who is liable to pay the compensation?

tollycatslave

Way to go :-)

Vauban

tollycatslave wrote: »

Way to go :-)

The CAA will take about four months to respond to your query, and then say that the airlines were not at fault. I think my advice is better.

greeneyedlad

Vauban wrote: »

The CAA will take about four months to respond to your query, and then say that the airlines were not at fault. I think my advice is better.

Vauban really the CAA will take 4 months then say they are not to blame anyway?! thats outrageous!!

Im not sure what my next step should be then

Vauban

greeneyedlad wrote: »

Vauban really the CAA will take 4 months then say they are not to blame anyway?! thats outrageous!!

Im not sure what my next step should be then

I've answered on the other thread: but for completeness, NBA letter to Thomson, quoting preamble para 7 to the Regulation, and then (inevitably, I fear) court action thereafter.

greeneyedlad

Vauban wrote: »

I've answered on the other thread: but for completeness, NBA letter to Thomson, quoting preamble para 7 to the Regulation, and then (inevitably, I fear) court action thereafter.

many thanks

tollycatslave

Vauban wrote: »

The CAA will take about four months to respond to your query, and then say that the airlines were not at fault. I think my advice is better.

So basically there is a law inplace to compensate delayed passangers but either Thomson or Monarch are breaking it by not compensating passangers .... yes it is outrageous that they can flout the law in such away.

tollycatslave

And I'm still non the wiser who is actually liable :-l

greeneyedlad

Centipede100 wrote: »

You could of course make both airlines jointly and severally liable via a legal claim...

Centipede, BOTH jointly liable?! OMG im finding this whole thing so confusing & im ready to give up lol

cheers

Mark2spark

Centipede100 wrote: »

You could of course make both airlines jointly and severally liable via a legal claim...

Exactly what I was thinking.
It would be good if one of these cases could get before a judge, so that a ruling can be referred to.
There's an option to take a court route where you apply for 'directions' from a judge first, a directions hearing will come up much quicker than a defended case.
Maybe Blondmark will have some clarity to add to this.

greeneyedlad

Mark2spark wrote: »

Exactly what I was thinking.
It would be good if one of these cases could get before a judge, so that a ruling can be referred to.
There's an option to take a court route where you apply for 'directions' from a judge first, a directions hearing will come up much quicker than a defended case.
Maybe Blondmark will have some clarity to add to this.

Is Blondmark able to advise??