Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

NoviceAngel · 19 July 2018 at 9:45AM

PomBear wrote: »

Novice - you really don’t need to admit on your CV that your hobbies include making sure J2 pay out under EU261. I’m sure there’s no harm in omitting it

I thought that would be a good selling point, I’m sure they honestly don’t try to decline genuine claims, their just uneducated misunderstandings - says novice sticking a stamp on his envelope lol

JPears · 19 July 2018 at 10:56AM

NoviceAngel wrote: »

I thought that would be a good selling point, I’m sure they honestly don’t try to decline genuine claims, their just uneducated misunderstandings - says novice sticking a stamp on his envelope lol

You're funny

Angel_Advisor · 24 July 2018 at 9:25PM

manchesterflyer wrote: »

Came back from Rome to Manchester on 22 May on Jet2 flight LS792. Flight delayed by approx 6 hours and 25 minutes.

Cause was that Rome airbridge operator had damaged aircraft door while putting airbridge into place for inbound flight. This couldn't be fixed so a new aircraft had to be flown over from UK.

The initially quoted delay was going to be 4 hours but I believe that French air traffic control strike that day meant it was ultimately longer. This point is not relevant to the claim although as an aside it was a bit cheeky to receive a text from Jet2 later that evening apologising for delay "due to the French air traffic control strike".

I haven't had a response yet to my claim but I am anticipating that they will argue it was totally outside their control and therefore an extraordinary circumstance. I'd be interested in readers' thoughts. Yes, it is outside their control but then so is a technical fault caused by a faulty component during flight. The purpose of the regulation is to compensate passengers for the inability of airlines to counter technical faults by having and deploying assets (eg standby aircraft) located nearby which could minimise delay. In this regard I am not sure what the difference is between an on-board technical fault and one caused in this way.

Hi, just wondered if you had heard anything from Jet2 yet regarding compensation?

Pepod · 25 July 2018 at 2:52AM

Just a quick post from me to give some perspective from inside the industry, albeit not necessarily from Jet2.

Regarding Air Traffic Control strikes - you do not have to be going directly over the affected area for this to affect the flight. Whenever the French (as a common example) say they are only going to accept 10% of the normal traffic through their airspace, everyone starts routing the same alternative ways which means restrictions have to be imposed in other areas to avoid them being overloaded. This is not even to mention that it could have been a knock on from an earlier flight going through the striking area.

Regarding technical problems/delays - Yes the ruling is that these are not extraordinary circumstances (I personally don't agree - but I can see the reasoning behind it, in that the maintenance and checking is the responsible of the airline), but something like an airport staff member driving an airbridge into the aircraft is certainly an extraordinary scenario and undoubtedly outside the airline's control.

As may be obvious from this post, I do not agree with the current meta of EU261, but as it exists then of course it is to be used. I would however say that airlines go to a massive amount of effort and expense to try to avoid all delays, and especially for those that could trigger EU261 claims, the effort that goes in to trying to avoid them is massive - I would suggest that claiming when it is due is fine, and challenging an airline trying to wriggle out of obligations is of course necessary - however if it gets to the point where every airline has to have multiple spare aircraft and crew dotted around the network because more and more things are deemed (wrongly, IMO) to be within their control, the immediate result will be increased fares.

NoviceAngel · 25 July 2018 at 6:58AM

Thank you for your misguided post.

Pepod wrote: »

Just a quick post from me to give some perspective from inside the industry, albeit not necessarily from Jet2.

So why post on the dedicated Jet2 thread ?

Pepod wrote: »

Regarding Air Traffic Control strikes - you do not have to be going directly over the affected area for this to affect the flight. Whenever the French (as a common example) say they are only going to accept 10% of the normal traffic through their airspace, everyone starts routing the same alternative ways which means restrictions have to be imposed in other areas to avoid them being overloaded.

If a delay is quite genuinely delayed by ATC restrictions then the delay is generally NOT regarded as an EC. Even NWNF Solicitors take this view.

Pepod wrote: »

This is not even to mention that it could have been a knock on from an earlier flight going through the striking area.

The whole area of knock on delays is as you should know still contentious. Here's a couple...

https://www.flightdelays.co.uk/blog/2015/1395/another-weather-court-victory-for-flight-delays

https://www.flightdelays.co.uk/blog/2015/1388/another-win-at-court-for-flight-delays

Bott_&_Co wrote:

Is Bad Weather an Extraordinary Circumstance?

Bad weather is not always an extraordinary circumstance, despite what an airline might tell you when you try to claim direct from them.

In fact, the only time weather is an extraordinary circumstance is when:

The flight in question is directly affected by 'freak' or 'wholly exceptional' weather.
Air Traffic Control decides to reduce flow rates due to bad weather. For example, if ATC decides only 20 planes an hour can land as opposed to the usual 45 planes an hour, that would be an extraordinary circumstance.
Air Traffic Control decides to delay a flight, and this causes a knock-on effect to flights throughout the day.
An airport is closed because of bad weather.

Botts also agree your ATC restrictions point.

Working on the inside, you will of course know that this will be tested fully early next year at the CoA with the Blanche case https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4384709&page=147 Until then, I generally do not recommend taking on an airline to fight knock on delays, but I would recommend talking the individuals case over with a good NWNF solicitor.

Pepod wrote: »

Regarding technical problems/delays - Yes the ruling is that these are not extraordinary circumstances (I personally don't agree - but I can see the reasoning behind it, in that the maintenance and checking is the responsible of the airline),

So you personally don't agree with the Supreme Courts ruling on Huzar ? I think Jet2 might well agree with you there Pepod, but like you say, your opinion doesn't really matter and neither does Jet2s for that matter.

