Taking The Airlines To Court

NoviceAngel

NoviceAngel wrote: »

I think the point is that if I were to call my local garage and ask what steps should I take to fix my car this morning because it won't start, I would expect them to say bring it in and we'll fix it, doubt very much that they would give me chapter and verse on how to fix it myself.

Thanks for not pointing out the very obvious ! If my car won't start how the beep can I bring it in to you ~ flaming push it ????

Oops mistakes ~ still making them lol

johndoe70

novice angel,
haha i did sort of see that but what the hell eh lol. By the way thanks v much for the encouraging words,much appreciated


jpears,
yes in prob being a bit over sensitive (must be all those school reports that said 'must do better' still haunting me) but i take your point regarding formatting.i generally post on here using my windows phone and its very limiting so prob not up to standard!
i would like to say thanks for not pulling me up for my ranting and i appreciate both of you for your advice

johndoe70

novice angel,
its good that you havnt had to re-submit your claim via N1 as plenty have i think and the only reason i knew to put it in paper form is due to vaubans court experience of how he was pulled up for issuing by mcol.
seems a little lame of airlines (or dc's) ordering a claim re-issue in this regard but that's why i thought it best not to take any cchances.
wish they would revise the mcol form to allow multiple claimants,would be so much simpler
ah well

Prof_Ligate

NoviceAngel wrote: »

Hi Johndoe70,

Thank you for a respectful comeback.

Well you doing better than me, I did issue via MCOL for myself and my wife and can't even remember if I mentioned her in the particulars, but my case hasn't been chucked out yet! Lol


NoviceAngel

Id imagine most do as it's so much easier. A decent small claims judge should allow an oral application to add a Claimant at the hearing if it becomes necessary.

stevemej

johndoe70 wrote: »

novice angel,
thanks for reply and yes i suppose there is a tendancy to over complicate matters when it comes to being a l.i.p. ,just worried that if i get one measly thing wrong on the form,it will be bounced back to me to re-issue along with another fat fee to stump up.
with regard to my earlier post i apologise if it seemed a little gnarly as that was not my intention and i truly appreciate all suggestions and assistance other forumites are able to offer.
i must say though that although i am classed as a newbie i have done a shedload of homework on this subject and read the excellent guides and FAQ's on here as well as all the relevant judgements and rulings on the matter so i am failry well read on this issue and would not waste others time with easy to find ,well linked bread and butter info that is freely available thanks to the effort and time of others.Believe me it is nit my intention to be spoon fed answers.
my enquiry,i felt,was r elating to an uncommon issue whereby the answer isn't readily,or easily found on here and was quite specific.
i understand that its a give and take forum and amembers should 'pay it forward' and help others where possible.Unfortunately due to my workshifts and kids extra curricular activities and my daughters ongoing medical situation i am not able to offer my time much at the mo but going forward as commitments allow i fully intend to participate more on here and let people know how my claim is progressing when i can.
im not a taker guys and want to do this myself and cant wait to take tc on in court.
just sometimes,now and again,there may be something that in not entirely sure on and would like to approach others about without fear of being subjected to 'eliteism mentality'. Where all on the same side after all.
so frustration? No.
i hear you noviceangel and understand where your coming from when you mention the car breakdown and garage scenario but i would say this, i myself am a stroke patient therapist and try to help all my patients yet i cannot imagine a scenario whereby if i was asked my advice about something i could actually help with,not bothering just because I'd clocked off!
perhaps i should have found razorsedge' post myself but you know sometimes its hard to see the wood for the trees on these threads even when its staring at you, lol.
anyway,enough grandstanding and once again my apologies if ive been overly sensitive but honestly ive done my own homework and am not looking for a free ride.

"Disappointed at being pulled up on my grammer? Yes!"

the word is grammar!

stevemej

stevemej wrote: »

"Disappointed at being pulled up on my grammer? Yes!"

the word is grammar!

Only kidding!

stevemej

Comments most welcome:

I have been following this flight delay forum for more than 2 years and following huzar am finally getting a claim in. Could you please cast you eye on my details for the form and tell me if you think this is ok:

On 12 July 1012 me and 5 friends departed on a 4 night trip to Malaga. The flight was delayed by approximately 5.5 hours arriving at 1:30am effectively reducing our trip to 3 nights.
Under Article 7 of EC 261/2004, pursuant to the Sturgeon judgment in the ECJ (Case C-402/07 of 19
November 2009), we are entitled to €400 per passenger and we would like to claim compensation from Jet2 for this delay.
Details: On 12 July 2012 our flight LS265 (from Leeds to Malaga) was delayed by approximately 5.5 hours departing at approx. 21:22 instead of 15:45 and Jet2 have confirmed that the cause of the delay was a technical fault.


We originally wrote to Jet2 on XX/XX/12 claiming compensation but this was rejected on the grounds that the delay was caused by a technical fault resulting in a flight safety shortcoming and that compensation was not due.
There have been several court cases (at district court level) which have found that technical faults do not amount to 'extraordinary circumstances' and that in these circumstances compensation is due. Most recently (in the case RONALD HUZAR vs JET2.COM Appeal ref: M13X134) the county court found against Jet2 and when Jet2 appealed the court of appeal also found against Jet2. Finally Jet2 sought to appeal against this decision to the Supreme Court and on 31 October 2014 the Supreme Court also rejected Jet2s appeal.

We wrote a notice before action letter to Jet2 in June this year but waited for the ongoing court processes to be concluded. Finally we have written to Jet2 since the outcome of the Supreme Court judgement on 31 October and they are still refusing to pay compensation which we believe is due. We feel we now have no option but to pursue this claim in court.

Our claim is for 400 Euro per passenger (6 passengers) and 8% interest on the outstanding money.


I would be most grateful for any guidance before submitting the form.

thanks in advance

JPears

i would include a line about technical faults being normally inherent in the activities of an airline.

johndoe70

stevemej,
ha,i shot myself in the foot with that one,doh!
must be thinking of Kelsey grammer i reckon lol.


sounds like your all ready to take this further!
you have the know how,all the details you need and the impetus so should this go all the way to a hearing, i think your chances are very good being as most tech breakdowns are no longer judged as ec's, so i think its full steam ahead for you and your party

Vauban

If this is the particulars of claim section for the N1 claim form, it should be much shorter and doesn't need to get into arguments about Huzar etc. All that comes later. There's a template I recall at the start of this thread. I would just copy that - short and sweet.

Btw: if there are five adults claiming you will all need formally to be claimants and named as such in the claimants box. (This can't be done via MCOL unfortunately.)