Holiday firm changed dept airport - Advice needed

lewroll

peachyprice wrote: »

EC261 only kicks in if changes are made less than 2 weeks before departure.

peachyprice, where did you get this information please? I always thought that you were entitled to either a full refund or re-routing of your choice at whatever stage your flight was cancelled. I believed it was only compensation that was not in the equation unless it was 14 days or less before the intended flight.

duchy

lewroll wrote: »

peachyprice, where did you get this information please? I always thought that you were entitled to either a full refund or re-routing of your choice at whatever stage your flight was cancelled. I believed it was only compensation that was not in the equation unless it was 14 days or less before the intended flight.

You are misunderstanding
No-one is saying a full refund isn't due......what they are saying is that compensation under EC261 doesn't apply.

There is no obligation to provide a reroute - although many airlines will offer one but it isn't compulsory and if you refuse the alternative offered then the only other solution offered will be a full refund when a cancellation or major change is several months ahead as in the OP's situation..

Scheduled airlines tend to offer reroutes -charter/LCC tend not to and go the "take it or take the refund route" So long as it is more than two weeks ahead they are following the regs correctly.

duchy

Perhaps you could just read the regulation........probably take less time than it took to write your post !!

It's very straightforward. (Well it is to me)

callum9999 wrote: »

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying I'm not convinced you're right. Much like with religion - I cannot demonstrate they are wrong, but I'm not convinced by their argument that they are right.

What a ridiculous post that is. I'm not taking any "camp" because I'm not 100% convinced, and I think it's absurd that you've decided the answer is no despite saying you don't actually know the right answer. I'm not taking a "holier than thou" argument and have taken care to explicitly state that I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm right.

My opinion is that they are entitled to rerouting as the EC261 regulation specifically states they are. I was merely being humble in accepting I may have misread or missed a relevant section.

You don't need to be a lawyer to work out the answer to this, you merely need to be able to read English. EC261 says they are entitled to rerouting - which means the only reason they wouldn't be is if a different part of the legislation contradicts it. If you're aware of that then say so, if you aren't aware of it then on what basis have you possibly decided the answer is no?

callum9999

duchy wrote: »

Perhaps you could just read the regulation........probably take less time than it took to write your post !!

It's very straightforward. (Well it is to me)

Perhaps you could just stop being an arrogant know-it-all?

I have read the regulation and the way I have read it makes it look like you are entitled to a re-routing. As you're clearly so much better than me, perhaps you'd be willing to share the exact portion of the regulation that makes you think you aren't entitled to rerouting.

peachyprice wrote: »

EC261 only kicks in if changes are made less than 2 weeks before departure.

And that's come from where exactly? It's certainly not from the actual regulation.

---

Article 5

Cancellation

1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:

(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8

---

Article 8

Right to reimbursement or re-routing

1. Where reference is made to this Article, passengers shall be offered the choice between:

(a) - reimbursement within seven days, by the means provided for in Article 7(3), of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought, for the part or parts of the journey not made, and for the part or parts already made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to the passenger's original travel plan, together with, when relevant,

- a return flight to the first point of departure, at the earliest opportunity;

(b) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity; or

(c) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at a later date at the passenger's convenience, subject to availability of seats.

---

The two week rule people keep quoting is ONLY mentioned in the cash compensation bit. The words "two weeks" do not appear anywhere else in the document.

d123

callum9999 wrote: »

Perhaps you could just stop being an arrogant know-it-all?

I have read the regulation and the way I have read it makes it look like you are entitled to a re-routing. As you're clearly so much better than me, perhaps you'd be willing to share the exact portion of the regulation that makes you think you aren't entitled to rerouting.



And that's come from where exactly? It's certainly not from the actual regulation.

---

Article 5

Cancellation

1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:

(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8

---

Article 8

Right to reimbursement or re-routing

1. Where reference is made to this Article, passengers shall be offered the choice between:

(a) - reimbursement within seven days, by the means provided for in Article 7(3), of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought, for the part or parts of the journey not made, and for the part or parts already made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to the passenger's original travel plan, together with, when relevant,

- a return flight to the first point of departure, at the earliest opportunity;

(b) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity; or

(c) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at a later date at the passenger's convenience, subject to availability of seats.

