Jet2 refusing compensation. What's next?

pecunianonolet

Hi all,

Looking for some advice and next steps and opinions overall.

Log of events:

OH and I were supposed to fly from Glasgow to Funchal (Madeira) on 14th March 2022. 

13/03/2022 

Jet2 E-Mail with the information that the flight is delayed until Tuesday 15th March, due to forecasted adverse weather conditions at Funchal airport. Flight now expected to depart at 12:25 on Tuesday 15th March 2022.

14/03/2022 

Jet2 E-Mail with the information that severe weather conditions in Funchal are now forecasted to continue for the rest of the day and the following day. New departure time has been provided to be 11:55 on Wednesday 16th March 2022. Jet2 promised to get in touch by 16:00 on the same day via SMS with further options.

15/03/2022 

Another Jet2 E-Mail announcing a further flight amendment to now depart Glasgow on 16th March at 16:05 and scheduled arrival in Funchal at 19:40

16/03/2022 

Jet2 confirming the departure time as announced the day before.

There was in fact a storm and we accept that on the 14th literally all was canelled due to weather. However, on the following day (15th) a total of 18 planes from various destinations and various airlines landed an there was literally no disruption on the 16th. 


Jet2 is quoting in response to my compensation claim:

"Your flight was delayed as a result of adverse weather conditions (high winds) affecting Funchal which were forecast to be significantly beyond the operational limits on both the flight date and the following day. Due to the forecast conditions, the decision was taken to delay the operation of your flight until 16th March to arrive within a more favourable weather window and avoid a diversion.

Once the forecast was released for the 16th March 2022, as conditions were forecast to continue, your flight was operated later that day when the conditions were forecast to be within limits."

Based on this I complained to The Civil Aviation Authority and after around 6 months they responded:

"Thank you for your patience with us while we investigated your complaint about the disruption of flight LS129 on 14 March 2022. During our investigation, we received information from Jet2 about the flight concerned, which we have considered in the light of the 'extraordinary circumstances' exception of EC Regulation 261/2004.

After considering all the information provided to us, it is our view that the disruption of your flight is of a type which means that the airline does not need to pay compensation. It appears from the information and evidence provided that the reason of the flight disruption was caused by adverse weather (strong wind) in the vicinity of Funchal Airport. This means that, under these specific circumstances, the disruption could be considered as outside the airline's control and could not have been avoided. It is our view, therefore, that this disruption falls under the 'extraordinary circumstances' exception of EC Regulation 261/2004 and, as such, we believe that you are not entitled to compensation in this case.

Unfortunately, we are unable to take your case any further. Our opinion that, in this case, the disruption was due to extraordinary circumstances is based on the information available to us. Please be aware that this is not a legally binding opinion and only relates to the flight concerned.

It is, of course, still open to you to issue a claim in the Court but, in our opinion, we believe that the airline has a strong case not to pay compensation. As such, it is entirely up to you to decide whether you wish to pursue this further."


I have now responded to the CAA a without any response (yet) and have now also replied to Jet2 to challenge their decission.

Jet2 is citing  “extraordinary circumstances” and “operational limits”, which apparently prevented the operation of the flight. My understanding would be that if such operational limits are in place, they would be applicable to all airlines simultaneously scheduled to approach or depart Funchal airport. In total, 18 aircrafts landed on the 15th of March so have they all broken rules and operated despite those limits in place? I have requested that Jet2 provides all relevant evidence such as logbook entries, incident reports, weather data, airport limitations, etc.

Funchal airport is very challenging and very often affected by bad weather, especially wind. Other airlines landed in Madeira airport on the 15th March and therefore the severe weather conditions Jet2 claims are neither “freakish” nor “wholly exceptional”. In my opinion, it is not an extraordinary circumstance for bad weather to cause delay or flight cancellation, because wind is “inherent” at Funchal airport. 


What is the opinion of the experts here? Do we have travel lawyers here? Should I hand in a complaint now so I can get a deadlock letter? What would be the next step after such a letter? Should I try to take it to court (cost if I don't win?) or drop the case and give up on the potential of 700 quid?

Any help appreciated!

daveyjp

As you note Funchal is challenging.

This video gives an insight into how weather, crew experience, and company operating restrictions make Funchal difficult, from 7 minutes in:

https://youtu.be/Y1yQziRUFNY

Lufthansa pilots need 4,000 flight hours on commercial, lots of simulator training and check flights with an instructor.

It could be the case that Jet2 simply didn't have a pilot with the operational experience to land at Funchal and a qualified replacement had to get to Glasgow.

eskbanker

I'd have thought that there was a pretty clear-cut case that the initial delay was indeed unavoidable extraordinary circumstances, given the example in the regulations of "meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned", but if there's a delay of 24 hours caused by extraordinary circumstances and then another 24 hours (say) by something deemed to be within the airline's control then it's not clear to me whether or not that first element allows the airline to deny compensation, i.e. once the flight has already passed the threshold for delay caused by ECs, can the airline then be held liable for additional delay caused by a separate reason?

pecunianonolet

daveyjp said:

As you note Funchal is challenging.

