Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

urban469

grayme-m wrote: »

Cracking thread this, thank you to you all.

Last summer, our flights did a stopover at a hub airport before our plane continued on to our destination.

On the way back, because of issues the previous day at the stopover airport, we got home at 10.30pm, eleven hours later than scheduled. The same crew operated our flight and that the day before, but due to the issues the day before this caused the crew to go out of time when it came to operating our flight. As a result our flight was late taking off and we had to be put up in a hotel near the stopover airport getting a whole four hours sleep and a whole host of misinformation whilst the crew rested (on top of poor service on the plane).

I wrote when we got back requesting that under 'EU Regulation 261/2004 we are entitled to compensation of €600 per passenger' to get two responses.

The first was an apology for the matter, the second tried to fob me off:



I wrote back saying we should wait for the outcome of the case before we closed the matter.

I was thinking it was about time I looked it up, then came across this thread which tells me (as long as I have it correctly), that the issue with the prior day is irrelevant to my claim, and that we believe that the Sturgeon judgement is due in the next few months and expected to fall in our favour.

If (as expected), the Sturgeon judgement goes in our favour, will they be forced to payout on backdated claims?

I have been delayed today. 3 and a half hours on Monarch, and predictably, they are refusing to pay.

If, say, the ruling happens in Sept 2012, will I be able to claim for a June 2012 flight?

Also - when I was told about the delay at check in, they didn't tell me my rights under EU law (£5 food voucher, phone call etc). And there was no sign like there is at other airports. Is this a breach of EU law?

urban469

Conel wrote: »

Well I have an e-mail stating it is high winds so I think I will keep my £10 (cheeky gits!).

So so I now log a case for compensation on the reason given at the airport or for the lies told to me now?

Be careful about keeping that £10. That may be considered by the courts as a compromise payment, and you may be unable to claim for any more.

urban469

Centipede100 wrote: »

I don't think Conel will be doing anything except keeping his own £10! Compromise payment NOT.

Ooops! Sorry. That's what happens when I don't read back through the thread properly

urban469

Centipede100 wrote: »

There will be no compulsion (as now) on airlines to automatically pay compensation if, as expected, the challenge is defeated in the ECJ.

Pax will still have to present their claim and, if dissatisfied with the airline's response to their reasonably-founded claim, then IMO will almost certainly have to either take the matter to the small claims track of the county court themselves, or if covered by legal expenses insurance cover via household contents policies, ask that the legal insurer takes action on the passenger's behalf.

The only temporal limit on claims for delay will be the 6 year limit on county court claims I believe.

Thanks, that all makes sense. My question was really about retrospective claims. If a new law comes into force it almost never applies to events before that date. But from what I understand, this issue is quite different...

grayme-m

Centipede100 wrote: »

Not quite clear about the circumstances of your flight. You seem to have incurred a stopover, was this scheduled or not?

Better still to post up the dates and flight numbers involved before we comment further.

The challenge to Sturgeon judgement is expected in the next 3 months or so.

Sorry, I may have been a bit paranoid having learned not to disclose details on the parking tickets forum.

The flight was from Turks and Caicos, to the Bahamas to collect more passengers, then straight on to London Heathrow. We should not have had to get off the flight at Nassau.

Because Nassau airport had a powercut the day before, BA wrote the following to me:

The delay came about because of the knock on effects from the BA0252 on 27 August. The same crew operated both flights and due to issues at Nassau airport on 27 August, this caused the crew to go out of time when it came to operating your flight on 28 August. This is why your flight had to stop over for so long at Nassau.

alanmalarkey

delvey wrote: »

Thanks for clearing that up
I am sitting tight and waiting for the ECJ to finish there proceedings
My brother was delayed last week as well for 4 hours from Tunisia with Thomas Cook, and will be claiming for him as well

Do you know if the ECJ proceedings have been decided?

