Air Norwegian Claim - Thoughts

bradders1983

dickydonkin wrote: »

Indeed....!

There are too many who tend to offer ‘advice’ who know very little of the subject matter.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people answer questions with questions.....but there you go, that’s the nature of the beast I suppose.

I cannot even believe people are questioning the validity of your success for a very valid EC261 claim.

Well done for following your own instincts!

Erm...I think most people thought he wanted to complain about what happened to the plane, rather than about them taking 6 weeks to reply to an EU compo thing.

dickydonkin

bradders1983 wrote: »

Erm...I think most people thought he wanted to complain about what happened to the plane, rather than about them taking 6 weeks to reply to an EU compo thing.

Erm....I would suggest that 'most people' have not read the thread in its entirety as the OP had made it blatantly clear what he was claiming for - there was certainly no specific reference for claiming to what happened to the aircraft.

iarniee wrote: »

And yes what else would I be referring too?
I put the EU compo + expenses claim in.

I certainly never thought otherwise even though the OP made numerous references to the delay, however, provided the details of why the delay occurred in the first instance which is the crux of any such claim.

He was certainly entitled to claim the 'EU compo thing' which was proven to be the right thing to do.

bagand96

I think what maybe confused the issue was all the Daily Mail style hyperbole about the passengers having to alert the pilots that the engine was on fire as they rolled down the runway, because the crew had no idea.

It was a valid EU261 claim and Norwegian have rightly paid out on it.

stoneman

OP should have been concise in his original post. Instead he/she went on a rant, which doesn't go down well.

Ganga

It was post number 4 before any mention of compensation for flight delay,the original post mentioned everything but.