Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

williamro

jamesh wrote: »

Received the Thomson forms today.

Bit concerned about the wording:



My issue is they ask stupid questions like what time did you check in. Or when did you hear of the delay?

Do you think they will wait 56 days then tell me I was wrong by 10 minutes on my guestimate of when I checked it?

Do your best, use "approximately", "about" and "to the best of my knowledge" etc and if they keep messing you about or using delaying tactics then threaten them with Court action, with the intention of going to Court, if having read this thread you are satisfied you have a good case. You must be reasonable in your actions and give them reasonable time to respond and be able to show the Court you have been reasonable throughout and tried to reach an out of Court settlement.

Kedi

Just to let you know the process works. Wrote to Thomas Cook due to flight delay 3 years ago of 12 hours. Claim denied! Wrote to CAA who referred the matter back to Thomas Cook. Thomas Cook review and accept claim. They send Travel Vouchers for £320.....I reject as say I am entitled to cash quoting the relevant part of the Regulation. They write back and say cheque for £320 on its way! RESULT and it was very easy. If you have any doubts, give it a try! Well done Martin Lewis for making it simples! They will try to refuse in the first instance....just hold your nerve as you are perfectly entitled to this compo! Good luck!

topyam

Can anyone advise me on my queries re Ryanair a few posts back today?

sooperb

We were delayed 8 hours on this flight, wrote a letter claiming compensation and have just received an email saying:

"Our records show that the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight developed a number 2 C-duct engine fault and the fan cowl was delaminated. A replacement fan cowl was sourced from Memphis, Tennessee. Due to the size of the component it was only able to be transported on a cargo aircraft from Atlanta, Georgia before being flown to London Heathrow Airport. However unfortunately this led to a delay in the scheduled departure time of your flight.

As a consequence your flight was transferred to the first available aircraft within the Monarch fleet. It was also unfortunate that despite Monarch’s best efforts there was no availability to transfer your flight to an aircraft sub-chartered from a third party operator to reduce the length of the delay.

Having considered the factual background of this incident, I am satisfied that this was indeed an extraordinary circumstance that could not have reasonably been prevented by Monarch and as a consequence I am unable to agree to your claim for compensation."

Is there anywhere I can find out whether EU 261 allows this exception? I understood mechanical failure was not a valid exceptional circumstance. They knew well in advance that the outward flight from Gatwick would not leave at 08.30 that morning so there would be no 20.30 flight from Malaga. Despite this it was shown as having taken off on Monarch's website.

I'm not happy that they can just skittle the claim like this, what next do you advise?

rusty_frog

As previously promised, following letters, emails and a LBA, I have today received the following email from TC re. a delay in excess of 4 hours Hurghada to Manchester 19/3/11.

Mr

Thank you for your further correspondence regarding the difficulties you have encountered during your recent holiday to Egypt and your main concerns surrounding your flight delay.

In response to your request for the reason as to the delay on this flight I can inform you that TCX253L from Hurgada to Manchester 19.03.11 was delayed due to a defect with the forward cargo door which was thought to be an indication of fault but after work had started on resolving this issue it was subsequently found to be a mechanical fault which caused the door to be stuck closed. The rotary door latch had an internal failure and was replaced; Thomas Cook airlines have confirmed that this delay is covered by extraordinary circumstances, as the cause of the delay could not have been reasonably foreseen.

In relation to your comments questioning our comparison of the aircraft to a personal car I must state that we make this comparison in order for customers to understand the meaning of extraordinary circumstances. If a motor vehicle is taken out of service as a result of a technical fault that has never occurred before, then this is through no fault of the owner, hence the comparison of an aircraft, if an aircraft is taken out of service due to a technical fault that has never occurred before then this is deemed as an extraordinary circumstance.

From your comments Mr ... it is true that technical faults are not covered by extraordinary circumstances, I would refer you back to the particulars of the legislation that state in order for technical problems to be covered under an extraordinary circumstance the problem with the aircraft must stem from events, which by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control.

