EasyJet cancels flights and refuse to book alternative flights.

Undervalued

jeffcarolt said:

TELLIT01 said:

Without seeing all the legislation surrounding this subject it's impossible to provide a definitive answer.  Every post so far has just posted small sections of the legislation and it's easy for information out of context to be misleading.

That's why this forum exists. So the people in the know can inform those of us who may not have the same knowledge. eskbanker above appears to have found the right nuggets of info I needed to at least make a claim. But thanks for your input anyway.

But in practical terms, even if they are obliged to do so (which is far from clear), your only option is to make other arrangements then attempt to make a claim against Easy Jet for any reasonable additional costs you incur.

If it is a grey area and you can get yourself there for £100 more then they will most likely pay up rather than let it go to court.

If you pay thousands to hire a private jet they will no doubt fight tooth and nail, so you will be taking a considerable gamble!

Manxman_in_exile

@jeffcarolt -  when Easyjet told you that because they had cancelled more tham 14 days before the scheduled date that you were not entitled to anythng(?) had you made it perfectly clear to them that you wanted rerouting/an alternative flight and not necessarily compensation?  It's just that sometimes I know consumers mistakenly ask for the wrong remedy which sends the provider off in the wrong direction.  I'm surprised EJ don't know the rules.  (Or of course, it might be more likely they are trying to pull the wool over your eyes!)

You might find it helpful to give them links to the legislation referred to by @eskbanker.  So far as I can tell from what @eskbanker posted above, the EU regulation is:  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (Text with EEA relevance) (legislation.gov.uk)

And this is the UK legislation that amended the wording so that it applied post-Brexit:  The Air Passenger Rights and Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (legislation.gov.uk)

jeffcarolt

Manxman_in_exile said:

@jeffcarolt -  when Easyjet told you that because they had cancelled more tham 14 days before the scheduled date that you were not entitled to anythng(?) had you made it perfectly clear to them that you wanted rerouting/an alternative flight and not necessarily compensation?

Manxman, To be honest it's not my flight but my daughters, she phoned them on her own the first time and was told it was a voucher or refund only, I then got interested and done some "looking up" and got here to phone them back when I was there. She categorically stated that we were not after compensation and that we are requesting an alternative flight. The agent then had a look for alternative flights none on the same day and others that were not suitable (too late). She then asked for an alternative flight with another airline as they had only at alternative EasyJet flights. My daughter was told that they can't do that, at which point we quoted The CAA regulations at them, the reply was I have no facility to look at alternative flights with other carriers and as it's not within the 14 days we don't have to do that. With that my daughter has now booked flights a day earlier with Ryan Air at a higher cost and an extra cost if a nights hotel when they land. There may be a fly in the ointment I've just checked flights this morning and there was an EasyJet flight  a day earlier but she was not given that option on the phone.

Undervalued

jeffcarolt said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

@jeffcarolt -  when Easyjet told you that because they had cancelled more tham 14 days before the scheduled date that you were not entitled to anythng(?) had you made it perfectly clear to them that you wanted rerouting/an alternative flight and not necessarily compensation?

Manxman, To be honest it's not my flight but my daughters, she phoned them on her own the first time and was told it was a voucher or refund only, I then got interested and done some "looking up" and got here to phone them back when I was there. She categorically stated that we were not after compensation and that we are requesting an alternative flight. The agent then had a look for alternative flights none on the same day and others that were not suitable (too late). She then asked for an alternative flight with another airline as they had only at alternative EasyJet flights. My daughter was told that they can't do that, at which point we quoted The CAA regulations at them, the reply was I have no facility to look at alternative flights with other carriers and as it's not within the 14 days we don't have to do that. With that my daughter has now booked flights a day earlier with Ryan Air at a higher cost and an extra cost if a nights hotel when they land. There may be a fly in the ointment I've just checked flights this morning and there was an EasyJet flight  a day earlier but she was not given that option on the phone.

Maybe that flight was already full?

The trouble is that even if your try and test that out by attempting to book (stopping just short of doing so) that still doesn't prove that it wasn't showing as full at the time your daughter was on to Easy Jet. With some bookings being flexible that can change all the time.

As I said earlier, I think your only option is to attempt to claim the extra costs back from Easy Jet after the event. How far you push it, if they resist, will obviously depend on your assessment of the strength of your case. If it is borderline (or better) and the additional cost is fairly modest I suspect they will settle.

eskbanker

jeffcarolt said:
My daughter was told that they can't do that, at which point we quoted The CAA regulations at them, the reply was I have no facility to look at alternative flights with other carriers and as it's not within the 14 days we don't have to do that.

Just to be clear, these aren't CAA regulations, it's the law, i.e. the legislation referred to earlier, although the CAA documentation does offer its interpretation.

Having said that, there is undoubtedly the reasonableness aspect that comes into play if there's a shortage of directly equivalent alternatives, but their denial of responsibility outside 14 days (for rerouting rather than compensation) sounds like a bare-faced lie - if the call was recorded then it might be worth securing a copy via a subject access request, as it could strengthen her case in the event of a dispute further downstream.