Conel

Centipede100 wrote: »

Why don't you mention both? At least it should flush out the reason on which the airline wishes to rely as a defence. Something like the following might be a start and please send this snailmail not via email:

Company Secretary
Easyjet Airline Company Ltd
Hangar 89
London Luton Airport
Luton
LU2 9PF


Dear Sir

Delayed Flight Compensation
Flight number: (insert here)
Date: 12th May 2012
Booking Ref: (insert here)
Passenger names: (insert here)
Amount claimed: 250 euros per passenger

I am writing to you to lodge my claim for delayed flight compensation. Our flight (detailed above) was delayed leaving London Gatwick and we arrived in Berlin in excess of 3 hours after the scheduled arrival time.

I am aware that flight delay compensation claims are currently stayed by the courts in England & Wales but once the judgement has been handed down in the current ECJ case (C-629/10) I want to put you on notice that my claim will proceed at that stage.

We were informed by the flight crew that technical reasons had delayed the flight but I have since been in correspondence with your customer services team who now claim that the flight was delayed due to "high winds". As this flight was the only delayed flight on this route that day and the weather reports for both Gatwick and Berlin do not indicate any high winds present, I find it somewhat puzzling that Easyjet should advance this apparent excuse.

Since technical problems have been ruled by the ECJ to be unlikely to be held as a valid defence of extraordinary circumstances to a compensation claim, then should you be claiming any such defence I should be grateful if such details could be provided to me at your earliest convenience.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully

xxxxx

Thanks everyone for all of your replies and especially Centipede for writing this out for me.

Being a total dunce but Snail Mail is a letter, right? Why is this so important?

grayme-m

Centipede100 wrote: »

Nassau and the T&C had rather more than a powercut in the 3-4 days leading up to your return flight though didn't they?!!!

As my posts demonstrate I am no apologist for airlines. On this occasion, however, I might just lean towards the fact that the airline would probably successfully persuade a court that Hurricane Irene played a large part in the delay to your return to the UK as it was this which caused the power failure in the Bahamas, directly leading the crew to go out of hours.

You might ask what 'reasonable measures' BA took to avoid the delay and you could argue that they might have flown a spare crew with them from London as Irene was very likely to cause problems to airline schedules during that period. That would be somewhat problematic for you IMO.

It is your decision and your money but I wouldn't be putting my own money on court fees in this case; and this from someone who won a case with an airline which claimed a hurricane caused my cancellation.

If you have legal expenses cover via household contents insurance, you could refer your claim to them and see what they say.

Indeed there was an event a few days earlier, we were right in the middle of it!

However, it was a few days before the powercut and flights had been working as normal.

I do normally consider myself a fair person, however it was a catalogue of !!!! ups, from not being able to check in online, too few check ins, late take off, being transferred to a hotel unable to cope, getting only four hours' at the hotel, waiting three hours for the second flight to restart (later than notified), and generally poor service on the flight with poor / miscommunication throughout.

delvey

grayme-m wrote: »

I do normally consider myself a fair person, however it was a catalogue of !!!! ups, from not being able to check in online, too few check ins, late take off, being transferred to a hotel unable to cope, getting only four hours' at the hotel, waiting three hours for the second flight to restart (later than notified), and generally poor service on the flight with poor / miscommunication throughout.

But the above has nothing to do with 261/2004 regulations
Was it a holiday?
If so you need to get hold of ABTA/ATOL and see if they can help you

purpleprincess1002000

Hi, any advice welcome...
I was due to fly from Belfast to Newark with United Airline on 2nd June at 11:15am. To cut a long story short this flight eventually left on 3rd June at 05:45am!!
I have requested and received my delay letter which states the delay was due to mechanical issues.
United sent all passengers a goodwill gesture - $125 off your next flight (the fine print shows this is for internal flights within the US and must be booked with a card which has a US address! Worthless to a UK citizen! OR 20% off your next flight booked with them.
My query is which route to take first with regards to getting some sort of compensation I can actually use!
* Should I accept what United have offered (email states I have 30 days to do this and it may be better than nothing)
* Or complain directly to United and ignore this email
* Or raise a claim through my travel insurance
* Or wait for the Autumn Court ruling
Thanks in advance!