Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

mugshot05

ian41 wrote: »

Why not post the details here?



My view is that this would not have affected the outcome one way or another.

I have a current claim for 600 Euros due to an airline cancelling a flight at the last minute.

The airline is denying responsibility to pay this and I'm contemplating taking court action with respect to this matter and therefore I have been researching the issues and my position on the net and elsewhere.


I believe that disclosing further specific details on a public forum viewable by airlines and especially the precise flight details involved will prejudice my position with respect to that intended court action.

The airline will very possibly be able to identify me from a more detailed posting of those flight details. I don’t think they need to know what I’m doing or thinking.


I don’t think I’m being unduly sensitive here. Surely no sensible litigant would discuss their legal position in a public forum where the intended opponent can view such discussions whilst court proceedings are contemplated?

ian41

mugshot05 wrote: »

I have a current claim for 600 Euros due to an airline cancelling a flight at the last minute.

The airline is denying responsibility to pay this and I'm contemplating taking court action with respect to this matter and therefore I have been researching the issues and my position on the net and elsewhere.


I believe that disclosing further specific details on a public forum viewable by airlines and especially the precise flight details involved will prejudice my position with respect to that intended court action.

The airline will very possibly be able to identify me from a more detailed posting of those flight details. I don’t think they need to know what I’m doing or thinking.


I don’t think I’m being unduly sensitive here. Surely no sensible litigant would discuss their legal position in a public forum where the intended opponent can view such discussions whilst court proceedings are contemplated?

It is your choice and decision but why bother to come on a forum to tell other forum members that you have no intention of posting. It's illogical.

As laymen, both Centipede100 and I have pursued our own cases through to successful hearings in the County Court. In addition, I have had the misfortune to seek compensation for cancellation from three other airlines - all successfully. So we have been successful litigants.

There are some very knowledgable forum members who know this legislation extremely well for different reasons. There is no cost to you other the cost of your time; for our part we offer just plain honest help and assistance - which you are absolutely free to ignore.

This silly argument that the airline might get someone to follow an individual case on a forum is ludicrous - if you proceed they will know chapter and verse because under our judicial system both parties exchange that information. An airline is not going to change its stance because you post or don't post on a forum or multiple fora! That is ridiculous.

Unles you have access to legal expenses insurance or wish to find and pay a competent solicitor yourself for individual advice(the very best idea of all) I suggest that you would be foolish to pass up a free opportunity to check the validity of your case before you spend any money on legal action.

But then again we all have different views.........

ian41

rich987652 wrote: »

I now have a response, and Ian your prediction was on target, here is my response...

Thank you for contacting Customer Relations. We appreciate hearing from our customers and having an opportunity to address their concerns.

We regret that your Flight 733 from London Gatwick on Feb. 26, 2012 was cancelled. As you may know this flight did not operate as scheduled due to an unexpected mechanical situation. Please accept our apology for the inconvenience and impact on your travel plans this irregularity caused. It is never our intent to create difficulties for you, or any of our passengers, and appreciate that this disruption was a frustrating experience.

We thank you for giving us the opportunity to respond to your request for compensation based on European Regulation 261/2004. Under EU regulations, carriers are not required to provide EU compensation in the event that the carrier performed all necessary maintenance checks and took all steps feasibly viable to prevent a mechanical cancellation or delay. We can assure you our aircraft undergo all required maintenance; however, despite the best preventive maintenance, some malfunctions cannot be predicted. Our records indicate all required measures pertinent to this flight were taken; therefore, no compensation under the EU Regulation No. 261/2004 is due.

Additionally, in December 2008, by its decision in Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia, the European Court of Justice limited the ability of air carriers to utilize the exception provided in Article 5(3). However, the Court did not rule out an air carrier’s ability to utilize Article 5(3) when, for example, and air carrier had not only undertaken all routine maintenance, but also had encountered a maintenance problem that could not have been avoided by measures that are technically and economically viable for the air carrier concerned.

We are unable to offer EU compensation, however; as we understand this was a difficult and frustrating experience for our customers, and certainly not something you had anticipated, US Airways wishes to acknowledge your inconvenience.

To convey our apologies and regain your confidence, I have authorized one transferable Electronic Travel With Us Voucher (E-TUV). Your E-TUV is valid toward the purchase of travel on US Airways. Please be advised the E-TUV is not valid with Internet bookings and must be redeemed within one year from the date of this correspondence. In addition, please take a moment to read the terms and conditions listed below to receive the full benefit of this compensation. When you are ready to make your future travel arrangements, please call our Reservations Department at 0845-600-3300 and provide the E-TUV code listed below. The customary ticketing fee will not be assessed at the time of booking with our Reservations Department.

The E-TUV code is:
xxx xxxxx xxxxxx $600.00 - transferable

Mrs. xxxxxx again, please accept my sincere apology for any inconvenience experienced on this occasion. I know you have other options when it comes to traveling, but I sincerely hope we have an opportunity to restore your confidence in our service on a future flight.

Sincerely,


Obviously, I'm not happy to accept this compensation so any advice on next steps.

