Jet2 refusing compensation. What's next?

pecunianonolet

eskbanker said:

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....

Agree, it is difficult to get hold of the relevant data and it is also unknown what data Jet2 provided to CAA alongside the evidence I provided when I raised the claim. 

The CAA website states:

"If you are not sure whether extraordinary circumstances apply to your flight, but have read about your other rights and think you might have a case, you can make a claim to your airline for compensation. The airline should explain to you the reason for the disruption. If they consider it was due to extraordinary circumstances they will need to clearly set out why. If they reject your claim then you can consider whether to pursue it further."

https://www.caa.co.uk/passengers/resolving-travel-problems/delays-and-cancellations/making-a-claim/am-i-entitled-to-compensation/

The EU website is a bit clearer:

"If you arrived at your final destination with a delay of more than 3 hours, you are entitled to compensation, unless the delay was due to extraordinary circumstances. The airline has to prove this by providing, for example, extracts from logbooks or incident reports. The air carrier should give this evidence to the relevant national enforcement body as well as to the passengers concerned in line with national provisions on access to documents."

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm#delay

ForumUser7 said:

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.

Thanks a lot for your comprehensive answer @ForumUser7. You state you're not a travel law expert, but I can sense some aviation knowledge here.

Yes, it is a very challenging airport and that makes it even more difficult. Thanks for pulling out all the links, although I have read all of them and remember watching the BA flight live on flightradar on the day making attempts to land but it ended up in the Canaries. In the end, I wouldn't have complained that much, at least somewhere warm for 1-2 days and a short flight from one island to the other

Most flights cancelled for the 15th got cancelled already the day before, perhaps unsurprisingly, a lot of so called low cost carriers among them. 

The airport itself is surprisingly well prepared and has routine dealing with issues. Yes, there was Oscar recently and that was quite something and some very extreme weather. There was a lot of disruption in May as well, for which I am waiting on an Easyjet outcome. You can read about it here

Below data from the airport website showing towards the evening all flights, not cancelled the day before, were able to land. 

My provocation, hence my claim, is that if wind would be well outside the operation limits, why did airlines like BA, TAP, Finnair operate each 2 flights that day? 

If they would have cancelled, they could easily cite "extraordinary circumstances" due to weather and it would be no cost to them other than maybe a £10 courtesy food voucher at the airport, if even. Them operating the flight, taking the risk of having to return or divert to either the Canary Island or mainland Portugal, sorting hotels, transfers, feed everyone, organise another flight, sort out emergency crew, etc. would come to a much higher price.

Or, do they simply have pilots with much more flight experience able to fly a plane manually and not just pilots flying magenta line and autopilot? Do they have different internal procedures? Less risk averse in general?

The weather data available was surely the same for all airlines and I can't imagine that any airline would operate a flight if they are not convinced it is safe for crew and passengers. 

The least I expect is Jet2 to provide the evidence and data they based their decission on.

Last but not least, the runway in Funchal is 2781m long and the runway in Glasgow 2665m according to Wikipedia.

ForumUser7

pecunianonolet said:

eskbanker said:

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....

Agree, it is difficult to get hold of the relevant data and it is also unknown what data Jet2 provided to CAA alongside the evidence I provided when I raised the claim. 

The CAA website states:

"If you are not sure whether extraordinary circumstances apply to your flight, but have read about your other rights and think you might have a case, you can make a claim to your airline for compensation. The airline should explain to you the reason for the disruption. If they consider it was due to extraordinary circumstances they will need to clearly set out why. If they reject your claim then you can consider whether to pursue it further."

https://www.caa.co.uk/passengers/resolving-travel-problems/delays-and-cancellations/making-a-claim/am-i-entitled-to-compensation/

The EU website is a bit clearer:

"If you arrived at your final destination with a delay of more than 3 hours, you are entitled to compensation, unless the delay was due to extraordinary circumstances. The airline has to prove this by providing, for example, extracts from logbooks or incident reports. The air carrier should give this evidence to the relevant national enforcement body as well as to the passengers concerned in line with national provisions on access to documents."

