Bird Strikes not EC's

Mark2spark

I can see from other threads that most of the regulars are aware of this new ruling, but thought it might be worth it's own thread in case some people (like me) don't get to read every single thread.

http://www.bottonline.co.uk/flight-compensation-latest-news/ruffling-the-airlines-feathers

D.J. lyer says:
“For my part I observe that the word used is “extraordinary” rather than “unexpected”, “unforeseeable”, “unusual” or even “rare”. Extraordinary to me connotes something beyond unusual. A motorway collision between two cars on a motorway is unusual but not extraordinary, whereas a motorway collision between a car, and say, a horse would be extraordinary.”

“Bird strikes happen every day, in fact many times a day, and would hardly be worthy of comment but for the delay which they cause. They do not fall within the same category as a motorway collision between a car and my previous example of a horse, which would be extraordinary for the simple reason that our skies are populated with birds, whereas our roads are not populated with horses.”

Which is really funny to me after the initial guff from TC about planes breaking down were to be compared with cars breaking down

The judge goes on to say that bird strikes are so common that Manchester Airport uses a hawk to prevent other birds from straying into its airspace.

On another social media site, some wag observed that The Gov't/Police say that many (dozens? Hundreds? Thousands?) terrorist plots are foiled annually, and that terrorism is now so commonplace that airports have special security measures and body scanners to prevent against it.

Seeing as it's now so commonplace it could be argued that it is no longer an EC! :rotfl:

NoviceAngel

Yes, I have to admit to being one of the doubters, razorsedge has posted extensively about this and my mind was initially 95% sure a birdstrike was a genuine EC, after learning more and reading more I was more of the opinion that just perhaps razersedge had a point, and I was quite willing to eat humble pie...

Looks like I'm going to be a fat basket case next month with all these pies....

TBS, a good result and although not setting a binding precedent is certainly persuasive to use if your flight is delayed by a bird strike.

razorsedge

NoviceAngel wrote: »

Yes, I have to admit to being one of the doubters, razorsedge has posted extensively about this and my mind was initially 95% sure a birdstrike was a genuine EC, after learning more and reading more I was more of the opinion that just perhaps razersedge had a point, and I was quite willing to eat humble pie...

Looks like I'm going to be a fat basket case next month with all these pies....

TBS, a good result and although not setting a binding precedent is certainly persuasive to use if your flight is delayed by a bird strike.

By way of an explanation for my apparent BS knowledge...
My flight did not hit a bird but, Thomson were claiming a bird strike (BS) as EC (on a previous flight though). Consequently I ended up doing a fair bit of research into BS as a back up. Mainly just in case I ended up with a Judge who didn't see the rest of my case my way.

The more I looked into it, the more I was convinced that BS were not EC. As regards to the good Judge's words reproduced above about 'our skies are populated with birds' etc, I think I said as much myself a little while ago in one of my early attempts to convince NoviceAngel:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/67556257#Comment_67556257

First Bott & Co and now NoviceAngel, I'll have Jet2 convinced next!;)

PS If you need a hand with the pies, I am quite partial.

legal_magpie

Is a copy of the judgment itself available please?