Do you have to advise airline of court action?

hungledink

Had a 10 hour delay on flight back from Florida to Manchester. We were told, while in the airport waiting, that the plane used to fly us had had to have repairs to both its weather detection systems. Contacted Thomas Cook with the standard letter and was advised they thought we had no claim, exceptional circumstances they said.

So I am proceeding with the small claims court route, but I had a few quick questions.

Firstly, does the fact that the plane had to have these repairs, classed as exceptional circumstances?

Secondly, will the fee for initiating the claim be reimbursed should the claim be successful?

And thirdly, do I need to advise the airline I am begining court proceedings?

Thanks in advance.

111KAB

hungledink wrote: »

Had a 10 hour delay on flight back from Florida to Manchester. We were told, while in the airport waiting, that the plane used to fly us had had to have repairs to both its weather detection systems. Contacted Thomas Cook with the standard letter and was advised they thought we had no claim, exceptional circumstances they said.

This post should be on Thomas Cook thread after you have read Page one of that thread.

hungledink wrote: »

Firstly, does the fact that the plane had to have these repairs, classed as exceptional circumstances?

Presume you mean extraordinary circumstances - technical problems are not extraordinary.

hungledink wrote: »

Secondly, will the fee for initiating the claim be reimbursed should the claim be successful?

Yes

hungledink wrote: »

And thirdly, do I need to advise the airline I am begining court proceedings?

Yes by issuing NBA.

hungledink

Thanks for the response but what does NBA mean?

111KAB

hungledink wrote: »

Thanks for the response but what does NBA mean?

READ PAGE ONE of TC thread!

hungledink

Oh right, I had read that but overlooked the acronym. We mentioned in our first and second letters about possible court action so guess that qualifies?

111KAB

hungledink wrote: »

Oh right, I had read that but overlooked the acronym. We mentioned in our first and second letters about possible court action so guess that qualifies?

So long as you gave them a 14/21 days notice. This post should be on the appropriate thread!

Mark2spark

This is an extension to my answer on the rldav thread.
Really. :undecided
It clearly says in the FAQ's what NBA stands for.
So the ability to help people has now been lost. If the forum regulars continue to answer questions such as this, then they are not helping the OP, as instead of their silence encouraging them to find the answer for themselves, they will then go on to issue a court case, and not read up fully on the Reg 261 and Wallentin / Sturgeon cases, and therefore be prepared for their day in court.

So, the answer from now on, to the question of "What does NBA stand for please?", should be answerable by, "It means you have not read the FAQ's, and that you should go with a no win no fee firm".

Vauban

Mark2spark wrote: »

This is an extension to my answer on the rldav thread.
Really. :undecided
It clearly says in the FAQ's what NBA stands for.
So the ability to help people has now been lost. If the forum regulars continue to answer questions such as this, then they are not helping the OP, as instead of their silence encouraging them to find the answer for themselves, they will then go on to issue a court case, and not read up fully on the Reg 261 and Wallentin / Sturgeon cases, and therefore be prepared for their day in court.

So, the answer from now on, to the question of "What does NBA stand for please?", should be answerable by, "It means you have not read the FAQ's, and that you should go with a no win no fee firm".

I agree with this. It particularly irritates me when folk start their own thread, entitled "Do I have to accept vouchers?" or "Thomson Flight TC 123 8th January 2004 - Anyone else Claim?", thus burying the useful links and making the whole thing unusable.

From now on I resolve to answer any common question already asked with the phrase: "This is not a research service. Please look at the FAQs and use the search facility above." Is that mean?

Mark2spark

Better to just not answer really mate IMO :undecided

David_e

Vauban wrote: »

thus burying the useful links and making the whole thing unusable.

That's the most frustrating aspect. Any chance that the moderators could delete the random threads created which are comprehensively answered in the FAQ etc.?

Vauban wrote: »

From now on I resolve to answer any common question already asked with the phrase: "This is not a research service. Please look at the FAQs and use the search facility above." Is that mean?

No but it won't put them off because the point is some posters don't read previous responses - so they wouldn't see that you had responded that way previously!