Unfortunate but as predicted. US Airways are hoping that you will go away. I would reply

1. rejecting their offer of a voucher - you will only accept cash

2. reminding them as you said in your first email/letter, that they cannot just claim extraordinary circumstances, they are required to prove it to you. Just mentioning a technical problem is plain stupid and in itself means zilch.

3. The rulings in both the Wallentin-Hermann and Sturgeon cases, emphasise the high standards that airlines have to meet and US Airways has not bothered to offer any specific evidence of a defence.

4. You can point out that you are aware that US Airways have had to cancel several flights over the past year from the UK to the USA all due to "technical problems". It is not an occasional event.

If it was me, I would say that if I have to take legal action, I would ensure that the court is made fully aware of

(a) US Airways record of cancelling flights from the UK due to "technical problems". This is not an isolated example which makes it even more difficult for US Airways to claim and prove extraordinary circumstances. Perhaps this is down to continued lack of investment in maintenace personnel at UK airports - as a result short delays to fix even the simplest problem become cancellations?

(b) US Airways willingness to offer vouchers but not cash to settle this claim.

If you are willing to do so, you should give them 21 days to give a satisfactory response before your wife files her claim in court.

conval

Centipede100 wrote: »

Firstly, claims under 261/2004 can only be brought against the operating carrier which in your delay was AA.

The direct cause of your delay was due to the captain calling in sick. As this was on AA then you have no claim on the EU Regulation which only applies when flying to the EU on an EU airline. US airlines are exempt when departing their own country. As this was effectively a domestic flight which was delayed then there is no claim for you to pursue.

I believe you have been reasonably well-treated as the airline did in fact put you up in a hotel and make a subsistence payment so IMO that is the end of the matter.

Thank you for this. However, my ticket was issued by BA, I paid BA for it, and the flight that I was listed on was a BA flight (ie it had a BA number). The ticket was also a return to the UK which included this first flight and a second BA flight. I was delayed into the UK by 24 hours. They have also lost my bag and three days later have not found it. There is also much more to the story re inconvenience (eg when they rerouted/rebooked me they gave me ticket for the next day that looked strange to me as the flight number was wrong. I had to spend literally 2 hours on the phone the next day trying to clarify and eventually discovered although they had given me a ticket I wasn't actually booked onto the flight as it was full! If I had not investigated I would have gone to the airport and discovered I did not have a seat and would have been stranded for a second day), And as for given subsistence, I hardly think this was sufficient. The average 'meal' in the hotel they put me in was $20-25. The Airline had also arranged an automatic 'tip' when their voucher was used which further reduced the value of the subsistence. So receiving $25 in total for three meals (dinner, lunch and breakfast) is hardly being well-treated. And since I didn't have any luggage I had no clothes, toiletries etc for that 24 hours, And for the last three days as I'm still travelling in the UK.

I'm sure that there must be more to this than simply accepting that it was an 'internal flight' and so does not qualify. It wasn't booked as an internal flight, but was booked as a return to the UK on a BA flight number.

I'm hoping that you might have some other advice?

Caz3121

conval wrote: »

I'm sure that there must be more to this than simply accepting that it was an 'internal flight' and so does not qualify. It wasn't booked as an internal flight, but was booked as a return to the UK on a BA flight number.

It is not the fact that it was an internal flight, If someone was travelling from US to UK on a non-EU carrier the same would apply. It is down to the fact that the flight was operated by a non-EU carrier and was not departing the EU. Even though this was a codeshare it is the operating carrier that counts

conval

Thank you for the clarification - you clearly understand if far better than me!

The reason I believed it was covered was due to the definition that they give in the legislation of 'final destination' "means the destination on the ticket presented at the check-in counter or, in the case of directly connecting flights, the destination of the last flight; alternative connecting flights available shall not be taken into account if the original planned arrival time is respected"
so I assumed as I was ticketed to London with a directly connecting flight, that this would mean I was covered as my final destination was London.

If not then that means that you are only ever covered if you fly from say LA, Dallas, New York, Miami etc ie the airports where BA or Virgin fly direct to the UK from. The minute you make a connection internally (which has to be via a non-EU carrier as EU carriers aren't allowed to fly internally) then that means you have no cover under this legislation. Certainly a worry then that you're not covered!

ian41

conval wrote: »

I'm hoping that you might have some other advice?

I agree with the posts and sentiments expressed by Centipede100 and Caz3121.

What can you do? In practical terms not a lot. The problem lies with AA and has nothing to do with EU regulations. You received hotel accommodation but there is zero obligation to supply you with a meal voucher. That is not the way things happen in the USA - you were fortunate.

If you follow the link below to the Flyer Talk/AA forum and key in Compensation, you will be struck immediately that our American cousins have an ambivalent attitude to air travel delays and problems. As they say s**t happens. In your situation, if you write to AA they might throw you 5-10K AA Adv Miles because this is the currency that they use. Now you might get this topped up a little because of the initial lack of availability of your baggage at Miami and the general hassle but do not expect too much.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/american-aadvantage-445/

You could claim on either AA or BA re your baggage. Generally, the claim would be on the final carrier, BA. Now that is has been mislaid on arrival in your own country, compensation of any sort is rarely sought or paid unless the baggage is deemed lost. Then you will be compensated but it is a hassle.

