Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Former MSE Helen
    • By Former MSE Helen 17th Sep 15, 9:44 AM
    • 2,324Posts
    • 971Thanks
    Former MSE Helen
    MSE News: Victory for passengers on flight delay claims in European court ruling
    • #1
    • 17th Sep 15, 9:44 AM
    MSE News: Victory for passengers on flight delay claims in European court ruling 17th Sep 15 at 9:44 AM
    The ECJ has ruled that technical problems are not "extraordinary circumstances", meaning passengers can claim...

    Read the full story:

    Victory for passengers on flight delay claims in landmark European court ruling




    Click reply below to discuss. If you havenít already, join the forum to reply. If you arenít sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

    Last edited by Former MSE Helen; 18-09-2015 at 9:22 AM.
Page 1
    • glentoran99
    • By glentoran99 17th Sep 15, 9:46 AM
    • 5,468 Posts
    • 4,666 Thanks
    glentoran99
    • #2
    • 17th Sep 15, 9:46 AM
    • #2
    • 17th Sep 15, 9:46 AM
    is this new?
    • fermi
    • By fermi 17th Sep 15, 9:55 AM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    • #3
    • 17th Sep 15, 9:55 AM
    • #3
    • 17th Sep 15, 9:55 AM
    is this new?
    Originally posted by glentoran99
    Yes, it is a result hand down by the ECJ today.

    http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2015-09/cp150105en.pdf
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debt-Free Wannabe, Bankruptcy, Credit Cards and Loans boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Any views are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com. Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

    Free/impartial debt advice: National Debtline | StepChange Debt Charity | Find your local CAB

    IVA & fee charging DMP companies: Profits from misery, motivated ONLY by greed
    • Vauban
    • By Vauban 17th Sep 15, 9:56 AM
    • 4,729 Posts
    • 2,094 Thanks
    Vauban
    • #4
    • 17th Sep 15, 9:56 AM
    • #4
    • 17th Sep 15, 9:56 AM
    It's Van dear Lans - the airline was arguing an interpretation of Wallentin along the lines of spontaneous technical faults being extraordinary circumstances. Oddly, the ECJ didn't agree ...
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 17th Sep 15, 10:22 AM
    • 2,111 Posts
    • 895 Thanks
    Tyzap
    • #5
    • 17th Sep 15, 10:22 AM
    • #5
    • 17th Sep 15, 10:22 AM
    It's groundhog day!

    I'm sure I've seen a judgement almost identical to that before, what a surprise - not.

    IMO this case should never have been referred up to the ECJ, it was a weak link (judge) who should have know better.
    Last edited by Tyzap; 18-09-2015 at 9:38 AM. Reason: typos
    Please read Vaubans superb guide. To find it Google and then download 'vaubans guide'.
    • glentoran99
    • By glentoran99 17th Sep 15, 10:27 AM
    • 5,468 Posts
    • 4,666 Thanks
    glentoran99
    • #6
    • 17th Sep 15, 10:27 AM
    • #6
    • 17th Sep 15, 10:27 AM
    It's ground hog day!

    I'm sure sure I've seen a judgement almost identical to that before, what a surprise - not.

    IMO this case should never have been referred up to the ECJ, it was a week link (judge) who should have know better.
    Originally posted by Tyzap
    Yeah that's what I thought,
    • Dr Watson
    • By Dr Watson 17th Sep 15, 1:19 PM
    • 446 Posts
    • 218 Thanks
    Dr Watson
    • #7
    • 17th Sep 15, 1:19 PM
    • #7
    • 17th Sep 15, 1:19 PM
    So if you are a litigant with your claim on hold/stayed because of this, particularly with Ryanair-
    Now is the time to contact your court and get the stay lifted...
    Surgery is open, and i'm expecting it to be busy.
    Good luck and keep going.
    Successfully sued Ryanair in 2013/14...and have been 'helping' litigants since then.

    Current known score:-
    Dr Watson 35 - 0 Ryanair / Ince and Co

    Go to post 622 on the Ryanair thread to read how to sue them safely.
    • NoviceAngel
    • By NoviceAngel 17th Sep 15, 1:21 PM
    • 2,249 Posts
    • 661 Thanks
    NoviceAngel
    • #8
    • 17th Sep 15, 1:21 PM
    • #8
    • 17th Sep 15, 1:21 PM
    and I thought we were having a holiday for a few weeks, get your Ryanair claims in, and get any stays lifted NOW!!

    Good luck

    NoviceAngel
    After reading PtL Vaubans Guide , please don't desert us, hang around and help others!

    Hi, weíve had to remove part of your signature. If youíre not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if youíre still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
    • Smudge's Lot
    • By Smudge's Lot 17th Sep 15, 2:15 PM
    • 59 Posts
    • 17 Thanks
    Smudge's Lot
    • #9
    • 17th Sep 15, 2:15 PM
    • #9
    • 17th Sep 15, 2:15 PM
    I am afraid that as I work for an airline,this will only be self defeating.

