Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

LBD

Lol they clearly are not grasping the concept of ec's lol and that the courts are now begining ot catch up

Galaxy135

We were delayed by 3 and half hours coming back from Turkey at the beginning of June. I wrote to Thomas Cook and within 14 days I had a voucher from them for £700 for two of us

I'm now going to write to claim for the 6 hr delay in jan 2010 to Orlando

Vauban

Galaxy135 wrote: »

We were delayed by 3 and half hours coming back from Turkey at the beginning of June. I wrote to Thomas Cook and within 14 days I had a voucher from them for £700 for two of us

I'm now going to write to claim for the 6 hr delay in jan 2010 to Orlando

Great - well done. You do know you can ask for the cash, though?

pxxuk

Just about to start a claim with Monarch for our flights to and from Sharm on 26th June and 11th July... Wish me luck!!

It was a 2.5hr delay leaving Birmingham on 26th and a 23hr and 50 minute delay (according to their apology email but in reality we took off 1 minute prior to the 24hrs depending on whose watch you looked at!!) on the 11th July.

We were offered no refreshments or update info on the outbound (which I am not expecting to be considered at all as it was a couple of hours but am mentioning for the customer service complaint point of view) nor were we offered anything whilst sat on the broken plane between our scheduled take off time of 9pm until we were offloaded at 2:15am into the closed airport terminal before being bundled to a hotel nearby as staff flying hours had expired.

We got to bed at 3.30am tired, hungry and thirsty which I wouldn't normally moan at but I am 4 and a half months pregnant! When I asked about food and drink they told me to order room service and try to claim back the money from Monarch when I got home... I used my money at the airport on gifts for family so had no cash or cards, as a majority of people had done on our flight, so gave up and went to bed... it was only a 3hr wait til breakfast!! The following day we were not given much of an update other than that we were being collected at 12:30 to leave the ground at 3pm. We finally got on the plane, pushed out onto the runway for the same "fixed and tested twice during the night" fault to reoccur. We were allowed back into the terminal where we remained for a further 4 and a half hours (this time with food and 1 drink) before being herded back onto the plane to finally take off at 9.05pm, 24hrs later than expected, just within staff flying hours.

Im guessing that I'll be told to shove off too? The outbound delay was to do with a staff strike in Portugal. The fault on the aircraft was something to do with the flaps on the wings that give lift in flight and slow down for landing... They bodged it on the way home and flew without them in the end to save us being further delayed!!

romanby1

pxxuk wrote: »

Just about to start a claim with Monarch for our flights to and from Sharm on 26th June and 11th July... Wish me luck!!

It was a 2.5hr delay leaving Birmingham on 26th and a 23hr and 50 minute delay (according to their apology email but in reality we took off 1 minute prior to the 24hrs depending on whose watch you looked at!!) on the 11th July.

We were offered no refreshments or update info on the outbound (which I am not expecting to be considered at all as it was a couple of hours but am mentioning for the customer service complaint point of view) nor were we offered anything whilst sat on the broken plane between our scheduled take off time of 9pm until we were offloaded at 2:15am into the closed airport terminal before being bundled to a hotel nearby as staff flying hours had expired.

We got to bed at 3.30am tired, hungry and thirsty which I wouldn't normally moan at but I am 4 and a half months pregnant! When I asked about food and drink they told me to order room service and try to claim back the money from Monarch when I got home... I used my money at the airport on gifts for family so had no cash or cards, as a majority of people had done on our flight, so gave up and went to bed... it was only a 3hr wait til breakfast!! The following day we were not given much of an update other than that we were being collected at 12:30 to leave the ground at 3pm. We finally got on the plane, pushed out onto the runway for the same "fixed and tested twice during the night" fault to reoccur. We were allowed back into the terminal where we remained for a further 4 and a half hours (this time with food and 1 drink) before being herded back onto the plane to finally take off at 9.05pm, 24hrs later than expected, just within staff flying hours.

Im guessing that I'll be told to shove off too? The outbound delay was to do with a staff strike in Portugal. The fault on the aircraft was something to do with the flaps on the wings that give lift in flight and slow down for landing... They bodged it on the way home and flew without them in the end to save us being further delayed!!

