Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

supersmithy

JPears wrote: »

Sounds like a perfectly valid claim.
You may need to progress through court where it will be a balance of probabilities and given the information and evidence you have the judge should look favourably.
So you will be claiming compensation under reg 261/2004, and reimbursement of your additional flight costs, hotel and food/drink as long as you have receipts.
Have you donlwoaded and read Vauban's guide?

Thanks. Yes, have had a good read of Vauban's guide. Where there seems to be a lack of guidance is in relation to airlines using the tactic of accusing customers of being late to gate in order to get around their overbooking practices....no doubt knowing all too well that it's difficult for the customer to prove anything on this front.

Two other shockers we heard on the day were that "Wizz Air take no responsibility for the information displayed on the information screens around the airport" and that London Luton is "a silent airport" that makes no passenger call announcements....all of which again helps the airlines in ensuring that can continue to get away with overbooking.

Caz3121

supersmithy wrote: »

Long story but my question is whether there are any rules or regulations with regards to boarding and the effect of ques/backlog? Is a 30 minute boarding gate closure legally enforceable with no flex (e.g. a pregnant wife needing to sit down nearby)? I can't find it anywhere online but I've heard it mentioned that wizz air customers with 'standby' tickets aren't to know if they can board until 10 minutes before departure. So even if the whole 4 minutes, "if your late, your late", is the line they take, I can't believe that they couldn't of shown some customer service and at least listened to what we had to say.

Much will depend at the setup at the airport. In many cases they may say that you need to be at the gate 30 minutes before departure but if they are still boarding 20 minutes before departure they do not know who is not there until everyone has gone through the gate
In this instance having hand luggage helped the airline as they could offload at T-30 sharp. When there is baggage checked in the captain will often agree that if the passenger turns up before they can locate and offload the baggage they will accept the passenger, if the bags are located first the passenger is denied which can delay standby passengers being accepted

Vauban

supersmithy wrote: »

Thanks. Yes, have had a good read of Vauban's guide. Where there seems to be a lack of guidance is in relation to airlines using the tactic of accusing customers of being late to gate in order to get around their overbooking practices....no doubt knowing all too well that it's difficult for the customer to prove anything on this front.

Two other shockers we heard on the day were that "Wizz Air take no responsibility for the information displayed on the information screens around the airport" and that London Luton is "a silent airport" that makes no passenger call announcements....all of which again helps the airlines in ensuring that can continue to get away with overbooking.

I've never heard of this tactic before: so long as you present yourself at the final gate before boarding is formally closed, there shouldn't be an issue.

Are you sure that boarding hadn't been closed, and that those who saw getting on were not those who'd been placed on stand-by? That sounds more likely, tbh.

If not, then of course it's a straightforward case of denied boarding. But you'd need to be able to demonstrate exactly when you presented yourself.

Tyzap

This situation 'smells a bit fishy'!

I am going to assume that the airline must have known the op was airside after their boarding card was scanned at security.

Admittedly, that is not the same as presenting themselves at the gate within the prescribed time, but the airline knew that they had arrived at the airport and were in the vicinity.

I also recall something similar to this in the past which was due to the airline needing to reposition crew for another flight, hence the ham fisted way of denying boarding to the op.

Vauban

Tyzap wrote: »

This situation 'smells a bit fishy'!

I am going to assume that the airline must have known the op was airside after their boarding card was scanned at security.

Admittedly, that is not the same as presenting themselves at the gate within the prescribed time, but the airline knew that they had arrived at the airport and were in the vicinity.

I also recall something similar to this in the past which was due to the airline needing to reposition crew for another flight, hence the ham fisted way of denying boarding to the op.

I agree that it would be ham fisted to do this - and simply without justification if the passenger presented themselves at the boarding gate before the deadline.

The fact that the OP has asked whether "a 30 minute boarding gate closure [is] legally enforceable with no flex" suggests (to me) that s/he may have presented themselves late - assuming that the presence of a queue meant the gate was still open.

Odd that the airline would be removing some people from the flight (and putting on reserves) before the normal queue was processed. Doesn't quite make sense to me.

BarbaraWozniakowski

Dear Martin and everyone,

On 4thJune, my flight from Gatwick to Vancouver with Air Transat was delayed by approx. 8 hours.
I telephoned Air Transat in Canada and was given a case number and was advised to email my claim details with the case number as a reference.
I submitted a claim for compensation by email to Air Transat's Customer Services dept.on June 24th, plus a second complaint against poor service on the 15th June return flight on 2nd July.

On 17th July I sent an email asking for an update on my case and received an automated No Reply email which acknowledged my contact with Air Transat.

Can you advise what action I should take now as this would seem to be an unacceptable delay and enquiry emails are answered by a "robot" rather than the human being to whom they are addressed.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara

Tyzap

BarbaraWozniakowski wrote: »

Dear Martin and everyone,

On 4thJune, my flight from Gatwick to Vancouver with Air Transat was delayed by approx. 8 hours.
I telephoned Air Transat in Canada and was given a case number and was advised to email my claim details with the case number as a reference.
I submitted a claim for compensation by email to Air Transat's Customer Services dept.on June 24th, plus a second complaint against poor service on the 15th June return flight on 2nd July.

On 17th July I sent an email asking for an update on my case and received an automated No Reply email which acknowledged my contact with Air Transat.

Can you advise what action I should take now as this would seem to be an unacceptable delay and enquiry emails are answered by a "robot" rather than the human being to whom they are addressed.
Yours sincerely,
Barbara

Hi Barbara,

Air Transat don't seem to be party to a CAA approved ADR scheme so you have little option, I would send them a LBA (letter before action) with a view to taking them to the small claims court, assuming you are domiciled in the UK..

Please google and then download 'Vaubans guide' for lots of info.

Once they know that you are serious they will afford you a little more respect and handle your case appropriately.

Ultimately it will all depend upon the reason for the delay but unless it can be classed as an 'extraordinary circumstance' you will be due €600 each in compensation.

Good luck and do let us know how you get on.

Lynthejock

Trying to fill in Martins claim form and the airline is not recognised on the drop down bar. The airline is ASL Airlines France. They are trying to claim bad weather for the delay which we know is a load of rubbish cause the weather was fine on this day.

Lynthejock

I am trying to fill in Martin's compensation form and the airline is not recognised on the drop down bar. The airline is ASL Airlines France hired by Thomson. The flight was delayed by 5hrs and 55 mins and I have had the standard reply from the airline saying it was due to bad weather which I know is nonsense as there was no bad weather on that day. Any advise appreciated.

Caz3121

Lynthejock wrote: »

I have had the standard reply from the airline saying it was due to bad weather which I know is nonsense as there was no bad weather on that day

the weather could have been anywhere on the route not just at your departure or arrival airport. Do you mean you already have all the meteorological data for the route on the date?
what was your flight number and date? what do the checkers on EUClaim and bottonline state? (there is no point in taking this further until you know if the reason for the delay is not extraordinary and have the evidence to challenge)