Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

c90

ian41 wrote: »

IMHO, I am sorry but this is not a case where compensation would be paid.

Clearly, the first and defining event was totally out of the control of the operating air carrier. It is a foregone conclusion that a court would dismiss such a claim under EC Reg 261/2004.

Pleased to hear that BA met their Art 9 obligations to the pax in New Delhi.

Particularly sorry to read your final para. I can see that it would be annoying to you and your son but on further reflection, you might consider that the crew member's illness which required the diversion was of greater importance - possibly a matter of life or death.

I hope that the crew member recovered and that your next flight is less eventful.

Thanks Ian41.:)

Yes. When we continued our flight from New Delhi, we were told that the crew who was ill was recovering and transferred to Dubai. :j

But just out of curiosity, is it common for aircrew workers to have this maxmimum working hours limitations that they could not exceed? I am surprised that the short 3 hours in middle east could triggered that and everyone on that flight had to stopover in Delhi and resulting in a 22+ hrs delay.:eek:

If i have bought travel insurance, would the insurance not pay too?

Thanks again.:)

Caz3121

c90 wrote: »

But just out of curiosity, is it common for aircrew workers to have this maxmimum working hours limitations that they could not exceed? I am surprised that the short 3 hours in middle east could triggered that and everyone on that flight had to stopover in Delhi and resulting in a 22+ hrs delay.:eek:

If i have bought travel insurance, would the insurance not pay too?

Airline crew do have a maximum number of hours and can end up going "out of hours" there will have been standby crew but if this was a diversion it may not be a base with available crew so they may have had to fly crew in

Travel insurance normally pay out something like £20 for 12 hour delay or similar depending on the policy

c90

Caz3121 wrote: »

Airline crew do have a maximum number of hours and can end up going "out of hours" there will have been standby crew but if this was a diversion it may not be a base with available crew so they may have had to fly crew in

Travel insurance normally pay out something like £20 for 12 hour delay or similar depending on the policy

Hi Caz3121,

I see, noted. Thanks.
In my case, they used the same crews the next day. Guessed it was ok for BA to use the same crews after 10hrs rest in this case.:)

Noted on the travel insurance too.

Cheers,:beer:

Saramond

Hi all,

I'm looking for some advice, please.

We (2 adults and 4 children) traveled with Monarch on ZB 69 on 21st Dec 2010.

We were scheduled to leave at 11:55am from Gibraltar to Luton. The flight was unable to land because of weather conditions.

The inbound flight was diverted to Malaga and we were eventually transported, by coach, to Malaga Airport.

On arrival at Malaga we were told our plane was there and they would shortly get us on our way. We eventually found out, via th UK, that our plane had actually taken passengers delayed at Malaga home instead of us.

We stood in a check in queue for hours before finally being checked in on the Manchester flight (which would stop at Luton) due to take off at 20.20 that evening.

We were eventually given 10 euros food vouchers each, around 8 hours after our original departure time.

To add to our frustration there was a further 2 hour delay until our flight took off.

We arrived in the UK around 1:00am, 11 hours later than scheduled.

Do we have any right to compensation?

TIA

dzug1

Caz3121 wrote: »

Travel insurance normally pay out something like £20 for 12 hour delay or similar depending on the policy

Though with some policies at least the clause is expressed as delayed 'departure' so an ontime departure with delays on route wouldn't count, presumably.

Ditto parts (and only parts) of the EU regs, depending how you read them

richardw

Saramond, please read earlier posts re Sturgeon, btw there is nothing 'extraordinary' re bad weather at GIB requiring diversions to Malaga airport, it is a fairly frequent occurrence.

theboots

theboots wrote: »

'll get those into an mail and reply to SIA this week

Just before the New Year I sent a further email (suggested by Iain41) outlining arguments against the stance taken by SIA previously. In essence reminding them that the defence of extraordinary circumstances requires evidence to support it and the standard is fairly high. They've now dropped that from their defence...

SIA wrote:

"T[FONT=&quot]hank you for your email dated 28 December 2011. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Please allow me to clarify that we are not pursuing the defence of extraordinary circumstances. I apologise if my original statement led you to believe this.[/FONT]

Here I think they've realised thanks to Iain's arguments that they don't actually have a case.

