50% reduction in claim for delay between 3 and 4 hours

Vauban

TSC: You have my sympathy. Monarch are robbing you blind, but you cannot focus on taking legal action, given your other concerns. Unfortunately I don't think that there is anything else you can do: Monarch will always fold before this goes to court, because it's indefensible. But even if they fought and lost, this won't help you: no precedents are set.

I agree that the CAA should take a clear position, but they are unlikely to enforce it. So you'd still be left needing to take legal action.

I have no idea what else to advise: perhaps someone else has a better idea?

Mark2spark

Vauban wrote: »

I have no idea what else to advise: perhaps someone else has a better idea?

Try a NWNF firm?

DavePollard

I read TwoSeniorCitizens post on this subject and would firstly like to offer them my sympathy on their situation.It just go to show how callous Monarch are to their customers. It a waste of time writing to Monarch legal team as the will either ignore any communication or stay entrenched in the decision. I am sure you have other priorities looking after your husband but if you feel it is worth the time and effort it might be worthwhile lodging a formal appeal to Monarch about their decision. I would suggest you explain your situation and address your E Mail to either or both of Kevin George Managing Director/CEO and/or Paul Keithley Head of Customer Services. Their E Mail addresses are
kevin.george@monarch.co.uk and Paul.Keithley@monarch.co.uk
I know Paul always has the respect to respond to E Mails.Makle sure you quote your case number on any communication. Maybe in view of your circumstances they may should a little human touch and settle as a Goodwill Gesture. Do not say you are not in a position to take them court and if unsuccesful make sure you keep the case open.Good luck.

On the broader issue of the 50% reduction in compensation I find it unbelievable that the CAA will not come out say it is not justified and against the law. If they quoted this fact on their website or elswhere, it may make Monarch change their minds on this issue of at worst help with any Court cases. The CAA ssem incapable of making a decision.

111KAB

DavePollard wrote: »

I would suggest you explain your situation and address your E Mail to either or both of Kevin George Managing Director/CEO and/or Paul Keithley Head of Customer Services.
I know Paul always has the respect to respond to E Mails.

As someone who had to take Monarch Airlines to Court I have to totally disagree with your suggestion to contact Kevin George and/or Paul Keithley. I was keen not to go to Court and offered to accept 200€ rather than the entitled 250€ and Monarch never responded. In order to avert action I emailed numerous times and their lack of response exacerbated my annoyance so much so I took the Court action and the Judge at Worcester Court agreed with my claim and I was ultimately awarded £325 per person ie almost double my claim.
I subsequently wrote to the Chairman (Rawlinson) and the MD (George) to both point out that they were wasting money in defending these cases but more importantly I suggested numerous ways they could alleviate their problems. I never received a response from Rawlinson but George's secretary did respond to confirm my letter had been passed onto Keithley. The 'wishy-washy' 4 line response I ultimately received from Keithley was, basically, an insult as it was obvious he couldn't give a monkeys about my delay and quite honestly he would have been better not to reply at all rather than send a brief cut n' paste standard apology.
A sub-standard outfit offering a sub-standard service particularly when it comes to delays.

Mark2spark

Or you could just call them wanka's :rotfl:

Vauban

Mark2spark wrote: »

Or you could just call them wanka's :rotfl:

As in the indigenous tribesmen of Peru?

Mark2spark

They are as good as being from out of space anyway mate

DavePollard

I see that the CAA have amended their guidelines to state that there should be no reduction in compensation for delay of between 3 and 4 hours for flights under the distance of 3500 km. Hopefully Monarch will accept this fact and pay up. If they don't then surely there is no doubt the CAA guideline can be used in court against Monarch.

Vauban

Centipede100 wrote: »

In the same way that 'guidelines' should not be used in a legal sense by airlines, then neither should 'guidelines' published on the CAA's website be used by passengers.

Much better to use the Regulation and precedent case law in a legal claim against an airline particularly on this narrow point IMO...

Is there any precedent case law on this narrow point?

Magic_Moments

DavePollard wrote: »

I see that the CAA have amended their guidelines to state that there should be no reduction in compensation for delay of between 3 and 4 hours for flights under the distance of 3500 km. Hopefully Monarch will accept this fact and pay up. If they don't then surely there is no doubt the CAA guideline can be used in court against Monarch.

Thank it great news Paul. Does that mean I can appeal to Monarch against my refused claim and also demand 8% interest from the date of the flight. I am unsure of the position regarding the latter can anybody clarify.