You certainly have a valid claim on the way back for the delay flaps not an EC.
You were given some duty of care (a hotel room) but you should have been offered food and non alcoholic beverages. I suggest as you did not purchase any food etc. you can only appeal to their good nature but no-doubt you will be told to get lost.
Send a 14 day NBA letter and if no response, court action, that is the only way you will get compensation.

bignick47_2

Thomson delayed our flight back from Montego Bay by over 6 hours in April and I submitted a claim according to the MSE guide. They have just replied, saying it was "exceptional circumstances" so I have referred to CAA. The crew had worked over their hours going out and had to have a statutory rest. That same crew told us onflight that "someone had made a mistake with the rotas". Thomson gave all passengers a letter saying we should claim off insurance because "the crew had experienced delays on the outbound sector and had exceeded their legally permitted hours". Seems clear enough to me - someone cocked up!

I will NOT let them squirm out of it this easily!:mad:

Horlock

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/travel/flight-delays

Just wondering if anyone else is having problems downloading the letter to send. It seems the link has been changed from what I recall was a link to a which? letter and is now and MSE own letter. But when I download it wont open. I can't open either the letter for delays or the letter for cancellations. (links in middle of STEP 2)

David_e

I'm just looking at the Wallentin case decision specifically para 42 which seems to be the key point. It says (my emphasis) the issue is:

... whether ... the air carrier concerned took measures appropriate to the situation, that is to say measures which, at the time of the extraordinary circumstances whose existence the air carrier is to establish, met, inter alia, conditions which were technically and economically viable for that carrier.

I am probably reading too much into the words but, in order to satisfy this requirement, should the airline be able to demonstrate that there was an assessment of what was "technically and economically viable" "at the time", ie, there and then?

Failing that, and assuming they claim that they operate to some agreed plan, presumably sight of that would be helpful. I have no idea what this plan would look like, except I doubt it's a nice simple, single document. Certainly not one that the airline would choose to share.

In the absence of hard evidence, the airline presumably says "it wasn't technically and economically viable" to, say, keep that spare part locally. I say, "well I think it was"! The onus of proof is on them, isn't it? How do they prove technical and economic non-viability?

Any thoughts gratefully received.

friendofbillw2

David_e wrote: »

I'm just looking at the Wallentin case decision specifically para 42 which seems to be the key point.

....

Any thoughts gratefully received.

I think you are overlooking a fairly major point in your favour and are being too keen to go play the airline on their turf.

Paragraph 42 is only relevant IF you accept that the circumstances causing your delay were extraordinary, i.e. (quoting Wallentin para 26) "not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity ofthe air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control".

I will certainly be arguing first and foremost that the technical issues impacting my flight were NOT extraordinary. Aircraft are very complicated things. Technical faults occur as a matter of routine and are not at all 'extraordinary'.

glentoran99

ok so flightmole was a waste of 6 months (or more)

Hi Andrew,

Thank you for your email.

The status of your claim is that the entitlement to 600 Euros per passenger Ec 261/2004 compensation tariff is disputed by the operating air carrier.

You are already aware of this having presented a claim to the airline for the compensation tariff potentially deliverable under Ec 261/2004.

Therefore the status is that you possess an ostensible claim subject to the operable Art 5.3 derogation but you are also the owner of a dispute.

You had previously presented that exact claim to the airline. It was disputed based upon their account of the aircraft suffering a technical defect in Mombassa.

You have not ( so far) presented any complaint to the CAA to investigate the factual circumstances and for them to provide any commentary upon that claim.

I have made a decision on behalf of ALC not to to advance the claim as assigned to ALC any further. As a consequence you should regard the claims as now remaining vested unencumbered in your and your co-passenger's hands.

You have the option to make complaint to the CAA regarding the entitlement you think is due you. I do not make any comment upon the merits.

Indeed given the time that has elapsed it is possible that they may already have advanced an investigation pursuant to another passenger delivery a complaint in respect of the same flight.

Should you consider that you wish to take further action yourself regarding prosecuting the claim then you would be best advised to obtain competent and qualified legal and technical opinion on the merits of the claim.

Therefore I regret that ALC has not been able to obtain any recovery.