Air Mauritius refusal 'Bird Strike'

gwarde

Hi all, we were due to fly on Air Mauritius (MK053) Gatwick to Mauritius on 14 November 2023. After online check in which was clearly stating arrival in Mauritius at 0730 the following day. The flight was delayed outbound and eventually landed just over four hours late, with no explanation. Upon my return to the UK I filed a claim for flight delay compensation, aside from an automated response I received no reply from Air Mauritius. On the 2 Feb 2024 I referred my claim to the CAA, who have acknowledged and are progressing the claim.

On the 2 May 2024 I received an email from Air Mauritius refusing compensation on the grounds that the aircraft had had a bird strike. 

My issue is, I am sceptical about the bird strike claim. The first reason behind this is that they would have known on the day, why did it take almost five months to tell me the reason and secondly, surely after a bird strike it would take more than four hours to check the aircraft was fit to fly. I am aware that there is a mandatory reporting system for bird strikes, but unsure how to access it. 

So my question (eventually) is this. Has anybody any knowledge about how I can check this bird strike claim. I have looked on the CAA web page but they only have general data up to 2022, whilst the CAA are dealing with the claim, they are extremely busy so replies are slow coming back. 

eskbanker

I'm not aware of any public access to industry data about bird strikes, but if the matter is in the hands of the CAA then they'd presumably be able to see this if necessary.

Claims can take a long time, especially where it's a small airline that'll rarely interact with the UK-specific regulations, and escalation to the CAA also isn't a swift process, so all you can realistically do is wait.

In terms of your scepticism, the fact that it took them five months to respond to the claim doesn't signify that it took them that long to find out what happened, and there's no actual obligation to declare it to passengers on the day.  I also wouldn't see a delay of 'only' four hours as inherently suspicious, in terms of conducting an ad hoc inspection, although if new parts had been needed then it would presumably have been longer.

What do you believe the reason for the delay to be, and what leads you to disbelieve the airline's version of events, beyond natural suspicion that they don't want to pay out?

Westin

gwarde said:

Hi all, we were due to fly on Air Mauritius (MK053) Gatwick to Mauritius on 14 November 2023. After online check in which was clearly stating arrival in Mauritius at 0730 the following day. The flight was delayed outbound and eventually landed just over four hours late, with no explanation. Upon my return to the UK I filed a claim for flight delay compensation, aside from an automated response I received no reply from Air Mauritius. On the 2 Feb 2024 I referred my claim to the CAA, who have acknowledged and are progressing the claim.

On the 2 May 2024 I received an email from Air Mauritius refusing compensation on the grounds that the aircraft had had a bird strike. 

My issue is, I am sceptical about the bird strike claim. The first reason behind this is that they would have known on the day, why did it take almost five months to tell me the reason and secondly, surely after a bird strike it would take more than four hours to check the aircraft was fit to fly. I am aware that there is a mandatory reporting system for bird strikes, but unsure how to access it. 

So my question (eventually) is this. Has anybody any knowledge about how I can check this bird strike claim. I have looked on the CAA web page but they only have general data up to 2022, whilst the CAA are dealing with the claim, they are extremely busy so replies are slow coming back. 

Not sure I share your scepticism. 

To your first reason: They may well of known on the day but perhaps either you did not heard the reason for the delay announced on board, or the flight crew decided not to be so specific in the information at the time so not to alarm some passengers.  A nervous or infrequent flyer might be more alarmed to hear about a bird strike issue, especially if the aircraft is then about to operate a long flight over water.   Perhaps easier to say a technical or operational issue. 

With your second reason: No, inspections for bird strikes don't necessarily take over fours hours. In fact I would think that would be the extreme and perhaps if they had to wait for a more through inspection, engineering services to be called out at a non-base,  or a more issues removing debris.   I have actually had two bird strike incidents in the past 18-months.  One in Faro and the return flight was delayed only 50 minutes (damage to nose). The other in Nice when the aircraft hit three birds on landing. One into the forward landing gear, one in to the starboard wing slats and one large bird into the starboard engine.  Even with that amount of bird strike damage the flight was delayed 3hrs45min.  Five ground staff worked on sorting out that flights issue.   

gwarde

Westin said:

gwarde said:

Hi all, we were due to fly on Air Mauritius (MK053) Gatwick to Mauritius on 14 November 2023. After online check in which was clearly stating arrival in Mauritius at 0730 the following day. The flight was delayed outbound and eventually landed just over four hours late, with no explanation. Upon my return to the UK I filed a claim for flight delay compensation, aside from an automated response I received no reply from Air Mauritius. On the 2 Feb 2024 I referred my claim to the CAA, who have acknowledged and are progressing the claim.

On the 2 May 2024 I received an email from Air Mauritius refusing compensation on the grounds that the aircraft had had a bird strike. 

My issue is, I am sceptical about the bird strike claim. The first reason behind this is that they would have known on the day, why did it take almost five months to tell me the reason and secondly, surely after a bird strike it would take more than four hours to check the aircraft was fit to fly. I am aware that there is a mandatory reporting system for bird strikes, but unsure how to access it. 

So my question (eventually) is this. Has anybody any knowledge about how I can check this bird strike claim. I have looked on the CAA web page but they only have general data up to 2022, whilst the CAA are dealing with the claim, they are extremely busy so replies are slow coming back. 

Not sure I share your scepticism. 