Given my explanation in paragraph 2 as to the reason for the delay this issue did stem from an event that is not part of the normal activity of the aircraft. For your reference Mr ... further information regarding this issue can be found in Article 5 of Regulation No 261/2004.

It is unfortunate to learn that you feel Thomas Cook did not provide adequate welfare to you during this delay but from the information I have received from the airline it is evident Thomas Cook did provide the amount of welfare required under the regulation. Passenger rights are displayed at all airports and check-in desks explaining their rights for any flights that are delayed. I apologise if you were not provided with a written document stating these rights and I can only assume that our agents at the airport were unable to provide this.

It is clear from your letter Mr ..... that this is not the outcome you are seeking and we have reached something of an impasse on this matter. Therefore, in the event that you wish to pursue your complaint further, I would recommend doing so via an appropriate third party.

In closing I would like to offer my sincere regret that I have been unable to resolve this matter to your satisfaction in the first instance and reiterate our appreciation for taking the time to bring these issues to our attention, as all feedback is greatly welcomed regardless of its nature.

Yours Sincerely

Whilst I thank them for admitting the fault was of a technical nature, I would welcome comment from you guys, but guess I will take up their offer of taking this further via a third party, and letting the Judge decide.

kech_2

Hi all,

I wondered if anyone had any luck going through the CAA? I first contacted the airline, who refused to pay out, and then contacted the CAA. They have agreed that I have a case but have apparently not had a reply from Germanwings, the airline I flew with. I sent it to the CAA in November but it seems to be taking a long time to get any response from them. Should I just give up and go for a MCOL? The flight was October 2012 so I'm not in any danger of going outside the 6 year mark. It would be good to know if the CAA have managed to settle anyones claim with an airline or is a bit of a waste of time.

Thanks for your help!

Kedi

topyam wrote: »

Can anyone advise me on my queries re Ryanair a few posts back today?

As they seems to be admitting the delay was due to Operational issues I would refer your complaint immediately to CAA who will refer the matter on the Ryanair. I did this with a claim Thomas Cook had refused and when CAA referred it back to them they paid out. They try it on, a case of 'last man standing' wins I think. Go to CAA next would be my advise. Good luck!

kforshaw

Caz3121 wrote: »

When in 2006 was the flight?
If they come back and refuse to pay, you will be unable to take them to court...If the flight was Nov/Dec was 2006 then this 'could' have been stalling, however if it was before then, you were already over the 6 years so there is no difference with the delay

Hiya, thanks.
My bad entirely, it was June 2007, not 2006 as I'd originally said.

topyam

Kedi wrote: »

As they seems to be admitting the delay was due to Operational issues I would refer your complaint immediately to CAA who will refer the matter on the Ryanair. I did this with a claim Thomas Cook had refused and when CAA referred it back to them they paid out. They try it on, a case of 'last man standing' wins I think. Go to CAA next would be my advise. Good luck!

Will look at contacting CAA next. Thanks!
Was considering contacting the airline again but will prob go straight to CAA now

yekram

Can anyone offer any advice please. I had a flight delay of over 4 hours in 2011 and wrote to the travel company after learning about the EU Regulation. My first letter to the ambitiously named Customer Service Department was ignored so a month later I wrote to the CEO. I received a reply last week which states :
"After investigating your claim for compensation, I can see from our internal airline reports that your flight was affected by a delay of 4 hours and 40 minutes as a result of disruption within our fleet caused by an earlier flight being diverted to an in-air technical issue......as I'm sure you can appreciate, the reason for your delay was as a result of an event beyond our control. As the delay to your flight was caused by extraordinary circumstances, the Regulation does not require us to make a payment."
Is this worth pursuing? They are certainly using the terminology "extraordinary circumstances" which means no compensation yet they have also stated "in air technical issue" - this to me is within the airline's hands.
Many thanks.