5285

bendis

I've just received a response from a lady at Wizz Air, that was quick... as I completed the claim online earlier today. This is what it says... unexpected technical fault? Is this another generic response, as it's not mentioning what actually happened? So now I have to respond back saying that tech dificulties aren't 'extraordinary circumstances' and request full info on the nature of the 'tech difficulties'?

[FONT=&quot]Please be informed that unfortunately despite the fact that Wizz Air operates a quite young aircraft, and its airline totally corresponds with the international standards and regularly maintain as per the directions for AIRBUS aircrafts in order to carry the passengers with a 100% safety, unexpected technical fault could always happen. Wizz Air’s primary concern is always the 100% safety of passenger-carriage which can cause inconveniences to our passengers.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Please also be informed that all the required strict service checks (A, B, C, D, and Z-check, daily maintenance) had been done regularly on that air carrier, the fault could not have been predicted and this flight delay was outside of Wizz Air’s control.[/FONT]

airhelp

If the airline has already rejected your claim, it is more likely that they will not change their mind. They usually explain that delay was caused by sudden technical failure. And that safety must always come first, even before punctuality. They also will not provide any documentation, because according to them they can only provide documentation of the flight upon request from the authorities empowered to control air carriers.
If you want to continue your "fight" with the airline, all you can do is to send your claim to National Enforcement Body.

David_e

airhelp wrote: »

If the airline has already rejected your claim, it is more likely that they will not change their mind. They usually explain that delay was caused by sudden technical failure. And that safety must always come first, even before punctuality. They also will not provide any documentation, because according to them they can only provide documentation of the flight upon request from the authorities empowered to control air carriers.

If you want to continue your "fight" with the airline, all you can do is to send your claim to National Enforcement Body.

This is neither correct nor helpful. The evidence regarding the UK "National Enforcement Body" is that they are pretty well useless.

"All you can do" is read the FAQs and then, if the circumstances indicate a right to compensation, take legal action yourself or engage a no win no fee lawyer.

Just spotted the url in your auto signature. The website contradicts your posting.

111KAB

If you need any 'air help' insofar as you decide to use a no win no fee you are better placed, in my opinion, to use a UK based firm.

airhelp

David_e wrote: »

This is neither correct nor helpful. The evidence regarding the UK "National Enforcement Body" is that they are pretty well useless.

"All you can do" is read the FAQs and then, if the circumstances indicate a right to compensation, take legal action yourself or engage a no win no fee lawyer.

Just spotted the url in your auto signature. The website contradicts our posting.

I can't agree with you... NEB exists to help air passengers in claim their rights according to Regulation 261/2004. Everybody can send a request to the NEB by himself, even via email. So before someone will go fight in court, first he should use all other ways to get compensation from the airline.

David_e

airhelp wrote: »

I can't agree with you... NEB exists to help air passengers in claim their rights according to Regulation 261/2004. Everybody can send a request to the NEB by himself, even via email. So before someone will go fight in court, first he should use all other ways to get compensation from the airline.

Sorry but that is absolutely wrong and contradicted by the experience of the overwhelming majority of the posters on this forum (including me).

This forum deals almost exclusively with UK resident passengers claiming from UK based airlines. Your advice may be good for other jurisdictions but not the UK.

Vauban

airhelp wrote: »

I can't agree with you... NEB exists to help air passengers in claim their rights according to Regulation 261/2004. Everybody can send a request to the NEB by himself, even via email. So before someone will go fight in court, first he should use all other ways to get compensation from the airline.

I can only conclude that you must have very little experience of engaging the UK's Civil Aviation Authority. The CAA is a) taking a year or more to respond to individuals; b) then simply refering them back to the airline; and c) siding with the airline industry over the passenger.

What is your view, for example, of the NEB list published on the EC website? Do you consider it consistent with European law?

(I also agree with David that you should not be advertising your services on the site. I don't believe it is allowed.)

Caz3121

there are also inacurate statements on your website

"I missed my connecting flight due to flight delay. Do I have the right to compensation?

When the connecting flight is operated by the same airline company, you have a right to compensation if the total delay is more than two hours."

The flight does not have to be by the same airline company to qualify, it needs to be on a single PNR
You could be travelling on separate tickets for the same airline and would not qualify
The delay needs to be over 3 hours not 2 for compensation

" Additionally, airlines can be held liable for damages resulting from delays." Interesting and I believe incorrect. Compensation is a set fee based on distance and length of delay. You mention duty of care separately - don't believe there is anything else, certainly not consequential losses