Thomson Claim 2 years limit to claim

phritchie

For those who haven't seen other threads, Thomson 's appeal has been rejected - we've won!

Everything is Awesome!

:beer:

razorsedge

Vauban has posted this message on the Huzar thread and I thought it would be worth placing on this thread too:

Vauban:
For those applying to have stays overturned, you might find it useful to include this document from the Supreme Court. It doesn't add to what is in the public domain, but I think the seal adds quite a bit of gravitas!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/f8b69w397r...awson.pdf?dl=0

(Many thanks to Bott and Co for making this available to share with you all.)
For general advice on how to claim EU 261/04 flight delay compensation, please see my guide (last link on the "flight delay forum" sticky).

Eurorage

19th July 2010 three of us bound for Turkey arrived after a 9 hour delay so under 261/2004 - 400 Euros each at the exchange rate of the time £1,016.

Two years of letter writing since MSE flagged this back in February 2013 and with Thomson switching their defence from 2 year time barred to technical fault to... oops Supreme Court says neither are valid and a cheque to the value of £954 finally arrives.

BEWARE the accountants at Thomson are exploiting the current very poor Euro exchange rate (Jan 2015 is a good rate if you are buying holiday money BUT incredibly poor if your compensation is set in Euros and being used provide a Pound Sterling cheque).

If your compensation letter states "in full & final settlement" you need to decide if you wish to accept or challenge its value.

If it says "here is a cheque" cash it - confirm receipt in writing of their "interim payment" then decide if you want to pursue the difference.

legal_magpie

Eurorage wrote: »

BEWARE the accountants at Thomson are exploiting the current very poor Euro exchange rate.

Not so. They are simply applying the rule that where a claim is made in foreign currency, the conversation rate is at the time of payment not the time of issue. It's just too bad that the rate is unfavourable. Presumably you wouldn't be complaining if the rate had swung the other way and Thomson were paying you more in sterling than you had originally claimed.

Star9272

legal_magpie wrote: »

Not so. They are simply applying the rule that where a claim is made in foreign currency, the conversation rate is at the time of payment not the time of issue. It's just too bad that the rate is unfavourable. Presumably you wouldn't be complaining if the rate had swung the other way and Thomson were paying you more in sterling than you had originally claimed.

I have to say I thought the exchange rate was at the time of the delay
Oops