Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

jpsartre

Dopey1980 wrote: »

Have you got a link to the exact ECJ page that says that?

I assume the ruling referred to is the Wallentin-Hermann ruling, a summary of which can be found here:

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/arrets/07c549_en.pdf

jpsartre

Mark2spark wrote: »

But at the least, over 5 hr delay, you're entitled to a refund.

Not if the passenger uses his ticket though.

Mark2spark

jpsartre wrote: »

Not if the passenger uses his ticket though.

Which is why I asked how the return flight on another airline came about.

Mark2spark

Dopey1980 wrote: »

Have you got a link to the exact ECJ page that says that?

I used my words, in an attempt to make it easy for forum readers to understand.
What was actually said was:

"The Court stated that “extraordinary circumstances” may be regarded as covering only circumstances which are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond the actual control of that carrier on account of its nature or origin. The Court pointed out that air carriers are confronted as a matter of course in the exercise of their activity with various technical problems to which the operation of those aircraft inevitably gives rise. The resolution of a technical problem which comes to light during aircraft maintenance or is caused by failure to maintain an aircraft must therefore be regarded as inherent in the normal exercise of an air carrier’s activity and cannot therefore constitute as such an “extraordinary circumstance” within the meaning of Article 5(3) of the Regulation."

Mark2spark

Maybe a useful link for people stranded abroad?
You can download to a modern phone, via an App, your passenger rights.

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/passenger-rights/en/mobile.html

jpsartre

Mark2spark wrote: »

Which is why I asked how the return flight on another airline came about.

But you said the least he was entitled to was a refund which isn't the case. In any case, the poster said he accepted a seat on SAA. That seems to indicate it was offered, presumbly by AF. If he paid out of his own pocket that changes the situation obviously.

Daza

It appears that ALL airlines are in breach of "Regulation 216/2004 - Article 14" - as no airline has a notice at check-in explaining your rights to compensation in case of any delay, nor are you given a written notice of these rights to compensation


OBLIGATION TO INFORM PASSENGERS OF THEIR RIGHTS
Article 14: Obligation to inform passengers of their rights

1. The operating air carrier shall ensure that at check-in a clearly legible notice containing the following text is displayed in a manner clearly visible to passengers: "If you are denied boarding or if your flight is cancelled or delayed for at least two hours, ask at the check-in counter or boarding gate for the text stating your rights, particularly with regard to compensation and assistance".

2. An operating air carrier denying boarding or cancelling a flight shall provide each passenger affected with a written notice setting out the rules for compensation and assistance in line with this Regulation. It shall also provide each passenger affected by a delay of at least two hours with an equivalent notice. The contact details of the national designated body referred to in Article 16 shall also be given to the passenger in written form.

3. In respect of blind and visually impaired persons, the provisions of this Article shall be applied using appropriate alternative means.




For anyone receiving the standard letter from Thomas Cook saying you have 28 days to make a complaint (which is a pure fob off) .... then you can also quote them on this, which basically cancels out their booking terms & conditions (even though you have 6 years to make a claim)


EXCLUSION OF WAIVER
Article 15: Exclusion of waiver

1. Obligations vis-à-vis passengers pursuant to this Regulation may not be limited or waived, notably by a derogation or restrictive clause in the contract of carriage.

2. If, nevertheless, such a derogation or restrictive clause is applied in respect of a passenger, or if the passenger is not correctly informed of his rights and for that reason has accepted compensation which is inferior to that provided for in this Regulation, the passenger shall still be entitled to take the necessary proceedings before the competent courts or bodies in order to obtain additional compensation.

johnisworried

Mark2spark wrote: »

Obviously airlines will use the touchdown time if it brings them under the three hour delay time limit. It's a tough call really if the only dispute at the end of the day is having to get a court to decide what the *real* defining moment of arrival is.
IMO it wouldn't be fair on the airlines to include waiting time to clear immigration as it's beyond their control.
But it isn't until after that, that you get to go to baggage reclaim. And sometimes that can be an hour to wait there, - IMO this *is* within the airlines control, and I would have no hesitation in arguing in Court that the final arrival time is the time that you can freely walk out from departures having collected your checked in baggage, it's all part and parcel of the flight IMO.
Ridiculous for an airline to claim that you have arrived whilst the plane is still slowing down on the runway.

I agree. Does anyone know if the rules are set in stone, or it can be disputed that it was at least another half an hour before we even stopped taxing on the runway and out bags came through? Anyone know what rules te Courts are abiding by?

richardw

Mark2spark wrote: »

.... I would have no hesitation in arguing in Court that the final arrival time is the time that you can freely walk out from departures having collected your checked in baggage, it's all part and parcel of the flight IMO......

Touch down and arrival at the gate/parking spot are the significant points. If touch down is not delayed by 3 hours or more, you may find airlines forcefully arguing against you.

Mark2spark

johnisworried wrote: »

I agree. Does anyone know if the rules are set in stone, or it can be disputed that it was at least another half an hour before we even stopped taxing on the runway and out bags came through? Anyone know what rules te Courts are abiding by?

AFAIA this hasn't yet been tested in the courts.
It's early days yet, following the 23rd October ECJ clarification, I don't know of any cases that have actually got to a judge yet. Even bog standard compensation for delay, let alone the question of exactly when arival time is.
IMO the airlines would also appeal this if it was taken up, so a decision on this detail might be a year or two away at best.