Flight delay due to road closure

Wonka_2

larryharvey said:

I also think what @CKhalvashi says at the end of the other MSE thread I linked to above is relevant:


As you can see from the attached, this plane was already in Bristol Airport before all the delays occurred.

You'll need to be a bit better with facts if you're to get anywhere with this - showing a schedule for a future date (and probably on their winter schedule/timings) is no indication of what happened on the day

A quick check shows that the plane you were on had already done a trip BRS-IBZ earlier in the day so was well and truly involved in the delays (should have left at 06h20 and eventually departed at 09h36 before landing back into BRS at 14h56)

Whilst I don't agree with your attitude towards it if you're to get anywhere I'd be focusing on what reason they give that it took 2hrs to turn it round once back at Bristol - but with only a small number of planes/crew (3 ?) based there and a school holiday weekend it's not surprising that a relatively simple incident caused such an issue.

You put your claim in and see what they throw back 

bagand96

larryharvey said:

The reason I am pursuing this, btw, is 1) no refreshments or water was given to us in the airport, despite my requesting them. 2) Jet2 staff were rude and unhelpful, 3) we were left sat in the plane waiting for take off for an hour, which was also unnecessary, and 4) ruined the first night of a very short holiday. If somebody had said to us "do you want to pay £250 for tickets to Gran Canaria, you'll end up getting to your hotel the first night just before midnight, thoroughly fed-up and tired, and you won't be able to go out for dinner anywhere - but you'll still have a day and a half to enjoy yourselves" we'd have said no.  

It did not feel like an unavoidable !!!!!! - it felt like a bunch of headless chicken were in charge and an inevitable result of a not being prepared. There was simply no contingency plan in place. 

What was the reason for that delay?  If you were boarded and sat waiting for an hour it might be that some other factor was at play.

How did you get on with KLM by the way?

Caz3121

larryharvey said:

The reason I am pursuing this, btw, is 1) no refreshments or water was given to us in the airport, despite my requesting them. 2) Jet2 staff were rude and unhelpful, 3) we were left sat in the plane waiting for take off for an hour, which was also unnecessary, and 4) ruined the first night of a very short holiday. If somebody had said to us "do you want to pay £250 for tickets to Gran Canaria, you'll end up getting to your hotel the first night just before midnight, thoroughly fed-up and tired, and you won't be able to go out for dinner anywhere - but you'll still have a day and a half to enjoy yourselves" we'd have said no.  

It did not feel like an unavoidable !!!!!! - it felt like a bunch of headless chicken were in charge and an inevitable result of a not being prepared. There was simply no contingency plan in place. 

that could well be due to Air Traffic restrictions waiting on a slot. 
It is not uncommon for a delay duration to consist of both parts that are within the airline's control and some that are not. 
The part within airline control needs to be over 3 hours to qualify for compensation so if they say that an hour was for ATC then your qualifying delay would be under 3 hours

eskbanker

larryharvey said:

37

FROM https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62011CJ0022 In addition, it is apparent from recital 15 in the preamble to Regulation No 261/2004 that ‘extraordinary circumstances’ may relate only to ‘a particular aircraft on a particular day’, which cannot apply to a passenger denied boarding because of the rescheduling of flights as a result of extraordinary circumstances affecting an earlier flight. The concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ is intended to limit the obligations of an air carrier — or even exempt it from those obligations — when the event in question could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. As the Advocate General observed in point 53 of his Opinion, if such a carrier is obliged to cancel a scheduled flight on the day of a strike by airport staff and then takes the decision to reschedule its later flights, that carrier cannot in any way be considered to be constrained by that strike to deny boarding to a passenger who has duly presented himself for boarding two days after the flight’s cancellation.

38

Consequently, having regard to the requirement to interpret strictly the derogations from provisions granting rights to passengers, which follows from the settled case-law of the Court (see, to that effect, Wallentin-Hermann, paragraph 17 and the case-law cited), an air carrier cannot be exempted from its obligation to pay compensation in the event of ‘denied boarding’ on the ground that its flights were rescheduled as a result of ‘extraordinary circumstances’.

This exemplifies the point I was making about applicability of case law - even though I was (cautiously) citing this case in the other thread, the fact remains that it relates to an airline rescheduling flights two days after some extraordinary circumstances, rather than being some sort of catch-all for any knock-on delays.

Hopefully all the other case law you said you'd found will support your case more directly....

larryharvey said:

The reason I am pursuing this, btw, is 1) no refreshments or water was given to us in the airport, despite my requesting them. 2) Jet2 staff were rude and unhelpful, 3) we were left sat in the plane waiting for take off for an hour, which was also unnecessary, and 4) ruined the first night of a very short holiday.

Obviously nobody will be thrilled when there's a delay, but it's one thing to pitch for the sympathy vote when complaining to an airline and another altogether to construct a compelling case about their legal obligations.  For example, airlines are indeed obliged to offer free "meals and refreshments in a reasonable relation to the waiting time" but only if expecting "a flight to be delayed beyond its scheduled time of departure [...] for three hours or more in the case of all flights between 1500 and 3500 kilometres [such as yours]", and yours apparently departed 2h38 late....