This video gives an insight into how weather, crew experience, and company operating restrictions make Funchal difficult, from 7 minutes in:

https://youtu.be/Y1yQziRUFNY

Lufthansa pilots need 4,000 flight hours on commercial, lots of simulator training and check flights with an instructor.

It could be the case that Jet2 simply didn't have a pilot with the operational experience to land at Funchal and a qualified replacement had to get to Glasgow.

If that is the case and they only have a magenta line pilot available, it would be an operational issue for which the airline alone is liable and not the passenger. Indeed, to fly into Madeira pilots require additional training.

The wind limits are part of discussions for a rather long time now and apparently it's the only airport in the world with such limits and they seem to originate from 1964 as this article specifies. 

The limits are mentioned in this study, but without citation to any official source. The video above is therefore a great source of Lufthansa and their SOP

Anyhow, should the weather be that challenging and a forcast showing conditions be without those limits (if they make sense or not) I would think this is applicable to all airlines. 

eskbanker

pecunianonolet said:

Jet2 is citing  “extraordinary circumstances” and “operational limits”, which apparently prevented the operation of the flight. My understanding would be that if such operational limits are in place, they would be applicable to all airlines simultaneously scheduled to approach or depart Funchal airport. In total, 18 aircrafts landed on the 15th of March so have they all broken rules and operated despite those limits in place? I have requested that Jet2 provides all relevant evidence such as logbook entries, incident reports, weather data, airport limitations, etc.

Funchal airport is very challenging and very often affected by bad weather, especially wind. Other airlines landed in Madeira airport on the 15th March and therefore the severe weather conditions Jet2 claims are neither “freakish” nor “wholly exceptional”. In my opinion, it is not an extraordinary circumstance for bad weather to cause delay or flight cancellation, because wind is “inherent” at Funchal airport. 

pecunianonolet said:
Anyhow, should the weather be that challenging and a forcast showing conditions be without those limits (if they make sense or not) I would think this is applicable to all airlines. 

But surely there are a wide range of factors affecting whether or not a flight can land there?

1. Non-negotiable airport policy, as covered in that local Madeira article
2. Airline policy
3. Aircraft type-specific policy
4. Pilot judgement, based on what's actually being experienced when in flight

Obviously point 1 overrides everything, so if the airport effectively closes the runway then there isn't any scope for further debate.

However, even if the runway is open, i.e. the conditions are within the limits under which the airport takes the decision, airlines or their pilots could still legitimately determine that forecast conditions exceed their policies, which would be why some flights could operate while others didn't - in other words the fact that one or more airlines or aircraft types operate on a given day doesn't prevent other airlines from claiming that strong winds were outside their own safe limits, so the 'operational limits' referred to may be at an airline or aircraft level rather than solely at airport level.

I'm essentially just speculating though - there may be others who can find precedents or case law on such issues, have you searched for something relevant on that front?

pecunianonolet

eskbanker said:

pecunianonolet said:

Jet2 is citing  “extraordinary circumstances” and “operational limits”, which apparently prevented the operation of the flight. My understanding would be that if such operational limits are in place, they would be applicable to all airlines simultaneously scheduled to approach or depart Funchal airport. In total, 18 aircrafts landed on the 15th of March so have they all broken rules and operated despite those limits in place? I have requested that Jet2 provides all relevant evidence such as logbook entries, incident reports, weather data, airport limitations, etc.

Funchal airport is very challenging and very often affected by bad weather, especially wind. Other airlines landed in Madeira airport on the 15th March and therefore the severe weather conditions Jet2 claims are neither “freakish” nor “wholly exceptional”. In my opinion, it is not an extraordinary circumstance for bad weather to cause delay or flight cancellation, because wind is “inherent” at Funchal airport. 

pecunianonolet said:
Anyhow, should the weather be that challenging and a forcast showing conditions be without those limits (if they make sense or not) I would think this is applicable to all airlines. 

But surely there are a wide range of factors affecting whether or not a flight can land there?

1. Non-negotiable airport policy, as covered in that local Madeira article
2. Airline policy
3. Aircraft type-specific policy
4. Pilot judgement, based on what's actually being experienced when in flight

Obviously point 1 overrides everything, so if the airport effectively closes the runway then there isn't any scope for further debate.

However, even if the runway is open, i.e. the conditions are within the limits under which the airport takes the decision, airlines or their pilots could still legitimately determine that forecast conditions exceed their policies, which would be why some flights could operate while others didn't - in other words the fact that one or more airlines or aircraft types operate on a given day doesn't prevent other airlines from claiming that strong winds were outside their own safe limits, so the 'operational limits' referred to may be at an airline or aircraft level rather than solely at airport level.