    Does anybody out there think that paying say £100 for a flight should then be entitled to £300 compensation when a crucial part on the plane fails for whatever reason?

    Do you get compensation from National Express coaches when a coach gets a tyre puncture and you are delayed?

    Do you get compensation that is 3 times your ticket cost for when your train is delayed by strong winds bringing down power cables?

    Parts can and do fail and yet with the strongest safety ethic in almost any industry,do you think some airlines will now just go ahead and fly rather than delay the flight so they are not liable for compensation......

    Is your £300 worth that risk that has been imposed by the ECJ.??

    The compensation culture will only mean that businesses will increase costs,and guess who ends paying that-look at car insurance-part of everyone's insurance pays for the sore neck culture out there,so with airlines,fares WILL go up and some airlines WILL cut corners

    Is that what we want?
    Last edited by Smudge's Lot; 17-09-2015 at 2:16 PM. Reason: Spelling
    • 111KAB
    • By 111KAB 17th Sep 15, 2:18 PM
    • 3,640 Posts
    • 1,479 Thanks
    111KAB
    No what we want is an efficient punctual flight and I for one do not mind paying the 50p extra per person per flight as proven by Jet2's own figures in respect of the cost to them for 261/2004 claims.
    • Smudge's Lot
    • By Smudge's Lot 17th Sep 15, 2:28 PM
    • 59 Posts
    • 17 Thanks
    Smudge's Lot
    I am not suggesting that Jet 2 would cut corners but some airlines WILL because the flood gates have been opened by the ECJ which means they will have to pay out if a technical fault affects the flight-do you think your extra 50p guarantees that no part will fail-no,that's the nature of machines!does everybody's car run faultlessly every day,every year,even with servicing,does your car run with no defects-ever?
    • Dr Watson
    • By Dr Watson 17th Sep 15, 3:03 PM
    • 446 Posts
    • 218 Thanks
    Dr Watson
    I am afraid that as I work for an airline,this will only be self defeating.

    Does anybody out there think that paying say £100 for a flight should then be entitled to £300 compensation when a crucial part on the plane fails for whatever reason?

    Do you get compensation from National Express coaches when a coach gets a tyre puncture and you are delayed?

    Do you get compensation that is 3 times your ticket cost for when your train is delayed by strong winds bringing down power cables?

    Parts can and do fail and yet with the strongest safety ethic in almost any industry,do you think some airlines will now just go ahead and fly rather than delay the flight so they are not liable for compensation......

    Is your £300 worth that risk that has been imposed by the ECJ.??

    The compensation culture will only mean that businesses will increase costs,and guess who ends paying that-look at car insurance-part of everyone's insurance pays for the sore neck culture out there,so with airlines,fares WILL go up and some airlines WILL cut corners

    Is that what we want?
    Originally posted by Smudge's Lot
    Smudge's Lot,
    We had this debate on here many months ago with a 'Spanner Monkey' (if i remember correctly).
    I've got to say his/her arguments were much better presented and argued/reasoned.
    But from the regulars on here including myself- it's not self defeating, it's just application of the law and the regulation.
    For me the debate is over.
    Successfully sued Ryanair in 2013/14...and have been 'helping' litigants since then.

    Current known score:-
    Dr Watson 35 - 0 Ryanair / Ince and Co

    Go to post 622 on the Ryanair thread to read how to sue them safely.
    • 111KAB
    • By 111KAB 17th Sep 15, 3:05 PM
    • 3,640 Posts
    • 1,479 Thanks
    111KAB
    No 'my' 50p does not guarantee a part will not fail but what it should guarantee is that I will be compensated for the inconvenience of being delayed beyond 3 hours.
    As you work in the airline industry I would hope you can impress upon your colleagues not to 'cut corners' - perhaps you should name those airlines which will cut corners so we can all avoid same.
    • christaitfife
    • By christaitfife 17th Sep 15, 3:34 PM
    • 158 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    christaitfife
    This whole '50p extra per ticket' thing is very wrong. Airlines can't afford to raise ticket prices on competitive routes, so where the increases come are on routes with little competition or on high yield tickets. It is likely that a few higher ticket prices on selected routes will pay for all of this.

    I would also like to see what would happen if you could opt for 'compensation protection', say £1 extra per ticket to be able to claim... how many people would select that extra?? The thing is, people see this as free money - it isn't, it is just that we are all paying for it.

    I agree that if the airline screws up you should get something - but we must all see the current structure is nuts. Hundreds.of pounds for a.few hours, and they need to feed and water you. Yes, airlines should pay but I just think the current structure is far too hard lined.
    • christaitfife
    • By christaitfife 17th Sep 15, 3:40 PM
    • 158 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    christaitfife
    Oh... I have friend who was a pilot and now does consultancy work. He reckons that if an aircraft fails it is now cheaper to cancel the flight, repair it over 24hrs and compensate the passengers than brining in a spare crew and flying in a standby aircraft if it will take longer than 3hrs. This is because of crew costs, fuel, landing charges, leaving a crew to return an aircraft etc. Could it be that this ruling will make certain delayed flights even more delayed?
    • cheekymonkeynotts
    • By cheekymonkeynotts 17th Sep 15, 4:20 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    cheekymonkeynotts
    Was on a monarch flight from Bham - Barcelona - 2013 August.
    Flight was supposed to leave @ 7am but left after 3pm.

