MSE News: Flight delay compensation: More could claim thanks to new guidelines

ArianSandra

111KAB wrote: »

12 April 2013 > Guidelines dreamt up by CAA/NEB and airlines marked as preliminary and non binding - [link to guidelines]
Summer 2013 > Guidelines issued and complaints flood in
19 September 2013 > Issue of Guidelines challenged by representation to EU Ombudsman - [link]
28 November 2013 > Ombudsman apologises that examination of reasons why NEB list was included as EU document is taking longer than she thought and accordingly they have instructed NEB's to reissue marking as Draft, not legal and non binding. NEB's reissue however they do not change the date (12 April 2013) so there is nothing to stop them just sending out version 1. - [link]
The standing of the NEB list is also discounted in the Huzar case > "I am informed that a meeting of European national enforcement bodies has provided guidance on this issue which would tend to support the respondent’s argument. However its provenance is unclear and in any event the guidance is just that. It does not purport to be definitive or binding. Whilst it is drawn up by a body whose view deserves some respect, that body is not part of the legislature and is not tasked with interpreting the intention of the legislative body in any particular case."

Would it advisable to include this paragraph from Huzar in a court bundle when referring to the NEB guidelines while we await the outcome of the leave to appeal?

111KAB

ArianSandra wrote: »

Would it advisable to include this paragraph from Huzar in a court bundle when referring to the NEB guidelines while we await the outcome of the leave to appeal?

The information I provided is not from the Huzar judgement but an analysis of the CAA/Airlines introduction of their own guidelines which the airlines have used, in some cases, to provide a reason for non payment.


In my opinion if you include a reference to Huzar than you should, within your claim papers, include the full determination as some judges are not aware of the case. You run the risk however of your case being frozen (stayed) as many judges/airlines are hiding behind the current appeal and until such time as this is resolved many cases are in limbo.

Vauban

111KAB wrote: »

The information I provided is not from the Huzar judgement but an analysis of the CAA/Airlines introduction of their own guidelines which the airlines have used, in some cases, to provide a reason for non payment.


In my opinion if you include a reference to Huzar than you should, within your claim papers, include the full determination as some judges are not aware of the case. You run the risk however of your case being frozen (stayed) as many judges/airlines are hiding behind the current appeal and until such time as this is resolved many cases are in limbo.

True - but I think that most airlines are requesting a stay on the basis of Huzar, regardless of whether the claimant wants to rely on it for evidence or not.

ArianSandra

111KAB wrote: »

The information I provided is not from the Huzar judgement but an analysis of the CAA/Airlines introduction of their own guidelines which the airlines have used, in some cases, to provide a reason for non payment.

In my opinion if you include a reference to Huzar than you should, within your claim papers, include the full determination as some judges are not aware of the case. You run the risk however of your case being frozen (stayed) as many judges/airlines are hiding behind the current appeal and until such time as this is resolved many cases are in limbo.

Sorry, I was referring to the paragraph I put in bold - just about the guidelines. But it's helpful to know that it's worth putting the whole judgement in. Thank you!

G17GJP

Can anyone help ? I, along with my family,suffered a 3 3/4 hour delay coming back to Manchester from Orlando in Aug 2014. Aware of the information on this site, I wrote a letter of complaint to the airline, Thomas Cook, asking for compensation.
They acknowledged my letter and wrote a reply within 28 days having investigated my claim.
I also complained about a faulty earphone socket which meant one of us couldn't listen to in-flight entertainment. Being fair they offered and I have accepted £75 cash (not vouchers) for this.
However, they have rejected my claim for the delay compensation. We were delayed because the ground handling staff couldn't reconcile the number of people on the plane with the number of passports swiped. It became a farce and ended up with us having to disembark and re-embark.
They have said this problem was 1.20hrs of reconciliation delay but the other 2.20hrs of delay was because the airport was shut due to storms.
This I believe to be totally untrue, especially as 2 Virgin 747's on stands near us took off during our delay. Does anyone know where I can get information (data) on airport closures ?I have tried one website - Flightstats - and they replied that they are not allowed to give out their data to passengers who want to use the data as part of any claim.


Any help would be appreciated.

Grumpelstiltskin

G You need to post on the Thomas Cook thread.


Start your reading here.


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4384693

G17GJP

Ok, have done Thank you.