I'm essentially just speculating though - there may be others who can find precedents or case law on such issues, have you searched for something relevant on that front?

All points are possible explanations. 

1. Indeed, in this case there is no further discussion needed
2. If so, ok, but I would like to know as in this case I might decide to fly next time with a different airline. Perhaps one with more experienced pilots not just flying the magenta route. BA seems to fly in most instances when others get cold feet and cancel but also comes with a very different price tag.
3. Possible, but on such routes, especially across Europe, the range of aircraft used is faily standard but would be still good to understand if there is a difference. Anyhow, if an airline decides to offer this destination it should ensure that aircrafts used are fit for purpose and have crew with suitable qualification. A pilot with extensive e.g. 4000h experience and all licenses would also cost an airline a fair bit more in salary.
4. A possibility and probably the right thing to do in favour of safety but har dto believe that so many other pilots judge differently

I have done some research on Google but not specifically on individual cases, would not really know where to search for such things. 

bagand96

You could try one of the no win no fee solicitors as a last resort. But if they won't take it on then I think it would definitely be a lost cause. 

eastmidsaver

it seems likely this will go in the airline's favour.
but you could try see if Jet 2 are part of an ADR scheme.
it's a bit like an Ombudsman,  the airline will be obliged to payout if it goes in your favour.
however, if it doesn't go in your favour you could still take it to the Court.

pecunianonolet

bagand96 said:

You could try one of the no win no fee solicitors as a last resort. But if they won't take it on then I think it would definitely be a lost cause. 

Any recommendations? I looked at some but they have often sketchy T&C's and it's not really clear how much their cut is in the end. 

eastmidsaver said:

it seems likely this will go in the airline's favour.
but you could try see if Jet 2 are part of an ADR scheme.
it's a bit like an Ombudsman,  the airline will be obliged to payout if it goes in your favour.
however, if it doesn't go in your favour you could still take it to the Court.

Jet2 is not part of an ADR scheme. Apparently, these schemes are volunatrily and not obligatory.


On another note, got a response from Jet2 today:

Dear pecunianonolet,

Thank you for your recent correspondence.

I note that correspondence was received from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in May 2023 in relation to your claim which outlined that Jet2.com had proved the occurrence of extraordinary circumstance on this occasion, and that compensation is not payable. Our position will therefore remain that your claim is ineligible for compensation.

I am sorry to read you are considering legal action. Should proceedings be issued, we will defend them accordingly. We reserve all of our rights.

Thank you once again for taking the time to contact us.

Yours sincerely,

With no word are they talking about my request to provide any relevant and specific evidence for the exemption from compensation. If they think their case is so water tight they should have no issue with providing this. 

eskbanker

pecunianonolet said:
With no word are they talking about my request to provide any relevant and specific evidence for the exemption from compensation. If they think their case is so water tight they should have no issue with providing this. 

Trouble is, it sounds like they're effectively saying that they don't intend to supply you with any further information (unsurprisingly, given their citing of the CAA endorsing their position), in that they're apparently defining that message as their final response, albeit not actually using that term, but would doubtless provide additional details to a court if ultimately defending a claim there.

It's unfortunate that airlines essentially hold the cards in this situation, as you'd need to be confident enough in your position to take them to court, even in the knowledge that they haven't declared the full circumstances, so you're at a disadvantage in terms of which facts and evidence would be presented to the court....

ForumUser7

pecunianonolet said:

Hi all,

Looking for some advice and next steps and opinions overall.

Log of events:

OH and I were supposed to fly from Glasgow to Funchal (Madeira) on 14th March 2022. 

13/03/2022 

Jet2 E-Mail with the information that the flight is delayed until Tuesday 15th March, due to forecasted adverse weather conditions at Funchal airport. Flight now expected to depart at 12:25 on Tuesday 15th March 2022.

14/03/2022 

Jet2 E-Mail with the information that severe weather conditions in Funchal are now forecasted to continue for the rest of the day and the following day. New departure time has been provided to be 11:55 on Wednesday 16th March 2022. Jet2 promised to get in touch by 16:00 on the same day via SMS with further options.

15/03/2022 

Another Jet2 E-Mail announcing a further flight amendment to now depart Glasgow on 16th March at 16:05 and scheduled arrival in Funchal at 19:40

16/03/2022 

Jet2 confirming the departure time as announced the day before.

There was in fact a storm and we accept that on the 14th literally all was canelled due to weather. However, on the following day (15th) a total of 18 planes from various destinations and various airlines landed an there was literally no disruption on the 16th. 


