Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

Daisybooxxx

111KAB wrote: »

Out of time I'm afraid.

I was under the impression that you could go back to February 2005 according to this weeks Martin Lewis email, is this not the case?

111KAB

tomawest wrote: »

Its a shame but neither of these (weather or air traffic control) are the fault of the airline and one part of the criteria states that it has to be a fault of the airline. I fear that they may pull the "exceptional circumstances" excuse on you.

Apologies I read "computerised navigation system not working" as being a technical problem in/on the aircraft.

111KAB

Daisybooxxx wrote: »

I was under the impression that you could go back to February 2005 according to this weeks Martin Lewis email, is this not the case?

Suggest you read through thread as there are numerous posts (particularly posted by Centipede) where the content of Martin Lewis email is questioned and reference made to the 6 year limitation.

tomawest

111KAB wrote: »

Apologies I read "computerised navigation system not working" as being a technical problem in/on the aircraft.

Sorry that was my mistake. I thought it was referring to an Air Traffic Issue.

tomawest

FYI for anyone who has lost any documentation and have been with Thomas Cook. They only keep booking reference numbers for 1 year so are useless after that time.

thetourist85

Hello everyone, I've been following this thread quite closely and recently got a response back from easyJet regarding my claim, which in my opinion fully met the criteria for compensation.

Here is the response:

Thank you for contacting us.

I understand that you inbound flight to Bristol (from Amsterdam) on August 18, 2011 was delayed for more that 3 hours. Additionally I acknowledge that the European Union Compensation (EUC) is applicable in case of delayed flights (delayed for three hours or more) as well, as per the judgment given by the European Court of Justice in the Sturgeon case.

Our records confirm that your flight was delayed due to a fault in the rudder (which is used to steer the plane) of the aircraft which was suppose to operate your flight. We had call far a replacement aircraft from London Stansted in order to operate your flight. Per CAA website, unexpected flight safety shortcomings are considered under 'extraordinary circumstances' for which EUC is not applicable.

Therefore I regret that we are unable to comply with your request for compensation. I, once again, apologise for the inconvenience this delay must have caused to both of you.

I wish you a pleasant day ahead.

In summary, their defense is that they claim the technical fault with the aircraft's rudder falls under 'extraordinary circumstances', specifically as 'unexpected flight safety shortcomings'.

To quote 261/2004 directly:

(14) As under the Montreal Convention, obligations on operating air carriers should be limited or excluded in cases where an event has been caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. Such circumstances may, in particular, occur in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier.

Can a fault of this type really be classified as an 'unexpected flight safety shortcoming'? It just doesn't feel right to me, because if things like this are included then what exactly is within the airline's control?

Secondly, I could also argue that the delay was pushed over the 3 hour mark (total delay was 4 hours 18 minutes) due to easyJet's response time in providing a replacement aircraft, although I'm not sure how much weight this holds.

If anyone could offer some advice here, I would appreciate it. There are no issues with any of the validity of other criteria for my claim, other than this debate surrounding 'extraordinary circumstances'.

1) Is this worth pursuing and do easyJet have a solid case here?
2) If it is worth pursuing, how would be the best way of proceeding?

Voyager2002

Daisybooxxx wrote: »

I was under the impression that you could go back to February 2005 according to this weeks Martin Lewis email, is this not the case?

That is the case, but if the airline refuses then you need to take them to court, and the courts in England only go back six years.

Maybe you could use a court elsewhere in Europe?

somean49

My wife our daughter and I were held up at Luton Airport en route to Prague in 2008 for three hours or more. The plane had a defective lavatory door. I seem to remember being given a voucher each which entitled us to a sandwich and hot drink. Do you know Luton airport? No? Lucky you. It seemed like a fortnight to be waiting. Complaint at the time was dismissed. So compo is in order for us three. Oh wait a minute. The airline was Air Europe, bankrupt since the '90s.

dankellys

Is it possible to make a claim without a booking ref number? We booked our holiday through a small independant travel agent (cant even remember what they were called now) which we found on icelolly.com, and all of our holiday doc's were posted rather than emailed. Our Holiday was in August 2010, and we no longer have the documentation.

whistler-alison

I was delayed for more than three hours at London City in July. We sat on the plane on the tarmac for all that time and were not offered any food or drink (and when we finally did take off the food they gave us was so tiny that we were almost fainting by the time we arrived at Faro!).

Anyway, the reason for the delay was that the plane was too heavy to take off in the weather conditions. Now of course they cannot help the weather but it was in their power to avoid the delay because they asked for volunteers to leave the flight and get another flight from Heathrow. A group did volunteer and they got off the plane but then had to get back on again because BA would not waive the non-transferable conditions on their tickets and told them that they were not allowed to transfer to the Heathrow flight and they had to get that flight or none. We finally took off when the weather cleared. Does anyone think that the fact that they could have avoided the delay by allowing the offloaders to transfer would make any difference?

Incidentally, during this time other flights were quite happily taking off and landing at the airport . I am no expert on aircraft but , it was a full flight on which every passenger was allowed 23kg of hold luggage (which they would take advantage of given they it was going to a holiday destination) plus two items of hand luggage on a small plane travelling 2600km which would normally carry business people with no more than a laptop and an overnight bag on other routes. So it seems to me that they had left themselves with little margin to allow for bad weather when they decided the weight limits.