---

The two week rule people keep quoting is ONLY mentioned in the cash compensation bit. The words "two weeks" do not appear anywhere else in the document.

If you had taken the time it took to to ask all the questions you have asked you could probably have found the answer yourself .


Page 6
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/passengers/air/doc/neb/questions_answers.pdf_reg_2004_261.pdf

Article 5: Cancellation

1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:

(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8; and

(b) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 9(1)(a) and 9(2), as well as, in event of re-routing when the reasonably expected time of departure of the new flight is at least the day after the departure as it was planned for the cancelled flight, the assistance specified in Article 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(c); and

(c) have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7,

unless:

(i) they are informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departure; or

(ii) they are informed of the cancellation between two weeks and seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than two hours before the scheduled time of departure and to reach their final destination less than four hours after the scheduled time of arrival; or

(iii) they are informed of the cancellation less than seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure and to reach their final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival.

duchy

callum9999 wrote: »

Perhaps you could just stop being an arrogant know-it-all?

I have read the regulation and the way I have read it makes it look like you are entitled to a re-routing. As you're clearly so much better than me, perhaps you'd be willing to share the exact portion of the regulation that makes you think you aren't entitled to rerouting.



And that's come from where exactly? It's certainly not from the actual regulation.


The two week rule people keep quoting is ONLY mentioned in the cash compensation bit. The words "two weeks" do not appear anywhere else in the document.

I didn't need to d123 beat me to it
It isn't arrogance -it's knowledge (and reading the regs in full )

It makes a lot of sense as schedules can and do change -a cut off point makes sense-whether 2 weeks is a fair or adequate timescale is a different matter.

I find scheduled airlines tend to bend over backwards to help- charters and LCCs have a more take it or leave it approach.
I once booked a STN to US flight with American -who later decided to pull out of the route (I'd only chosen STN because we had enough miles for one ticket to be free and there was only availability from STN on our date flying out and not LHR) They offered an alternative from Heathrow which would have worked for us but wasn't ideal so I called them and they switched us to a better flight and also refunded in full one passenger whose plans had changed and now couldn't travel (and was expecting to take the hit of 100% cancellation as it wasn't an insurable reason ). Our only loss was two travelodge rooms at £20 each which wasn't worth chasing - although had I pushed it they'd probably have given it to me as a credit for future travel or thrown me some frequent flyer miles. This was a month before travel -hence my confidence in what regs applied - I researched it throughly at the time

callum9999

What makes you think an exemption mentioned only in part C applies to part B? Even though they've (dishonestly?) edited the quote, those are in fact c) i), c) ii) and c) iii) and not a separate list that applies to the whole article as that fabricated quote implies.

This is where your arrogance comes in. It simply does not state what you claim it does - period. While I have been open to correction from the very beginning (despite your arrogant claims of it being a simple regulation, it is not - hence why despite being over 10 years old it is still being argued over in the courts), you think you know best.

And I am still open to correction. Court rulings have clarified other parts of the legislation so I'd love to see one that clarifies this bit. I'm also all-ears if you can explain why exemptions to part C apply to parts A and B.

System

Do they have a confirmed reservation for the flight from Cardiff. It sounds like the holiday was advertised before flight schedules had been published. When published there was no flight scheduled from Cardiff for that day. So is it a cancellation or a mistaken assumption by the travel agent that there would be a flight that day.

You will need to confirm that there was actually a flight scheduled for that day and it had been cancelled AND that you had a confirmed reservation I.E x seats on flight number xxxx

d123

callum9999 wrote: »

What makes you think an exemption mentioned only in part C applies to part B? Even though they've (dishonestly?) edited the quote, those are in fact c) i), c) ii) and c) iii) and not a separate list that applies to the whole article as that fabricated quote implies.

What fabricated quote? Perhaps if you learnt how to quote it would be easier to know who you are talking to. My quote is direct from the EU website, and perhaps if you understood how to read the Regulation it would be clearer to you.

The 'unless' means that 1a, b, or c apply unless i, ii or iii have happened.

So it's an easy Regulation to read, 1a, b, c would apply unless "(i) they are informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departure".

System

As I said Article 3 trumps any later article and the claim will fail on that point