Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

Mark2spark

a5827 wrote: »

Can anyone offer advice on my next step?

- flight was diverted back to Frankfurt due to technical defects with the aircraft (fuel leak in aircraft engines)

- airlines are not liable for delays caused by circumstances beyond their control, so we cannot offer compensation.

It's all about opinions, and IMO a fault that develops in flight is going to be successfully defended as an unexpected safety issue = no compensation.
Unless you can counteract that the plane was quite safe to continue to the destination, and that the decision to turn around and return was based on an economical benefit to the company as the spare parts/mechanics etc etc were all based in Germany.
Which you'll probably have to take up with the German CAA to get anywhere with.

Mark2spark

rusty_frog wrote: »

Hi,

We suffered a delay of just short of 5 hours on a flight from Hurghada to Manchester. Thomas Cook Airlines, Flight TCX253, 19/3/11.

Sent a letter to Peterborough (using template) end of Oct 2012 - no reply.
Sent LBA again to Peterborough at the end of November giving 28 days notice - time is now up.
Again no acknowledgement, no reply.

I am quite prepared to go down the MCOL route as I have:
The original booking confirmation.
Fightstats printoff.
Photo of airport info screen at Hurghada showing times of delay.
Receipts of sending Royal Mail recorded del. for both letters + printoffs of signed delivery receipts.

We were never given anything writing as to the reason for the delay.
There was no representation from TC in departures at Hurghada airport.
I have been told since that airline staff are not allowed access in departures as the airport is run by the Egyptian military.

When we eventually boarded we were told by cabin crew that our plane had just been flown from the UK & re fuelled as the original aircraft had 'some sort of problem'.

Although I am willing to go all the way via MCOL I am loathe to do so without written confirmation from TC as to their reason for the delay.

Any suggestions???

IMO issue a MCOL forthwith. You've given them a chance to sort the matter out of court, that's what the court will want to see.

richardw

A little reminder of something very important.

The regulation http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32004R0261:EN:HTML

Article 5 (3) says
"3. An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken."

It's a bit odd that some airlines appear to find it difficult to comply with something so simple, or is there some other reason for their reluctance?

Mark2spark

Billy_Bonkers wrote: »

Hi all. I've spent several hours trawling the net and not really coming up with much.

On 4th October 2012 my flight FR8357 due to depart Budapest at 16.40 was delayed by 5 hrs 55 mins.

I have written to Ryanair requesting the specific reason for the delay.

They replied by email:

"We sincerely regret the delay of 5 hours and 55 minutes to your flight FR8357 from Budapest to Manchester on the 04/10/12 which was due to an unexpected safety/technical problem with the aircraft due to operate your flight. It was necessary to delay the departure of this flight until the fault was rectified and the aircraft was cleared for operation by our Engineering Department."

They then go on to say that such technical faults are outside of their control and that as this delay was outside Ryanair's control (Extraordinary circumstances) they regret to advise that no compensation is due under EU261.

I am not convinced.

How can I find out exactly what that technical problem was?
Do I need to? IMO, No.
How should I proceed? Write a LBA saying why you disagree with the tech reason being an EC, (i've detailed this earlier today) and give them a set time to settle. After that issue MCOL.

Interestingly, from the announcement (and apology) the pilot made as we eventually taxied out to the runway, we understood that aircraft and crew had been flown out empty from the uk specially to get us.

I don't suppose you exchanged details with any other passengers that will back you up on that with a written statement for court, have you?

rusty_frog

Mark2spark wrote: »

IMO issue a MCOL forthwith. You've given them a chance to sort the matter out of court, that's what the court will want to see.

Thanks for your reply.

Does the fact that I dont know the reason for the delay matter?
Or does the fact that TC couldnt be a**ed to reply, count in my favour?

a5827

Mark2spark wrote: »

It's all about opinions, and IMO a fault that develops in flight is going to be successfully defended as an unexpected safety issue = no compensation.

Thanks for the reply. I understand that a serious technical fault which becomes apparent during a flight would obviously become a safety issue, however I would have thought that the proximate cause of the delay would still be the technical fault (fuel leak). I am not aware of any extraordinary circumstances causing the technical fault here, so assume it was the type of problem that is inherent in normal aircraft operations and maintenance. i.e. compensation payable.

I appreciate we're talking about opinions here, but any further advice would help.

balajo

In the article about compensation for delayed or cancelled flights, wasn't there a website that you could use to check past flights whether they were in fact delayed or cancelled?
Thanks
jo

J_B

balajo wrote: »

In the article about compensation for delayed or cancelled flights, wasn't there a website that you could use to check past flights whether they were in fact delayed or cancelled?

Yes there certainly was

northwest1965

We received our 2nd letter from Jet2 on 22nd December. (the 1st asked for a copy of the booking). It just states that they deal with all their correspondence in strict date order. What is an acceptable time for us to give them, before we write again?

Vauban

Has anyone received a "ruling" from the (UK) CAA on whether an airline's defence of "extraordinary circumstances" holds water? There was a useful post a couple of weeks ago (#4152) enclosing a letter from the Spanish equivalent.

Whilst I appreciate that the CAA has a limited locus (and no role as an ombudsman), I wouldn't want to be an airline defending a claim from someone in possession of an 'expert' CAA view that the EC defence does not apply: that would be reasonably compelling, surely (even if it is for the Court to take the decision)?

So two questions:

a) has anyone had a definitive view from the CAA on their own specific circumstances?

b) does it make for better tactics to solicit a supportive letter from the CAA before bringing the matter before the Courts? (I accept that Court action is inevitable, given the obduracy of some airlines - Monarch, I'm talking about you! - but sequencing is important.)