Jet2 is quoting in response to my compensation claim:

"Your flight was delayed as a result of adverse weather conditions (high winds) affecting Funchal which were forecast to be significantly beyond the operational limits on both the flight date and the following day. Due to the forecast conditions, the decision was taken to delay the operation of your flight until 16th March to arrive within a more favourable weather window and avoid a diversion.

Once the forecast was released for the 16th March 2022, as conditions were forecast to continue, your flight was operated later that day when the conditions were forecast to be within limits."

Based on this I complained to The Civil Aviation Authority and after around 6 months they responded:

"Thank you for your patience with us while we investigated your complaint about the disruption of flight LS129 on 14 March 2022. During our investigation, we received information from Jet2 about the flight concerned, which we have considered in the light of the 'extraordinary circumstances' exception of EC Regulation 261/2004.

After considering all the information provided to us, it is our view that the disruption of your flight is of a type which means that the airline does not need to pay compensation. It appears from the information and evidence provided that the reason of the flight disruption was caused by adverse weather (strong wind) in the vicinity of Funchal Airport. This means that, under these specific circumstances, the disruption could be considered as outside the airline's control and could not have been avoided. It is our view, therefore, that this disruption falls under the 'extraordinary circumstances' exception of EC Regulation 261/2004 and, as such, we believe that you are not entitled to compensation in this case.

Unfortunately, we are unable to take your case any further. Our opinion that, in this case, the disruption was due to extraordinary circumstances is based on the information available to us. Please be aware that this is not a legally binding opinion and only relates to the flight concerned.

It is, of course, still open to you to issue a claim in the Court but, in our opinion, we believe that the airline has a strong case not to pay compensation. As such, it is entirely up to you to decide whether you wish to pursue this further."


I have now responded to the CAA a without any response (yet) and have now also replied to Jet2 to challenge their decission.

Jet2 is citing  “extraordinary circumstances” and “operational limits”, which apparently prevented the operation of the flight. My understanding would be that if such operational limits are in place, they would be applicable to all airlines simultaneously scheduled to approach or depart Funchal airport. In total, 18 aircrafts landed on the 15th of March so have they all broken rules and operated despite those limits in place? I have requested that Jet2 provides all relevant evidence such as logbook entries, incident reports, weather data, airport limitations, etc.

Funchal airport is very challenging and very often affected by bad weather, especially wind. Other airlines landed in Madeira airport on the 15th March and therefore the severe weather conditions Jet2 claims are neither “freakish” nor “wholly exceptional”. In my opinion, it is not an extraordinary circumstance for bad weather to cause delay or flight cancellation, because wind is “inherent” at Funchal airport. 


What is the opinion of the experts here? Do we have travel lawyers here? Should I hand in a complaint now so I can get a deadlock letter? What would be the next step after such a letter? Should I try to take it to court (cost if I don't win?) or drop the case and give up on the potential of 700 quid?

Any help appreciated!

As you've said, LPMA can be tricky to land at. Crosswinds in particular can make it unsafe to land, causing diversions and delays. This isn't helped by the short runway or 180 degree bank shortly before the final to 05.

14th March 2022 was seemingly particularly problematic: https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/why-did-the-ba-heathrow-flight-come.html https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/a-severe-worsening-of-weather-from-sunday-evening.html https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/after-several-turns-in-the-air-british-airways-plane-gives-up-landing-in-madeira.html https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/jet2-cancels-tuesday-flights.html https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/jet2-cancel-flights-for-monday.html https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/recommended-walking-routes-in-madeira-closed-this-monday.html https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/wind-starts-to-cause-problems-at-airport-3.html

Looks like Jet2 cancelled 15th March 2022 flights (not necessarily saying they were in the right here) due to the weather on the 14th, so to avoid the risk of planes having to divert to an alternate airport (usually LPPT, GCLP, or GCTS - occasionally LPPS). Several other flights on 15th were cancelled https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2022/03/operation-at-madeira-airport-tends-to-normalize.html, although some flights did land there too - albeit significantly less than normal.

The flight then took place on 16th March, which seems to be the day operations really went back to normal.

As you've said, wind is inherent at LPMA, but it seems Jet2 are relying on the fact that they cannot control the weather. Their operational limits may be different to those of other airlines and potentially other aircraft types (ATR-72 vs 737-x00 vs A320 vs 757 vs A330 etc.). The airport itself often remains open to flights, even though airlines won't go due to the weather. Only once the weather breaches the operational limits of the airport, would the limits be applicable to all airlines simultaneously.

I'm no expert on travel law, and I wish you luck with any claim you wish to make against Jet2, but LPMA is of interest to me.

In summary, I agree that there were adverse circumstances and that these would be considered as extraordinary in the context of every flight Jet2 has to any airport, but disagree that they are as extraordinary when it comes to Funchal. It is not often that there is no activity at the airport, but it does happen every now and then - there was recent disruption earlier this month due to Storm Oscar.