European Union Views on Extraordinary Circumstances

Vauban

socrates1882 wrote: »

A new European Ombudsman was sworn in a couple of days ago. I suspect that has delayed it briefly but I wouldn't anticipate it taking too much longer.

You're optimistic! Have you looked at their "decisions" page, which lists decisions taken this month? The cases are all at least a year old, and one goes back to 2008. So I wouldn't hold your breath ...

I wrote to the Commission two months ago asking a series of specific questions about these guidelines. They replied a fortnight ago to say that experts were still considering my points, and would revert as soon as possible. I am still waiting ...

111KAB

Note you can post a 'like' for the comment "The Commission failed to comply with principles of good administration and have due regard to the public interest when it published the National Enforcement Bodies' guidelines on 'extraordinary circumstances' on its website" via the Facebook link (if you are Facebook registered) on the EU Ombudsman link on page.

Goniners

111KAB wrote: »

I think you may find the objection has come from a person who posts on this MSE website from time to time.

Nice one KAB

111KAB

Goniners wrote: »

Nice one KAB

May not be me as a few of us submitted the same request and I don't think any of us are sure whose letter they are using to record the matter on the ombudsman page!

CobyBenson

Vauban wrote: »

I like it - but when will the ombudsman rule, I wonder?

The complaint has been sent to the President of the Commission and he is supposed to provide an 'opinion' by 31st December 2013. However, the final decision won't be made until some time after this.

Ginger_lime

I am new to the forum but have just belatedly received a compensation denial from Monarch.
I have no idea about the workings of planes but am copying the reply I received today. Can anyone help with regards to whether or not it is worth appealing or are Monarch in the right?

"Our records show that during operation of its previous sector the number one exhaust gas temperature of the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight was showing in-flight to be over limits and resulted in a diversion to an alternative airport. Due to the serious safety implications the aircraft was grounded for investigations and rectification work to be completed. After extensive troubleshooting on the engine bleed system the source of the fault was found to be with the handling bleed valves and engineering support were then able to resolve the fault.

In order to minimise the disruption caused by this unforeseen event our operations team arranged for your flight to be operated on the first available aircraft from within the Monarch fleet. For the avoidance of doubt had we not have taken this reasonable measure the delay would have been far more extensive as the original aircraft was not declared serviceable until 21:40GMT on the 15th August 2010."

I am grateful for any opinions!
Thank you:eek::eek:

steve1500

Ginger_lime wrote: »

I am new to the forum but have just belatedly received a compensation denial from Monarch.
I have no idea about the workings of planes but am copying the reply I received today. Can anyone help with regards to whether or not it is worth appealing or are Monarch in the right?

"Our records show that during operation of its previous sector the number one exhaust gas temperature of the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight was showing in-flight to be over limits and resulted in a diversion to an alternative airport. Due to the serious safety implications the aircraft was grounded for investigations and rectification work to be completed. After extensive troubleshooting on the engine bleed system the source of the fault was found to be with the handling bleed valves and engineering support were then able to resolve the fault.

In order to minimise the disruption caused by this unforeseen event our operations team arranged for your flight to be operated on the first available aircraft from within the Monarch fleet. For the avoidance of doubt had we not have taken this reasonable measure the delay would have been far more extensive as the original aircraft was not declared serviceable until 21:40GMT on the 15th August 2010."

I am grateful for any opinions!
Thank you:eek::eek:

You want Monarch Section

Mark2spark

Standard denial letter from Monarch I'm afraid Ginger lime.
Please search and find the Monarch thread and start reading!

JPears

111KAB wrote: »

Note you can post a 'like' for the comment "The Commission failed to comply with principles of good administration and have due regard to the public interest when it published the National Enforcement Bodies' guidelines on 'extraordinary circumstances' on its website" via the Facebook link (if you are Facebook registered) on the EU Ombudsman link on page.

FB Liked and comment sent.

VOB72

JPears wrote: »

FB Liked and comment sent.

Me too! Come on guys, let's all get 'liking' this one......