flight diverted

Gonolek

Having just returned from the Gambia on a package tour I feel that I must let someone know what some tour operators are up to.





It started as my wife and I went to the check in, a sheet of paper was pushed in front of us and we were greeted with the words “read this” having been at the airport since 4.45am it was a little difficult to comprehend.
Having boarded the aircraft it became apparent that we would not be flying direct to Banjul as booked but would be diverted to Fuerteventura one of the Canary Islands, the reason being to replace a sick crew member in Banjul, take off was at 8.40am some 30 minutes late, having landed in Fuerteventura the ground crew went to work on refueling the aircraft three additional crew members joined us and it was about an hour before we were back in the air we eventually landed in Banjul about 4.20pm.


Once at our resort it also became apparent from regular travellers to Gambia that the refueling in the Canary Islands has become a regular occurrence over the past months and not for the numerous excuses that the tour operator is continuously telling their customers but solely down to the fuel costs in the Gambia.


Can anyone advise please

Alan_Bowen

There are serious fuel shortages in Banjul, the aircraft used cannot tanker sufficient fuel from the UK to make the return trip, therefore they have to stop en route and refuel. No airline wants to do this as they have to pay landing fees twice but it certainly appears to me to be a good reason to refuse to pay compensation

Gonolek

Even though they are being dishonest to their paying customers.

Tyzap

Alan_Bowen wrote: »

There are serious fuel shortages in Banjul, the aircraft used cannot tanker sufficient fuel from the UK to make the return trip, therefore they have to stop en route and refuel. No airline wants to do this as they have to pay landing fees twice but it certainly appears to me to be a good reason to refuse to pay compensation

Just playing devils advocate.

The airline gave the OP a written reason for the diversion which constitutes operational reasons IMHO. They are not citing fuel shortage as the reason.

If their final arrival time was more that 3 hours late do you not think they are due compensation?

Alan_Bowen

Well, I wouldn't waste money or time trying to be honest. There is nothing to say what the letter handed to the passenger actually said other than 'read this' The fuel shortages, which also affect petrol for cars, are clearly outside the airlines control and the fact that everything they spoke to said their flight had to do the same, i.e. refuel along the way, suggests this wasn't just an issue for this particular departure.

111KAB

Unless of course this was say a Monarch flight where for operational reasons the airline were using a smaller Airbus due to a shortage in their fleet. Seems to me if the airline or indeed their handling agents/fuel suppliers did not make adequate provision for the flight in terms of aircraft or fuel then they could well be liable.

Vauban

Do fuel shortages mean that it is impossible to refuel in Banjul, or rather than it is cheaper and more convenient to refuel elsewhere? If the latter, this in an operational decision by the airline, for which the passenger should be compensated (IMHO).

glentoran99

If its a regularly thing i dont understand why the airlines dont just adjust their predicted arrival time? save any hassle for customers or paying compensation??

Tyzap

Alan_Bowen wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't waste money or time trying to be honest. There is nothing to say what the letter handed to the passenger actually said other than 'read this' The fuel shortages, which also affect petrol for cars, are clearly outside the airlines control and the fact that everything they spoke to said their flight had to do the same, i.e. refuel along the way, suggests this wasn't just an issue for this particular departure.

Continuing on the devils advocacy path....:)

Wouldn't you just expect the airline say "sorry, shortage of fuel at Banjul, extraordinary circumstance" if that was the genuine reason for the delay. That would pretty much kill it stone dead.

The OP and his wife could be entitled to 1,200 euros, so I doubt they think it's not worth enquiring, I would.

The OP also mentions a sick crew member, which further confuses the issue, but this could also explain why they were diverted via Fuerteventura.

Gonolek, please explain what happened in more detail so that we can try to get to the bottom of your delay, what you have said so far has got us all guessing now!:o

bagand96

We don't know how late the OP was at Banjul? They state they left the UK around 30 minutes late and had around an hour fuel stop in the Canaries...

OP only states they arrived at Banjul at 4:20pm. The crucial information omitted is what time the scheduled arrival at Banjul was? I only make 1 hour 30mins delay so far?

NoviceAngel

Tyzap wrote: »

..........If their final arrival time was more that 3 hours late do you not think they are due compensation?

bagand96 wrote: »

We don't know how late the OP was at Banjul? They state they left the UK around 30 minutes late and had around an hour fuel stop in the Canaries...

OP only states they arrived at Banjul at 4:20pm. The crucial information omitted is what time the scheduled arrival at Banjul was? I only make 1 hour 30mins delay so far?

True, but I think that's why Tyzap used the word 'If'

The more broader question seems to be if a stop over at Fuerteventura was for operational reasons? (High fuel costs in Banjul) If it was and then providing the delay was above 3hrs, the OP would be entitled to compensation, Alan appeared to be suggesting something different.