You might believe that we are unsympathetic to your situation. That's not the case but you need to be realistic.

I made the mistake of booking an AA LAX/LHR flight and found myself stuck in California due to the Volcanic Ash problem - and received absolutely nothing in reimbursement for the 7 additional hotel, food and car hire. The AA flight was £70 cheaper than the BA flight alternative but now I will only book a non-EU airline for return legs to the UK and accept the risk, if the saving is huge! You might consider adopting a similar strategy in future.

PS My post was composed before I read your post #1450

ian41

jezeroo wrote: »

Hi, I would be grateful if anyone could offer advice on the following situation.

Should we leave it at that? Or do you think we are entitled to more. I'd appreciate your thoughts....

Sorry that your post has remained unanwered. When you read the posts by Robot1000 earlier on this page, you must begin to wonder whether there are two BAs! The answer is no but the reaction to your scenario is far more typical than the surprise reaction to Robot1000.

My initial reaction is that from your post, BA has decided that they are going to try to stage manage the after-events due to the potential number of passengers claiming compensation. With two 747 flights "cancelled" and Euro 600 due per passenger claim, the bill could be enormous if passengers can be bothered to fight the battle.

Based on what you have reported, I believe that BA will feel pretty confident that there will be few passengers that will take the legal route because of snow for the first cancellation on 4/2 and a long delay caused by fuel spillage on 5/2 for the second.

In my view, I believe that BA are more vulnerable to claims on the second flight but they might argue that, in fact, the flight on 5/2 was delayed (not cancelled) until the next day (6/2).

Due to the current legal stay on long delay claims in the UK, this would enable BA to say that they will not consider any delay claims. If the ECJ ruling on long delays when it is handed down is in favour of passengers, then BA will claim a defence of extraordinary circumstances.

From what you have said, that might be a weak defence. However, by the time we reach that point, I guess that 95% of potential claimants will have got on with their lives or accepted BA's derisory voucher offer.

We have not had sight of your two original letter/emails to BA and their initial reply. As the nuances are important, perhaps you might wish to post a verbatim copy - removing your name, address etc?

Could you also clarify what happened on 4/2? Was there an attempt to take off or not? How full was that flight? Was your actual flight on 6/2 from LHR much busier than your original 4/2 flight?

Am slightly concerned that on one database, there is no flight on 4/2 and the flight on 5/2 was cancelled. However, this is a daily 747 and under normal circumstances, one would have expected one cancellation on 4/2, one cancellation/delay on 5/2 and the regular flight on 5/2 to take place. I am suspicious that, bearing in mind your take off time was identical on 4/2 and 5/2 and the same as the scheduled flight that day, that some flight operational management took place and BA took the opportunity to amalgamate two flights to save money.

If you do continue to do battle with BA, I suspect that this will be protracted and will probably be necessary to fight this through the court at the appropriate time.

Others may have a different view.

ih8modem

Well we heard back from BA, and wow I was quite surprised, here is the full text of the email my wife has received.

Dear Mrs <removed>

Thank you for your letter regarding EU Compensation for your flight, BA0057. Firstly, I would like to apologise for the delay in writing to you.
Regulation 261/2004 states that compensation is payable in some instances of cancellation and for denied boarding. It does not provide for payment of compensation for delay. It is our view that the Sturgeon judgment has given a meaning to Regulation 261 that was never intended when the legislation came into force. Furthermore, the Sturgeon decision directly contradicts another European Court of Justice decision pre-dating the Sturgeon case, in which the European Court of Justice stated that compensation was not payable in respect of delay.

For these reasons we now consider the legal position relating to compensation for delay is unclear. Therefore, we have issued proceedings in the English High Court and questions have been referred back to the European Court of Justice under case reference C-629/10. The details of this case can be viewed on the Europa website, by searching for the case number at <link removed as I am not allowed to post links as a new user> Until such time that the position has been settled by a further ruling from them, we are of the view that we are justified in not paying claims for compensation for delay.

In your letter you also raised some issues regarding our service. This will be dealt with separately under a different case reference number and you will hear from us soon.

Thank you once again for contacting us. I do understand that this is not the answer you were hoping for and I’m sorry to disappoint you on this occasion.
Best regards
Munira Sura
EU Compensation Claims
Your case reference is:#######

So is the case number mentioned above the same case that is to be heard on 20th March ? Do we bother going back to BT and telling them that we intend waiting and will lodge the claim again following the ruling etc?

ian41

ih8modem wrote: »

So is the case number mentioned above the same case that is to be heard on 20th March ? Do we bother going back to BT and telling them that we intend waiting and will lodge the claim again following the ruling etc?

Well BT might be more helpful but I doubt it!

No do not bother to go back to BA at this stage - let's wait to hear the result of the ECJ deliberations first.

Incidentally, it is exactly for these reasons that the Sturgeon judgment was seen as such a breakthrough - treating the inconvenience of a long delay over 3 hours in the same way as a cancellation for compensation purposes.