SIA wrote:

[FONT=&quot]We have consulted with our legal advisers on this matter and have been advised that as all cases in UK have been stayed by the English courts, pending the judicial review of the Sturgeon by the EU courts, we will not be paying compensation for delay cases. Until a new judgement is made, Singapore Airlines is presently unable to consider any claims under the Sturgen ruling.[/FONT]

So like many others I am now on hold awaiting to courts decision. Assuming that it goes in favour of the passengers and inline with european law I'll remind them at the appropriate time.

SIA wrote:

[FONT=&quot]Please allow me to reiterate that the situation was dealt with in the best possible manner given the circumstances and information available at the time and we did take all reasonable measures to minimize disruption to our passengers. At the earliest possible opportunity, we notified passengers themselves and when possible, made adjustments to their travel plans. For bookings made through travel agents, we notified travel agents and it was then the agents' responsibility to inform the passengers about the delay and, where possible make adjustment to passenger’s travel plans. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We provided full duty of care outlined in EC Reg 261 /2004 to all passengers, which we already specified in our correspondence dated 06 December 2011. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Once again we apologise for the inconvenience caused.[/FONT]

This last part seems essentially standard apologies in the hope that I'll believe there is no more to be done.

So many thanks to Iain and I'll need to bide my time.

ian41

Saramond wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm looking for some advice, please.

We (2 adults and 4 children) traveled with Monarch on ZB 69 on 21st Dec 2010.

We were scheduled to leave at 11:55am from Gibraltar to Luton. The flight was unable to land because of weather conditions.

The inbound flight was diverted to Malaga and we were eventually transported, by coach, to Malaga Airport.

On arrival at Malaga we were told our plane was there and they would shortly get us on our way. We eventually found out, via th UK, that our plane had actually taken passengers delayed at Malaga home instead of us.

We stood in a check in queue for hours before finally being checked in on the Manchester flight (which would stop at Luton) due to take off at 20.20 that evening.

We were eventually given 10 euros food vouchers each, around 8 hours after our original departure time.

To add to our frustration there was a further 2 hour delay until our flight took off.

We arrived in the UK around 1:00am, 11 hours later than scheduled.

Do we have any right to compensation?

TIA

Could you clarify whether you mean 21/12/2011 or 21/12/2010 please? You said 21/12/2010 but it seems a long time to wait until today to enquire about your rights.

Once you have confirmed which year, I will be happy to give you an opinion.

Saramond

richardw wrote: »

Saramond, please read earlier posts re Sturgeon, btw there is nothing 'extraordinary' re bad weather at GIB requiring diversions to Malaga airport, it is a fairly frequent occurrence.

I live in Gib, so I know it happens a lot!

ian41, it was 2010. I was under the impression you had 6 years in which to claim. I did document what had happened to us, and looked into compensation at the time, but my husband thought we wouldn't have a case. I happened to stumble across this thread this morning, so I thought it was worth an ask.

Kira000

c90 wrote: »

Hi Caz3121,

I see, noted. Thanks.
In my case, they used the same crews the next day. Guessed it was ok for BA to use the same crews after 10hrs rest in this case.:)

Noted on the travel insurance too.

Cheers,:beer:

Flight crew (pilots/officers) and cabin crew for all airlines both have maximum duty days, which start from their reporting time, not from the flight departure as they need to report and be briefed as well. With a long flight like Singapore, they are pushing the max hours anyway, so if you add in a 3 hour delay on top of the original flying hours, it is very likely they would "go out of hours".

If a crew is going OOH, then there are two options, depending on where you are. If the plane is at a base (Gatwick, Heathrow, HongKong) then you may find a replacement standby crew can be found, and the plane departs as usual, with maybe a short delay to get them there. If you are at another airport, there would not be a standby crew available, unless you flew one there, which would require the flying time, plus a rest period. Otherwise, the only choice is what appears to have happened in your case, which is that the flight is delayed and the crew are given a set rest period, i.e have a set period of rest determined by the length of flight and time difference, and the flight then departs again with the same crew. It seems from your description of 10 hours, that they really DID take a minimum rest, which, they do by agreement only- they may actually have been entitled to longer than that and voluntarily agreed to take less, in order to get the plane away sooner.

Hope that helps!