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm#delay

ForumUser7 said:

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.

Thanks a lot for your comprehensive answer @ForumUser7. You state you're not a travel law expert, but I can sense some aviation knowledge here.

Yes, it is a very challenging airport and that makes it even more difficult. Thanks for pulling out all the links, although I have read all of them and remember watching the BA flight live on flightradar on the day making attempts to land but it ended up in the Canaries. In the end, I wouldn't have complained that much, at least somewhere warm for 1-2 days and a short flight from one island to the other

Most flights cancelled for the 15th got cancelled already the day before, perhaps unsurprisingly, a lot of so called low cost carriers among them. 

The airport itself is surprisingly well prepared and has routine dealing with issues. Yes, there was Oscar recently and that was quite something and some very extreme weather. There was a lot of disruption in May as well, for which I am waiting on an Easyjet outcome. You can read about it here

Below data from the airport website showing towards the evening all flights, not cancelled the day before, were able to land. 

My provocation, hence my claim, is that if wind would be well outside the operation limits, why did airlines like BA, TAP, Finnair operate each 2 flights that day? 

If they would have cancelled, they could easily cite "extraordinary circumstances" due to weather and it would be no cost to them other than maybe a £10 courtesy food voucher at the airport, if even. Them operating the flight, taking the risk of having to return or divert to either the Canary Island or mainland Portugal, sorting hotels, transfers, feed everyone, organise another flight, sort out emergency crew, etc. would come to a much higher price.

Or, do they simply have pilots with much more flight experience able to fly a plane manually and not just pilots flying magenta line and autopilot? Do they have different internal procedures? Less risk averse in general?

The weather data available was surely the same for all airlines and I can't imagine that any airline would operate a flight if they are not convinced it is safe for crew and passengers. 

The least I expect is Jet2 to provide the evidence and data they based their decission on.

Last but not least, the runway in Funchal is 2781m long and the runway in Glasgow 2665m according to Wikipedia.

Unfortunately, Jet2 may consider the information you are requesting to be 'commercially sensitive', as I suppose it's relating to internal policies and procedures - although I can see why you want the information. I hit a roadblock with this the other day with regards to interest calculation policies on a savings account.

As far as I know, pilots tend to visually land at Funchal, not using autopilot. Flight directors (I think this is the magenta line you're referring to) may be sometimes used, but with the 180 degree bank before the approach they would likely be of little use. Internal procedures and risk are likely at play in the end - but more with regards to tolerance for lengthy delays and diversions (and subsequent fuel burn and related costs) rather than compromising passenger safety. Additionally, the wind is variable and gust speed changes over the course of the day - it is possible the winds were forecast to be less gusty around the times of some of those flights (although this is speculation on my part). Looks like some flights had long delays.

Good luck with your case

For anyone curious, if landing on 05, this is the approach into Funchal for most UK originating flights (and other places too of course). Here is a video of it too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzrN9P3y4TQ

eskbanker

pecunianonolet said:

eskbanker said:

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....

Agree, it is difficult to get hold of the relevant data and it is also unknown what data Jet2 provided to CAA alongside the evidence I provided when I raised the claim. 

The CAA website states:

"If you are not sure whether extraordinary circumstances apply to your flight, but have read about your other rights and think you might have a case, you can make a claim to your airline for compensation. The airline should explain to you the reason for the disruption. If they consider it was due to extraordinary circumstances they will need to clearly set out why. If they reject your claim then you can consider whether to pursue it further."

https://www.caa.co.uk/passengers/resolving-travel-problems/delays-and-cancellations/making-a-claim/am-i-entitled-to-compensation/

The EU website is a bit clearer:

"If you arrived at your final destination with a delay of more than 3 hours, you are entitled to compensation, unless the delay was due to extraordinary circumstances. The airline has to prove this by providing, for example, extracts from logbooks or incident reports. The air carrier should give this evidence to the relevant national enforcement body as well as to the passengers concerned in line with national provisions on access to documents."

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm#delay

[...]