Undervalued

eskbanker said:

jeffcarolt said:
My daughter was told that they can't do that, at which point we quoted The CAA regulations at them, the reply was I have no facility to look at alternative flights with other carriers and as it's not within the 14 days we don't have to do that.

Just to be clear, these aren't CAA regulations, it's the law, i.e. the legislation referred to earlier, although the CAA documentation does offer its interpretation.

Having said that, there is undoubtedly the reasonableness aspect that comes into play if there's a shortage of directly equivalent alternatives, but their denial of responsibility outside 14 days (for rerouting rather than compensation) sounds like a bare-faced lie - if the call was recorded then it might be worth securing a copy via a subject access request, as it could strengthen her case in the event of a dispute further downstream.

Exactly. In any claim for compensation you will be expected to make reasonable efforts to minimise your losses. The law won't support you in running them up as big a bill as possible to teach them a lesson!

jeffcarolt

Undervalued said:

eskbanker said:

jeffcarolt said:
My daughter was told that they can't do that, at which point we quoted The CAA regulations at them, the reply was I have no facility to look at alternative flights with other carriers and as it's not within the 14 days we don't have to do that.

Just to be clear, these aren't CAA regulations, it's the law, i.e. the legislation referred to earlier, although the CAA documentation does offer its interpretation.

Having said that, there is undoubtedly the reasonableness aspect that comes into play if there's a shortage of directly equivalent alternatives, but their denial of responsibility outside 14 days (for rerouting rather than compensation) sounds like a bare-faced lie - if the call was recorded then it might be worth securing a copy via a subject access request, as it could strengthen her case in the event of a dispute further downstream.

Exactly. In any claim for compensation you will be expected to make reasonable efforts to minimise your losses. The law won't support you in running them up as big a bill as possible to teach them a lesson!

 @Undervalued All she wants is another flight of which there was availability the day before. Which she has now booked, as she has tickets for a festival over the following few days then flies back home. It is not a case of teaching anyone a lesson or running up a big as bill as possible. I’m just trying to help her get what she is entitled too under the law.

eskbanker

Undervalued said:

eskbanker said:

jeffcarolt said:
My daughter was told that they can't do that, at which point we quoted The CAA regulations at them, the reply was I have no facility to look at alternative flights with other carriers and as it's not within the 14 days we don't have to do that.

Just to be clear, these aren't CAA regulations, it's the law, i.e. the legislation referred to earlier, although the CAA documentation does offer its interpretation.

Having said that, there is undoubtedly the reasonableness aspect that comes into play if there's a shortage of directly equivalent alternatives, but their denial of responsibility outside 14 days (for rerouting rather than compensation) sounds like a bare-faced lie - if the call was recorded then it might be worth securing a copy via a subject access request, as it could strengthen her case in the event of a dispute further downstream.

Exactly. In any claim for compensation you will be expected to make reasonable efforts to minimise your losses. The law won't support you in running them up as big a bill as possible to teach them a lesson!

Yes, although the legislation envisages that the airline does the rebooking itself, with the expectation that this is at no extra cost to the passenger, so theoretically the issue of relative cost shouldn't even be one that the passenger needs to consider.

If the airline is uncontactable or uncooperative then obviously the most pragmatic response is for the passenger to rebook and reclaim, but I'd argue that they shouldn't even be put in that position so ought to expect some latitude when it comes to reimbursement, i.e. some travellers may not be positioned to research alternatives to the same degree as airlines, if, for example, they're stressed, and/or stranded abroad, and/or without internet access, etc, although such scenarios wouldn't seem to apply in this specific example.

Undervalued

eskbanker said:

Undervalued said:

eskbanker said:

jeffcarolt said:
My daughter was told that they can't do that, at which point we quoted The CAA regulations at them, the reply was I have no facility to look at alternative flights with other carriers and as it's not within the 14 days we don't have to do that.

Just to be clear, these aren't CAA regulations, it's the law, i.e. the legislation referred to earlier, although the CAA documentation does offer its interpretation.

Having said that, there is undoubtedly the reasonableness aspect that comes into play if there's a shortage of directly equivalent alternatives, but their denial of responsibility outside 14 days (for rerouting rather than compensation) sounds like a bare-faced lie - if the call was recorded then it might be worth securing a copy via a subject access request, as it could strengthen her case in the event of a dispute further downstream.

Exactly. In any claim for compensation you will be expected to make reasonable efforts to minimise your losses. The law won't support you in running them up as big a bill as possible to teach them a lesson!

Yes, although the legislation envisages that the airline does the rebooking itself, with the expectation that this is at no extra cost to the passenger, so theoretically the issue of relative cost shouldn't even be one that the passenger needs to consider.

If the airline is uncontactable or uncooperative then obviously the most pragmatic response is for the passenger to rebook and reclaim, but I'd argue that they shouldn't even be put in that position so ought to expect some latitude when it comes to reimbursement, i.e. some travellers may not be positioned to research alternatives to the same degree as airlines, if, for example, they're stressed, and/or stranded abroad, and/or without internet access, etc, although such scenarios wouldn't seem to apply in this specific example.

Absolutely, it would come down to what a judge felt was reasonable. Debating that has kept lawyers happy for centuries!