Can airlines defer case due to the jet2 court case?

Frankieandmindy

I was delayed around 5 hours on a very recent flight with Thomas Cook,
I sat at the airport bored reading threads here and so applied via their website upon my return.
I received this reply...
We are writing in response to your most recent letter following your flight with Thomas Cook Airlines.

Firstly, we would like to extend our sincere apologies for the delay you experienced on your flight. Please be assured On Time Performance is a key measure for us, and we do work extremely hard to get our customers to their destination on time, and in the vast majority of cases this does happen. We do, however, regret the impact to your travel plans on this occasion.

We have carried out an investigation as to the cause of delay that you experienced and can confirm that this was due to a technical fault which was not inherent in the normal course of activity. A recent court case, Huzar vs Jet2, has been heard in the court of appeal, which has resulted in a change to how EC 261/2004 is interpreted, which is the regulation that supports governance on compensation payments for flight delays. The decision of this case is due to be appealed at the Supreme Court by Jet2.com in the near future, which may result in a further change to the interpretation of regulations.

In view of this, Thomas Cook will be deferring a review of your case until such time as further clarification is received on the EC 261/2004 Regulations . We will continue to monitor any developments, and we will ensure an updated message is posted on our website with regard to our revised position following the outcome of the appeal. You will be required to re-approach us once the appeal has been heard and your case will then be reviewed against the appropriate guidelines.

Once again please accept our apologies for the delay to your flight, and I hope the above explains why we are unable to review your case at the present moment in time.

So can they do this as I don't think the law has changed yet?
Should I write back and state that or what should Ido!
Thanks in advance!

GlennTheBaker

Next time, ask the airline to fly without fixing the tech issue. Hopefully everything will be OK and you won't be delayed. If the plane drops out of the sky, at least they'll be able to say it was scheduled to be on time.

richardw

Wait and see if it goes to the Supreme Court, if it does and they lose, it will make things very straightforward.

Voyager2002

I suggest that you do some more reading here...

You have the option of taking them to court (either yourself or by using a NWNF solicitor) but if the pending court case is really relevant then the court would defer the matter until judgment has been handed down.

Voyager2002

GlennTheBaker wrote: »

Next time, ask the airline to fly without fixing the tech issue. Hopefully everything will be OK and you won't be delayed. If the plane drops out of the sky, at least they'll be able to say it was scheduled to be on time.

I did this, but for some reason the airline wouldn't listen to me...

Seriously, the law is there because many airlines fail to carry out preventative maintenance and/or have sufficient contingency plans to avoid unacceptable disruption to service. If they choose not to maintain their planes before problems arise, thus saving money, it is only reasonable that they should be forced to compensate passengers for the resulting inconvenience.

jpsartre

GlennTheBaker wrote: »

Next time, ask the airline to fly without fixing the tech issue. Hopefully everything will be OK and you won't be delayed. If the plane drops out of the sky, at least they'll be able to say it was scheduled to be on time.

Because the only two options are to fly without fixing or delaying without compensation?

111KAB

This explanation from Bott & Co sums up the position ...


http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=17cc323d39b9bce5e106cc4f0&id=5398000464&e=2bbccbfa17