Claiming against Norwegian Airlines

jpsartre

moneysaverz83 wrote: »

I may try Bott again with a fresh claim and this time give them zero information.

Even if they agree to take on the claim (again) they will almost certainly drop it using the same reasoning as before once they get info from Norwegian. Up to you if you wish to take it further but your claim is iffy at best if the incoming aircraft was delayed due to ATC restrictions. You could file a complaint with AviationADR, Norwegian might then provide more details about the cause of the delay.

moneysaverz83

If Mr Bott doesn't look at it again, I may do that. 600 euro is quite a bit for me.

Froggitt

You just need to search for and quote/use previous rulings eg

https://flightdelaypay.com/extraordinary-circumstances-explained/

In Frederique Jager v easyJet 2013 easyJet claimed the incoming flight was delayed at Milan’s airport due to bad weather which meant the aircraft did not arrive in time and hence a delay of over three hours. It was ruled that the bad weather had not affected the flight in question and Jager was entitled to compensation.

https://www.claimair.com/blog/what-if-airlines-claim-extraordinary-circumstances/#delay-of-previous-flight

Delay of previous flight
This one is tricky.

It’s clear that a single event can affect multiple flights by triggering a chain reaction. But it doesn’t mean that an “extraordinary issue” preamble can be called for every flight disruption in the chain.

The Egl!!!299;tis et Ratnieks court case (Case C-294/10) can be used for this particular scenario. It has mentioned that an airline can be required to organize its resources in good time so that it’s possible to operate a scheduled flight once the extraordinary circumstances have ceased, that is to say, during a certain period following the scheduled departure time.

In particular, the air carrier should provide for a certain reserve time to operate the flight in its entirety once the extraordinary circumstances have come to an end.

jpsartre

Froggitt wrote: »

You just need to search for and quote/use previous rulings eg

The problem with county courts is that you can often find contradictory rulings and they aren't legally binding anyway. For sure, if the poster goes to court it's something to reference but it doesn't mean compensation is due. As always, the crucial question is whether or not reasonable steps have been taken to avoid the delay.

binek

Hi, I have a similar situation to the ones mentioned before in this thread; my flight from Copenhagen to JFK was delayed over 12h due to earlier disruption in the network. The initial cause for the disruption was an evacuation at JFK, yet this happened 2 days before the scheduled flight (JFK returned to normal service 31h before my flight). Norwegian declined my initial claim using seemingly irrelevant Wallentin-Hermann case; here's their response

Unfortunately, Norwegian flight DY7011 (CPH-JFK) 16.08.2016 was delayed by 12 hours and 17 minutes. This disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken*.

Although we respect your request for compensation, we!!!8217;re unable to honour your claim as your flight was delayed due to extraordinary circumstances. This is in accordance with the European Court of Justice Verdict C-549/07 Wallentin-Hermann.

We apologise for the inconvenience caused on this occasion and hope to have the opportunity to welcome you on board a Norwegian flight when you next choose to travel.

* Flight disruption information

Norwegian flight: DY7011 (CPH-JFK) 16.08.2016
Disruption type: Delayed
Delay time: 12 hours and 17 minutes
Reason for disruption: This delay was caused by an earlier disruption within our network that had a direct effect on this flight. The original flight was disrupted due to an emergency evacuation at New York JFK airport.

Here are my questions:
1. From the discussion I found that Egl!!!299;tis and Retnieks case might be useful. However it focuses on airline's ability to carry out delayed flight after the extraordinary circumstances cease. Are there any other verdicts that might be useful in case of delay due to earlier disruption?
2. I was notified about the delay only when I got to the Copenhagen airport. Is there any ruling saying that airline should notify about the delays promptly?
3. Norwegian says they're not signed up to any ADR system. They, however, seem to be submitted to the UK's AviationADR. Is it the case for UK ombudsman if I have a UK address? Or is it only inbound and outbound airport counties?
Any help or suggestions are welcome.

DrA_Harrogate

I think Norwegian probably act on statistics, calculating that a vanishingly small proportion of folk will endure the numerous obstacles to claiming so it's cheaper overall not to bother and just pay up to the few who persevere.

JPears

And not the only airline to have such unlawful tactics.

Westin

I just thought I would share my experience when making a delay compensation claim with Norwegian under EU261/2004 following a delay of 6h50m on my USA > UK flight.

Hopefully the timings, and indeed the D8/DI responses, will help manage expectations on timelines with others.

I do think that if Norwegian improved even their generic template correspondence with passengers it would help set up expectations from the start and probably elevate chasing for responses.

I would add that Norwegian did send a text message to inform me of the delay on the morning of my flight and did give a $17 dinner voucher out at the airport.

==

Day Zero:
Flight arrival on 25 May 2018 delayed 6h50m. Claim made using the Norwegian online form on their website. Received an immediate automated reply giving me a reference number and also a comment not to chase for a response as it may delay the handling of the claim. I think Norwegian should at this point give an idea on timelines for settlement, so passengers know what to expect and then perhaps passengers would not chase for replies. If they had said 30 days, 60 days – I would probably have accepted that.

Day 18:
As no further correspondence from Norwegian I emailed them a chaser.

Day 27:
Finally a response from the airline. They confirmed my claim was valid and that a payment of €600 would be made and forthcoming. Their email mentioned - the approved amount above will be transferred to your nominated account within reasonable time. I would have preferred if Norwegian said at this point payment would be send in 7-10 days. What is reasonable to them may be unreasonable to me.

Day 34:
As no payment had been received I emailed them again.

Day 35:
No further email from Norwegian but payment hit my bank this day – 35 days after my initial claim - £526.00

Day 40:
Email from Norwegian in response of my day 34 email asking if payment received.

In summary my flight delay compensation was settled 35 days after my claim – or 22 working days. I guess not too bad.

I do however think Norwegian could save themselves from a lot of rework and their passengers in chasing them up, if the airline gave better timelines within their correspondence to passengers.

Laksegiljer

My flight between Oslo and Bergen was cancelled three times during the strike of 2015. I never received compensation for the delay and one night in a hotel. I probably did not insist as much as I should have following the strike. I heard that some people got a compensation months and even years after the strike. Would re-sending my case to Norwegian be worth it at this point?

Justice13075

Might as well, in relation to the hotel and food Norwegian should have put you up in a hotel and paid for the food so you can claim that back.