Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

WrexhamLad

Centipede100 wrote: »

Perhaps your bro in law should represent the kids in their claim just to be on the safe side!

IANAL nor do I claim to be.

IANAL -I had to look that up.


My Brother in law is suggesting that my teenage childrens' claims might still be able to go ahead after 6 years. Do you agree or not?


Did you read the section in the Limitation Act he mentioned so I can refer back to my brother in law with your reply as he asked?

You havent replied .

I'll tell him you are not any kind of lawyer.

Jamie_Carter

Centipede100 wrote: »

Airline bust = no claim

I haven't read through the whole thread, so this question may have already been asked.

How do you stand as far as travel insurance goes for delays (that airlines won't pay out for), or if the airline has gone bust?

Jamie_Carter

Centipede100 wrote: »

My question was serious.

Have you read the Wallentin-Hermann and Sturgeon judgments in full? If not then I suggest you do because that will ensure that in legal terms you understand the reasoning behind those judgments and how in most instances the ECJ would not describe mechanical faults as necessarily safety-related in relation to the "extraordinary circumstances" defence available to airlines under Art 5.3 of the Reg.

Well I'm not interested in reading any legal case, as I do have a life, and I'm not trying to get to sleep yet

What I am saying is that it is very unlikely that any airline would cancel or delay a flight due to a mechanical fault, unless it was for safety reasons. I'm not saying that all mechanical faults are safety related.

RedBern

Centipede100 wrote: »

Sadly you are mistaken. IMO your claim would fail.

Flight delayed by five hours or more? You could get a refund and compensation

Crucially, to get a refund, it doesn't matter whose fault the problem was. Unlike with compensation, even if it's totally out of the airline's control, such as bad weather, you are entitled to it.
To also get compensation, the problem must the airline's fault (see conditions above).

this is the bit I picked up on....

Zelen86

My wife and I were preparing to leave our hotel in Mexico and were standing in the hotel recepion, suitcases in hand ready to make our way to the airport for a flight back to East Midlands... this is when we were advised there was a delay.

After waiting for nearly 3 hours not knowing what was going on, we were told that there was a "fault with the plane that is being worked on" after another couple of hours we were told that there were no other provisions in place and another flight would be arranged the following day.

We were given an additional night in our hotel, although it was hardly an extension to the holiday as it meant packing/unpacking and waiting around checking for information so we couldn't leave the hotel.

We had to buy phone cards to ring home to make arrangements for another night in kennels for the dog, and sort out a lift home as my brother was originally picking us up from the airport but due to changes was unable to.

I'm sure I will get a response from the travel company to state that it was due to safety reasons but when you pay over £2000 for a holiday, you would expect there to be some sort of provisons in place for this sort of eventuality right? Should the customer just have to accept that these things happen and pay for the resulting issues from their own pocket? I personally don't think so.

RedBern

Centipede100 wrote: »

Did you (eventually) take the delayed flight? If so then no refund is due.

yes we did - thanks for your help though.

Mosh

I was delayed overnight for around 9 hours with no explanation whatsoever by Blue Express back in 2007. One meal and a bottle of water was provided, accommodation was refused (the entire passenger list slept on a concrete floor) and absolutely no information was offered when it was demanded right up until we left the destination airport.

I wrote to the airline back then who didn't reply. I wrote to the CAA, who told me to write to the airline (even though I'd told them I already had). Fingers crossed this ruling makes things easier.

I'll update as and when anything comes through.

helenm4920

Hi

I was on a flight last year from Gatwick to Cancun with Thomson. This flight ended up being delayed 24 hrs 58 minutes (as per the letter I received from them). The reason for delay was "The aircraft due to operate your flight today was late inbound from its previous rotation. The flight was then operated at the earliest opportunity the following day"

Please can you let me know if I can put in a claim?

Thanks

dalethomas11

My wife has advised me tonight of this new ruling tonight and we were over 4hours late to Orlando flying from Manchester in 2008 but cant find any docs for this. I have looked on the flight list and there is one flight that was late but it is a south african airline where we flew on either thomas cook or first choice. the times match up but with the wrong flight, anyone know what would be best to do from here?

VZ 63 Velvet Sky 9:15 AM 2:12 PM T-1 2:43 PM 7:02 PM Landed
259 min

This would mean we were over 4hrs late

111KAB

megan01 wrote: »

So has anyone actually sent in a claim yet besides myself?

My delay was 2nd/3rd July - I wrote to Monarch on 5th July and received standard response back (waiting for Sturgeon) ..... wrote on 23rd October to which they sent their standard form to be completed. These were sent back on 31st October with 14 day notice. If I have heard nothing/compensation by November 15th I will complete money claim on-line. I had 26 hour delay due to technical problems with the aircraft. Part of the problem was that the engineer ordered the wrong parts!