    We weren't told about it properly and were fobbed off.
    Pilot told us they were getting new part to replace dodgy part from Luton & people over the tannoy had said they have gone to crawley to pick up the part.

    Then after chasing it up for 2 years i was told there was a problem with the EEC: The reply from airline is below.

    Our records show that the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight suffered a fault with the electronic engine computer (EEC) and was subsequently grounded for safety reasons. Consequently the aircraft could not operate until the fault could be traced and rectified. Despite our best efforts we were unable transfer your flight to an aircraft within the Monarch fleet, consequently this led to an unavoidable delay to the departure of your flight.

    We can the EEC which failed on this occasion had only accumulated 24 flight hours since installation to the aircraft on the 17th August 2013. We can therefore confirm that such a premature failure can only have been caused by a hidden manufacturing defect of the component otherwise the part would not have failed so early into its life. Accordingly, this was beyond our control and was, in fact, a hidden manufacturing defect.


    Will i still get compensation?
    • howticklediam
    • By howticklediam 17th Sep 15, 4:27 PM
    • 330 Posts
    • 68 Thanks
    howticklediam
    Was on a monarch flight from Bham - Barcelona - 2013 August.
    Flight was supposed to leave @ 7am but left after 3pm.

    We weren't told about it properly and were fobbed off.
    Pilot told us they were getting new part to replace dodgy part from Luton & people over the tannoy had said they have gone to crawley to pick up the part.

    Then after chasing it up for 2 years i was told there was a problem with the EEC: The reply from airline is below.

    Our records show that the aircraft scheduled to operate your flight suffered a fault with the electronic engine computer (EEC) and was subsequently grounded for safety reasons. Consequently the aircraft could not operate until the fault could be traced and rectified. Despite our best efforts we were unable transfer your flight to an aircraft within the Monarch fleet, consequently this led to an unavoidable delay to the departure of your flight.

    We can the EEC which failed on this occasion had only accumulated 24 flight hours since installation to the aircraft on the 17th August 2013. We can therefore confirm that such a premature failure can only have been caused by a hidden manufacturing defect of the component otherwise the part would not have failed so early into its life. Accordingly, this was beyond our control and was, in fact, a hidden manufacturing defect.


    Will i still get compensation?
    Originally posted by cheekymonkeynotts
    I'd say it's a load of baloney. Look at this post http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=69054023&postcount=2545

    I am fighting the same defence.

    Then post on the Monarch thread.
    • glentoran99
    • By glentoran99 17th Sep 15, 4:33 PM
    • 5,468 Posts
    • 4,666 Thanks
    glentoran99
    This whole '50p extra per ticket' thing is very wrong. Airlines can't afford to raise ticket prices on competitive routes, so where the increases come are on routes with little competition or on high yield tickets. It is likely that a few higher ticket prices on selected routes will pay for all of this.

    I would also like to see what would happen if you could opt for 'compensation protection', say £1 extra per ticket to be able to claim... how many people would select that extra?? The thing is, people see this as free money - it isn't, it is just that we are all paying for it.

    I agree that if the airline screws up you should get something - but we must all see the current structure is nuts. Hundreds.of pounds for a.few hours, and they need to feed and water you. Yes, airlines should pay but I just think the current structure is far too hard lined.
    Originally posted by christaitfife
    I think Ryanair already do that
    • Deadbeat
    • By Deadbeat 17th Sep 15, 4:47 PM
    • 131 Posts
    • 144 Thanks
    Deadbeat
    This excuse seems rather dishonest: '...the two defective components hadn't exceeded their average lifetime'

    If a component has a known average lifetime then that is an average of many data points not a hard and fast figure. Some components will have a lifetime of less than the average; and some, more.

    A component failing before its average lifetime is not an exceptional event.
    • minnie-moo
    • By minnie-moo 17th Sep 15, 9:32 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    minnie-moo
    Hi Any one had problems with Blue Air a Romanian airline from Liverpool to Bucharest???
    They dont come up on the claim form.
    Also, if a flight takes off on time, then after the seat belt signs go off, been informed they had a technical difficulty and will have to return to Liverpool and will soon been making our descent. We turned around to land back at Liverpool, but ended up circling Liverpool for 2 plus hours, before landing. Then sat on the plane for a further 2 and half hours, before taking off again, this made us arrive at our destination 5 hours late, plus we were not even offered refreshments. I made a complaint to the airline, and they said because we decided to continue our journey we are not allowed compensation. Some people got off the plane as soon as we landed back at liverpool, We however did not know how long we would be left sat on the plane.
    Any advice/

    thanks
    minnie-moo
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

142Posts Today

1,705Users online

Martin's Twitter