Grumpy_chap

bagand96 said:

Assuming it was the Jet2 flight, it landed 2hrs 52 minutes late.  For delay compensation purposes it's when the doors were opened that counts.  Various websites list 2hrs 59mins or 3hrs 1min late as arrival time (unsure how they measure that)  Looks to be right on the cusp.

larryharvey said:

I have a text message sent at 21:24 to my partner back home, it reads "just waiting now to get off the plane". Doors did not open until at least 21:25. So 3 hour 5 minute delay.

This is probably the most critical factor in this claim - at least the first to assess.
I expect there is an "official" time for arrival determined by some official protocol otherwise any flight that lands a few minutes either side of the compensation-qualifying delay would be fraught with arguments on exact time rather than the merits or otherwise of why the delay occurred.

As others suggested, the OP could simply submit a standard delay claim and await the response. 
If the official delay is less than the threshold that should be the end of the matter.
If the official delay is longer than the threshold, then the airline may pay out or may reject the claim with whatever reason they give.
If the claim is rejected even though over the delay threshold, the OP can then accept or challenge the rejection based upon the position that has been stated by the airline.

eskbanker

Grumpy_chap said:

bagand96 said:

Assuming it was the Jet2 flight, it landed 2hrs 52 minutes late.  For delay compensation purposes it's when the doors were opened that counts.  Various websites list 2hrs 59mins or 3hrs 1min late as arrival time (unsure how they measure that)  Looks to be right on the cusp.

larryharvey said:

I have a text message sent at 21:24 to my partner back home, it reads "just waiting now to get off the plane". Doors did not open until at least 21:25. So 3 hour 5 minute delay.

This is probably the most critical factor in this claim - at least the first to assess.
I expect there is an "official" time for arrival determined by some official protocol otherwise any flight that lands a few minutes either side of the compensation-qualifying delay would be fraught with arguments on exact time rather than the merits or otherwise of why the delay occurred.

I don't believe there is a single 'official' arrival time (as above, it's first door opening that counts here), or at least if there is, then I don't believe it's available in the public domain, and hence the differing times shown by the flight-tracking sites - I think that there will be a variety of times recorded by the relevant authorities, including airlines, airports, ATC, handling agents, etc, but without hard evidence it's difficult for claimants to counter the times quoted by airlines, and OP's text message certainly wouldn't carry much weight, if any, given that most passengers beyond the front and back rows will still be waiting to disembark long after first door opening.

Grumpy_chap

eskbanker said:

I don't believe there is a single 'official' arrival time 

You may well be correct.
It seems like an omission. 
For any flight that lands "close" to the delay trigger threshold, there is a lot of money hinging on that if the airline has to pay or not pay compensation.  
The airline has a clear incentive to declare the time as 2 hours 59 minutes
The passengers have a clear incentive to declare the time as 3 hours 1 minute
Some "official" time that is recorded by an external party would make a lot of sense, especially as you can bet the aircrew are incentivised to follow process extra quickly when there is a risk that the compensation delay time may be passed.
Whether in or out of the permitted delay window is the fundamental parameter and "in" avoids any further discussion about why the delay occurred.

eskbanker

I think the issue is that there are too many times rather than not enough!

As I understand it, there's a substantial range of times tracked as standard across the industry:

https://www.isarsoft.com/knowledge-hub?category=Aviation

so, for example, "Actual In-Block Time (AIBT) is the time that an aircraft arrives in-blocks", i.e. when it stops at its parking stand.

However, I believe that these defined terms are primarily tracked for operational reasons rather than passenger-oriented commercial ones, so am unsure that opening the first door, which achieved more significance after EC261-related court judgments, is something that would be recorded independently as a matter of course....

Grumpy_chap

It is a shame that the legislation and court judgements did not adopt one of the already available times that the industry is recording in any case, rather than use another metric that then requires another data set.

CKhalvashi

eskbanker said:

I think the issue is that there are too many times rather than not enough!

As I understand it, there's a substantial range of times tracked as standard across the industry:

https://www.isarsoft.com/knowledge-hub?category=Aviation

so, for example, "Actual In-Block Time (AIBT) is the time that an aircraft arrives in-blocks", i.e. when it stops at its parking stand.

However, I believe that these defined terms are primarily tracked for operational reasons rather than passenger-oriented commercial ones, so am unsure that opening the first door, which achieved more significance after EC261-related court judgments, is something that would be recorded independently as a matter of course....

It won't be as a matter of course.

Off/on block are recorded, hence OH was handed a 116 block roster for August and managed to condense it into 99 hours and 43 minutes. The maximum monthly flight time is 100 hours, which doesn't include many hours worked.

Door closed to open will add a further layer of complexity to that which wouldn't be required for engineering, FTLs or any other purpose than compensation. This would also risk some of the more militant unions claiming this should be the number for the FTLs, when reasonably it shouldn't be as sitting in a closed aircraft with engines off should count towards duty period but not flight time as it's not, errm, time in flight (or where the aircraft can move under its own power).

The airport may have a recording of a time the arrivals door to the terminal was opened which should coincide within about a minute of the door opening, but this wouldn't be a guarantee either.