Pepod wrote: »

but something like an airport staff member driving an airbridge into the aircraft is certainly an extraordinary scenario and undoubtedly outside the airline's control.

This scenario has been discussed extensively on here, and it certainly is under the airlines control, we would always recommend taking this to Court. It's NOT extraordinary and as you will know is something of a regular occurrence. I can't think off the top of my head any Court cases where a passenger has lost their case on this type of event.If you know of any please educate us all.

Pepod wrote: »

As may be obvious from this post, I do not agree with the current meta of EU261, but as it exists then of course it is to be used. I would however say that airlines go to a massive amount of effort and expense to try to avoid all delays, and especially for those that could trigger EU261 claims, the effort that goes in to trying to avoid them is massive - I would suggest that claiming when it is due is fine, and challenging an airline trying to wriggle out of obligations is of course necessary - however if it gets to the point where every airline has to have multiple spare aircraft and crew dotted around the network because more and more things are deemed (wrongly, IMO) to be within their control, the immediate result will be increased fares.

I'm sure that some airlines on some occasions do make a momentous effort to avoid delays, the problem is I just can't think of any!

My personal experience of being delayed by J2 is well documented on here, I can assure you they behaved disgracefully and did everything possible to make my three cancelled flights an horrendous experience and I would not wish those events on any passenger. So what did they do ?

1) Did Jet2 explain to me my rights when my flight(s) were cancelled ? NO they gave me a telephone number in the UK to call.

2) Did they offer to re-book me on the next available flight ? NO they said because I wasn't on a Jet2 package the ONLY option was a refund.

3) Did they offer a safe place to stay - overnight accomodation ? NO they said I wasn't entitled, just a refund of the cancelled flight.

4) Did they offer to pay for any food, perhaps even a quick phone call back home ? NO because I wasn't on a package.

5) Did they offer transport from the airport ? You guessed it! NO they just left us there.

6) Did they have a valid genuine legal reason to cancel the flight under EC261/2004. NO, they rejected the claim but once Court proceedings had commenced they paid out in full.

Nobody is saying the airlines have to have multiple aircraft dotted on standby around the globe. What I want and many other passengers want is to be treated fairly and decently, not mislead and lied to about my passenger rights.

This is one I think we'll have to agree to disagree on.

Blimey - Anybody think I'm a bit triggered this morning? It's just turning 7am heading for coffee!

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

JPears · 25 July 2018 at 7:12AM

Pepod is entitled to his/her and/or corporate opinions.
But 13 years on the majority of airlines treat regulation 261/2004 and the passengers it was intended to protect with contempt.
Even though it is well established law.

PomBear · 25 July 2018 at 8:20AM

Excellent post NoviceAngel! You’ve most definitely had your Weetabix this morning.

As an aside, in relation to the air bridge striking the aircraft scenario, can’t the airline claim for the losses incurred (eg cost of checking aircraft and paying out under EC261) from the air bridge operator? I am sure I read something to that effect on here at some point.

NoviceAngel · 25 July 2018 at 8:34AM

JPears wrote: »

Pepod is entitled to his/her and/or corporate opinions.
............

Absolutely, you know me I love a lively debate. I'm looking at delays from the passenger side, I know as well as you do how specifically Jet2 treat delays and subsequent correspondence when trying to claim back what you're legally entitled to under the law.

The worst offenders to disregard and have utter contempt for the EC261 regs appear to be Ryanair and Jet2 in my opinion.

PomBear wrote: »

Excellent post NoviceAngel! You’ve most definitely had your Weetabix this morning.

As an aside, in relation to the air bridge striking the aircraft scenario, can’t the airline claim for the losses incurred (eg cost of checking aircraft and paying out under EC261) from the air bridge operator? I am sure I read something to that effect on here at some point.

I think I got triggered because I'd NOT had my Weetabix (other breakfast cereals available);)

I do believe you're correct, I have read that somewhere. I recall the specifics of this myself, a few years ago now. I wrongly stated that a passenger would have to sue the air bridge operator. I got stamped on by the regulars way back then, so it's one I do remember. The air bridge operator will probably have insurance to cover such an event.

NoviceAngel · 25 July 2018 at 9:29AM

I was looking at Bird strikes and came across this article in the independent.

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/airlines-compensation-bird-strikes-delay-european-court-of-justice-400-a7716846.html

Nothing that we didn't know but since Pepod mentioned it

Simon_Calder wrote:

Recent court decisions have extended the range of issues for which airlines must pay out. The “extraordinary circumstances” defence now excludes incidents in which a plane is damaged by ground equipment. or a flight returns to the airport of departure – as a British Airways jet did last week after a pressurisation issue on a Heathrow-Delhi flight.

Pepod · 25 July 2018 at 2:33PM

I posted on this thread because I was trying to find out some information for an Aunt of mine who recently had a Jet2 flight badly delayed and wanted to know if she could claim, that is all. I actually work as an independent contractor for a couple of different companies, so no corporate agenda from me.

I am not trying to get into an argument, just giving an opinion and point of view. I am nowhere near as well clued up on the ins and outs of EU261 as many of you here, I just have an opinion formed through my work.

I am not trying to put people off claiming what's due, and I had no idea that there had been a ruling on the ground equipment causing damage scenario, and I must say I strongly disagree with it but that is irrelevant.

Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free