Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

Daza

rusty_frog wrote: »

Noticed at the bottom of the Thomas Cook letter posted today by
Robrymond (post 3600) that the address given for Thomas Cook Airlines (TCA) was in Bradford.
I have been writing to TCA address in Peterborough.

Have I been sending to the wrong address?

Send it direct to the chairman


Frank Meysman
Thomas Cook Business Park
Coninsgby Road
Peterborough
PE3 8SB

Daza

RWT wrote: »

The EU judgement states that claims can go back to 17/02/05 has any one submitted an earlier claim !

I have submitted a 24 hour delay going back to October 2005 with Monarch
No reply as of yet, but worth a shot for 1200 euros

111KAB

As I have been away (Ryanair - great flights!) an update of my Monarch claim....

July 2nd/3rd - 26 hour delay
July 5th - Claim letter ~ told to wait for Sturgeon
October 23rd - further claim letter as Sturgeon ratified
October 30th - Monarch now require their form for claims so sent off with 14 day NBA
November 16th - MCOL submitted for £400 (2 pax) + £35 costs + interest - Monarch given 14 days by court to respond.
November 30th - Monarch respond (exactly on the 14 day limit) to acknowledge claim. 'Acknowledgement' gives them another 14 days.

From start to finish Monarch have put obstacles in my way and left everything until the last (legal) minute to respond.
If I 'win' the 500€ (£400) I am actually giving the money to charity - my main point in claiming was that Monarch's customer care was useless ~ had they looked after us during a 26 hour delay from Palma I doubt I would have even claimed.

It is unfortunate to note that my experience with Monarch Airlines Limited (both in July and recently) is borne out by others posting on this forum.

ollessendro

Hello all.

I wonder if anyone can help me? I had an absolute fiasco with BMI baby a few years ago (2010). They cancelled the flight after take off was due (keeping us waiting first) then stuck us on a flight to a different destination, arriving about 4 hours later planned. We sat around (in Amsterdam Schipol airport) and were told that there was a problem with the aircraft. Amongst the chaos they cancelled the flight to East Midlands and 4 hours later put us on a flight to Birmingham. I'll not bore you with the details, but it was a massive hassle. It was on a Sunday evening and I had work the next day, so just took the only flight I could (to Brum). This was all within the EU and meets all the criteria set out on Money Saving Expert web pages. Looking at the details of the EC 261/2004 regulation, I reckon I could be entitled to around 250 euros in compensation.

However BMI baby no longer exist. Any idea if I can do anything in these circumstances? I know BMI are still going and that IAG (owners of BA) bought BMI and then decided to stop BMI baby flights. Do you reckon I could get something from IAG? Or should I try BA. Reading back over some of the earlier posts in this forum I saw that, when BMI baby was cancelled, some people got joy out of going to BA. That is well over 2 years ago now though.

I should also state that I wrote to BMI baby at the time and they phobbed me off. However I was not aware of the regulations and was not persistant.

Grateful if anyone can provide any info on the law around this. Does anyone know where the responsibility might lie? Or have I missed the boat? I have held off writing to anyone, though I have drafted letter to BMI, IAG and BA. It would be helpful if I had some insight of what might happen and what I might be entitled to, so that I can tailor my approach.

Thanks,
Oliver.

SimonLugs

I have just printed the Monarch Claim form and read through it and came across:

8) For legal reasons at this time, Monarch is unable to consider claims brought more than 2 years after the date of arrival of the flight concerned.

Can anyone shed any light on this please?

Also, there is a fairly large list of things they wont pay out on:

a)Aircraft technical faults discovered just before flight or during the flight concerned; b)Damage to the aircraft caused by: •Acts of sabotage or terrorism; •Bird strike; •Ground incurred damage (i.e. baggage truck, air bridges); •Lightning strike; •Pepperpot event (eg large hailstones); •Severe turbulence; •Heavy landing; or •Foreign object damage; c)Catastrophic engine failure or engine surge; d) De-pressurisation; e)Electronic hardware / software ‘conflicts’ which indicate that the aircraft is not fit to fly and which cannot easily be cleared; f)Hidden manufacturing defect that impinges on flight safety; g)Meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned; h)Security risks; i)Unexpected flight safety shortcomings; j)Strikes; or k)Political instability.

What if they say it was one of the above which i suspect they will?

SimonLugs

Centipede100 wrote: »

For legal reasons Monarch are incorrect in stating the time limit for claims as they have. The limit in the UK is 6 years.

The airline can claim what it wants on a form but it carries no legal weight in its own right. The only thing that may carry some weight is whatever reason they give to you specifically and until you (and we) know that, anything else is pure speculation.

Ok thanks for that.

I'm going to fill the form in later tonight and do the first cover letter to send off asap. Do i put all my kids in the one box on my form or do i do one for each?

Is there anything i should avoid saying on form or anything i should say?

From memory the plane wasnt even at cardiff until about mid day (but i have no proof of this - does info like this get revealed if it goes to court or is it my/other passengers word against Monarch and who the judge believes? or would say Cardiff Airport also have to give evidence?)

Might be daft question but is it better to e-mail or normal post? or both?

Sorry so many questions!!

Thanks.

richardw

SimonLugs why are you bothering with all those forms?
Why not just ask Monarch for the reason for the delay and then go from there.

Mark2spark

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark2spark
Oh, sorry, I get it now. There seems to be a possibility that the flight was rescheduled, - at short notice - and flightstats reflect this.
Much will depend on the paperwork that you can amass, Charter confirmation, and Monarchs excuse.
Rescheduled or not (especially at such short notice), it was still delayed by more than the statutory limit for compensation to kick in.

Centipede100 wrote: »

Rescheduled or not (especially at such short notice), it was still delayed by more than the statutory limit for compensation to kick in.

I was reading it that the rescheduled flight was due at 17.00 (ish) and the actual arrival was 19.00 (ish) - so only 2 hours late?
But the flight would have had to have been rescheduled giving less than 2 weeks notice if thats the case?

Mark2spark

SimonLugs wrote: »

I have just printed the Monarch Claim form and read through it and came across:

8) For legal reasons at this time, Monarch is unable to consider claims brought more than 2 years after the date of arrival of the flight concerned.

Can anyone shed any light on this please?

This was put on their claim forms before the appeal ruling by the ECJ confirmed that the 2 year limit on making claims, as outlined by the Montreal Convention, is not valid, and that it's the home Countries rules that apply. In the UK, that's 6 years.

Daza

Centipede100 wrote: »

You should not be sending letters or correspondence to the Chairman's office as that will merely hold up or delay an airline's response to you!

If the airline has not given an address to specifically write to in order to further a claim, then you should write to the Company Secretary at the head office registered address. These addresses can often be found in the Conditions of Carriage linked to at the bottom of an airline's web home page or via 'Legal' or 'Investor Relations.' Otherwise just google the airline's registered office.

Actually it has caused a quicker response (had a reply back within 4 days)
As this was a NBA I see they have stated I would have a response within 10 days - which is the 14 day deadline.