To your first reason: They may well of known on the day but perhaps either you did not heard the reason for the delay announced on board, or the flight crew decided not to be so specific in the information at the time so not to alarm some passengers.  A nervous or infrequent flyer might be more alarmed to hear about a bird strike issue, especially if the aircraft is then about to operate a long flight over water.   Perhaps easier to say a technical or operational issue. 

With your second reason: No, inspections for bird strikes don't necessarily take over fours hours. In fact I would think that would be the extreme and perhaps if they had to wait for a more through inspection, engineering services to be called out at a non-base,  or a more issues removing debris.   I have actually had two bird strike incidents in the past 18-months.  One in Faro and the return flight was delayed only 50 minutes (damage to nose). The other in Nice when the aircraft hit three birds on landing. One into the forward landing gear, one in to the starboard wing slats and one large bird into the starboard engine.  Even with that amount of bird strike damage the flight was delayed 3hrs45min.  Five ground staff worked on sorting out that flights issue.   

OK, thanks for the input. I just find it hard to believe that it took nearly five months to tell me the reason for refusal if it was that simple. I have to say, I wouldn't fancy boarding a plane 3hrs 45 mins after it had taken a large bird into a starboard engine (with my previous aviation experience head on!!)

gwarde

eskbanker said:

I'm not aware of any public access to industry data about bird strikes, but if the matter is in the hands of the CAA then they'd presumably be able to see this if necessary.

Claims can take a long time, especially where it's a small airline that'll rarely interact with the UK-specific regulations, and escalation to the CAA also isn't a swift process, so all you can realistically do is wait.

In terms of your scepticism, the fact that it took them five months to respond to the claim doesn't signify that it took them that long to find out what happened, and there's no actual obligation to declare it to passengers on the day.  I also wouldn't see a delay of 'only' four hours as inherently suspicious, in terms of conducting an ad hoc inspection, although if new parts had been needed then it would presumably have been longer.

What do you believe the reason for the delay to be, and what leads you to disbelieve the airline's version of events, beyond natural suspicion that they don't want to pay out?

Thanks for the input, I think it is just my natural suspicion and the complete lack of information regarding the delay (until the bird strike information). There's also the fact that the same flight the following day arrived late by 3 hours and 20 minutes, surely not another bird strike! I will leave the case with the CAA and see if there is any further mileage in it. 

eskbanker

gwarde said:
I wouldn't fancy boarding a plane 3hrs 45 mins after it had taken a large bird into a starboard engine (with my previous aviation experience head on!!)

Did they say (when finally responding to your claim) that the issue was a large bird into an engine?  'Bird strike' covers a wide range of scenarios and obviously some are more significant than others....

gwarde

eskbanker said:

gwarde said:
I wouldn't fancy boarding a plane 3hrs 45 mins after it had taken a large bird into a starboard engine (with my previous aviation experience head on!!)

Did they say (when finally responding to your claim) that the issue was a large bird into an engine?  'Bird strike' covers a wide range of scenarios and obviously some are more significant than others....

No, nothing at all, and I can understand why they wouldn't on the day, but five months to say 'the aircraft had a bird strike' seems excessive.  I know life in Mauritius is lived at a slower pace, but that seems slow even for Mauritius! I was just referencing your own experience with the 3hr 45min comment.

eskbanker

gwarde said:

eskbanker said:

gwarde said:
I wouldn't fancy boarding a plane 3hrs 45 mins after it had taken a large bird into a starboard engine (with my previous aviation experience head on!!)

Did they say (when finally responding to your claim) that the issue was a large bird into an engine?  'Bird strike' covers a wide range of scenarios and obviously some are more significant than others....

No, nothing at all, and I can understand why they wouldn't on the day, but five months to say 'the aircraft had a bird strike' seems excessive.  I know life in Mauritius is lived at a slower pace, but that seems slow even for Mauritius! I was just referencing your own experience with the 3hr 45min comment.

As above, I think you're reading too much into the airline dragging their heels - this forum is littered with similar tales of airlines not being in any hurry to process compensation claims, so the fact that they only notified you of their reason when rejecting a claim after five months isn't inherently suspicious.

Not sure what you mean by my own experience, I was simply highlighting that an inspection of bird damage can easily be completed in much less than four hours in some circumstances, i.e. again in itself that's not suspicious, especially if 'large bird into engine' is just speculation.

Hoenir

Is your real issue the lack of compensation ? 

gwarde

Hoenir said:

Is your real issue the lack of compensation ? 

Yes, along with the four hour delay and no information from the airline at the time of the delay or during the following five months, although it does appear to be the normal timescale for a lot of people. As paying customers we were treated rather shabbily by the airline, we only found out about the delay after arriving at the airport.

What other issue could there be on a flight compensation forum? 

bagand96

gwarde said:

Hoenir said:

Is your real issue the lack of compensation ? 

Yes, along with the four hour delay and no information from the airline at the time of the delay or during the following five months, although it does appear to be the normal timescale for a lot of people. As paying customers we were treated rather shabbily by the airline, we only found out about the delay after arriving at the airport.

Depending on when/where the birdstrike happened it's quite possible that Air Mauritius didn't know about the issue until the aircraft landed at Gatwick and they then had to arrange inspections etc.

Airline operations are complex with a lot of variables, and there are occasions when the information just isn't available in a decent timescale, or can change rapidly.

The timescales to respond to your claim aren't great but as you say it's par for the course with a lot of airlines. Not just for compensation claims, generally customer service.