The least I expect is Jet2 to provide the evidence and data they based their decission on.

I'm not trying to defend Jet2 here, and they have form for using generic boilerplate wording instead of specifics, but it seems plausible to me that they consider that they've provided as much explanation as they feel obliged to:

"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."

as opposed to simply stating that it was due to 'extraordinary circumstances'.  I imagine that you'll argue that this is less comprehensive than the EU examples and it's obviously a considerable shortfall to your expectations of "the evidence and data they based their decision on", but in the context of a rejected claim and apparent lack of support from the CAA, it still doesn't seem to me that you have any more leverage to extract further detail from them, so that really does just leave court.

ForumUser7 said:
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.

There has been plenty of legal debate about whether and when 'extraordinary' should be equated to 'unusual' but I don't believe that frequency of adverse weather conditions on a remote island in the Atlantic prevents airlines from legitimately citing 'extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken', especially in the context of recital 14 of the regulations, in which "meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned" is expressly listed as an example of extraordinary circumstances.

Alan_Bowen

The best no-win no fee solicitors to try would be Bott & Co who have taken many of the leading cases to court and won. However being honest, I think you may be onto a hiding to nothing here. Every airline and every plane has its own wind limits which will vary, looking at the list of planes that landed they may well have been Airbus planes whereas jet2 only has Boeing aircraft and they have different limits regarding wind.

Flying to Funchal is expensive because of the need to carry extra fuel for diversions and every airline will take a view of when to fly. All pilots flying into the airport require special training, I know for example that BA only has 20 out of its 3600 qualified to land there and there will be a similarly limited number able to fly at Jet2. 

pecunianonolet

Alan_Bowen said:

The best no-win no fee solicitors to try would be Bott & Co who have taken many of the leading cases to court and won. However being honest, I think you may be onto a hiding to nothing here. Every airline and every plane has its own wind limits which will vary, looking at the list of planes that landed they may well have been Airbus planes whereas jet2 only has Boeing aircraft and they have different limits regarding wind.

Flying to Funchal is expensive because of the need to carry extra fuel for diversions and every airline will take a view of when to fly. All pilots flying into the airport require special training, I know for example that BA only has 20 out of its 3600 qualified to land there and there will be a similarly limited number able to fly at Jet2. 

Thanks for the recommendation and I looked into Bott & Co and there T&C's are not as clear to me as they probably could be but it looks like they are leading in this area. Might give them a try if I hit a brick wall.

Interesting point regarding wind limits for each plane and makes total sense. Not sure why the passenger has to take the hit because an airline uses Boeing or Airbus and therefore is or isn't able to operate the flight. 

Flying to Funchal is and isn't expensive. For that Jet2 flight we paid around £160 return for 2 pax, cabin trolley included no hold luggage. This was booked very early in January. The island had still strict Covid rules in place, they only got lifted very shortly before the trip. Yet, we still had to wear face covering indoors. 

A recent round trip in May this year (again booked in January), albeit a bit more complicated, wasn't breaking the bank either. Glasgow - Dublin - Funchal and return Funchal - Stansted - Glasgow. All with Ryanair, except of the last leg from Stansted to Glasgow which was Easyjet. Went 3 weeks, cabin trolley only. No issues with Ryanair whatsoever and on time. All together for two just under £400 all in. Jet2 would have charged this per person. That's around £100 per person, per route. Taking a taxi to the airport would cost me £80 alone.

Only 20 out of 3600 seems like a rather low number considering that pilots might be off sick, on holiday, need to rest, probably fly other routes too, need time for training. Indeed, it's captains only there and special training is required but that seems a bit unrealistic to me to be fair. You might have some aviation background to be able to make that claim but it's hard to believe. 

bagand96

pecunianonolet said:

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.  

I'd say go with a UK based one and make sure they're an actual law firm and not just a "claims management" company. I'd agree with @Alan_Bowen that Bott&Co seem to be the ones that reccomended most and have a good reputation.

I believe they charge around a third of your compensation. This is assuming they'd take on the case.