Flight delay compensation, all other non-EU airlines

24567111

Comments

  • I wondered if you could help with our case that we have taken up with Air Mauritius following issues with the cancelled departure of our scheduled flight from London Heathrow on Sunday 14th October 2012 at 5pm to Mauritius for our honeymoon, which following a number of false starts, was rearranged and finally departed at 11pm on Monday 15th October 2012, some 30 hours late.

    In summary, the sequence of events unfolded as follows:

    · Depart for Heathrow following online check in from home with no indication of any issues with the flight.
    · Arrive at Heathrow and go through all checks, again no indication of any issues.
    · Await gate information sign displayed at designated boarding time.
    · Call to attend Alitalia (Air Mauritius Heathrow representatives) information point at approx. 16.15 to be advised of an approximate 4 hour delay.
    · Approximately five minutes later, call that the flight has been cancelled and we are to collect our baggage and we would be put up in a hotel overnight.
    · On arrival at hotel we are advised that we are to reassemble at 10:00 as the aircraft should be ready for departure at this time following overnight repair with a part being flown in from Paris.
    · On checking at breakfast we are told that the aircraft could not be fixed and a replacement aircraft is currently en route from Mauritius to collect us and will depart at 23:00.
    · Replacement flight leaves at 23:00 – 30 hours late.

    Discussions that I had with an Air Mauritius representative at the hotel indicated that the story was actually more than had been indicated.

    We were originally due to depart Sunday afternoon. There had also been a Saturday afternoon flight scheduled on the 13th October. This aircraft was forced to turn back to the terminal following push back as a fault was noted on one of the engines and the flight delayed and aircraft grounded.

    These passengers were subsequently put onto the next incoming aircraft which was the aircraft that we were due to fly out on, thus leaving the grounded aircraft at Heathrow in the hope that it could be repaired prior to our scheduled flight time – which clearly it couldn’t be. This means that the airline knew of the issue some 24 hours in advance of our departure time.

    We have tried to follow the advice offered by those in the know on here and started with a letter to the airline stating our case giving them the requisite 14 days to respond. To their credit they did respond within the timescales stating that due to “unforeseen technical problems” that in this instance they were not liable to pay any compensation.

    Our understanding of recent case law laid down as recently as October 2012, is that airlines are unable to rely on this as a valid means of defence unless they can prove that it was a specific issue that would not normally be expected in the course of then normal operation of the airline.

    We therefore wrote again to the airline asking them to confirm what the specific issue had been that had caused the cancellation and again gave them 14 days to respond before we sought to further this matter through either the CAA in the first instance or the small claims courts.

    This letter was sent prior to Christmas and there was no response. To that end, we sought advice from the CAA in January 2013. The CAA concluded their investigation earlier this week and concluded that in this instance, with the information provided by the airline, that there was no right to compensation due to “extraordinary circumstances”.

    Obviously we were hoping for something more positive from the CAA and we were prepared to take this forward ourselves if this had been the case. However, with this conclusion what would you recommend?

    Can we push Air Mauritius to disclose the actual fault?

    Would it now be more prudent in this case to approach a ‘no win/no fee’ solicitor’?

    Hopefully you will be able to assist, or advise how we could move this further forward.

    Many thanks.
  • Vauban
    Vauban Posts: 4,736
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    Your main issue is that AM has no UK office at which service and enforcement of legal claims or enforcement action may be taken.

    Secondly, although on the face of it, you have a good case as the delay appears to have been caused by a technical issue, the CAA has stated otherwise.

    IMO even if you could get this into court, you may face an uphill battle to convince a judge of your claim.

    You would be best advised to try a no win no fee solicitor as if they think you have a good case and believe thay can recover the money for you, that would be the best outcome for you. They may say that this is going to be too difficult or not worth their efforts so be guided by what they say.

    Parking the issue of enforcement for the moment, isn't the OP's case quite strong? First, it is a technical fault with the plane. Second, the plane with the fault was not the OP's, but rather the OP's plane was used to substitute the other faulty plane. Surely this is an operational issue for the airline, not an extraordinary circumstance?

    Or is the fact that the CAA has ruled against the claim the most difficult point here? And does that suggest that the CAA is not an ally for passengers seeking legal redress? And indeed that writing to them could damage your prospects of success?
  • Vauban
    Vauban Posts: 4,736
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    I did state that I thought the OP had a good case! But the combination of the CAA statement and the question of service and enforcement of any claim led to my considered advice to seek out a no win no fee solicitor for at least their take on whether this is likely to be successful or not for the OP.

    Indeed - and I take these points. But to reiterate my main concern: if the CAA judge that a technical failure with another aircraft (not the one scheduled for your own flight) is "extraordinary circumstances", what does this say about the manner in which the CAA are approaching this issue - and the risks of engaging them?
  • Ich_2
    Ich_2 Posts: 1,087 Forumite
    But to reiterate my main concern: if the CAA judge that a technical failure with another aircraft (not the one scheduled for your own flight) is "extraordinary circumstances", what does this say about the manner in which the CAA are approaching this issue - and the risks of engaging them?

    Or it might actually be that the CAA and the airlines are correct in tiese matters having taken legal advice (and in the case of the CAA consulting other bodies) and that unfortunately views seen on here are incorrect!
    It is of no matter to myself but if folk start losing cases they may be unhappy with some of the advice given even though it was in good faith
  • Thanks to Centipede100, Vauban & Ich for your views.

    What I can't quite get my head around is that the CAA did acknowledge the technical fault caused the cancellation but that this was classed as extraordinary circumstances. My understading after much reading (and head scratching) is that this cannot be relied on by an airline as a means to escape a compensation claim.

    However, without the actual information from AM as to what this problem was it is very difficult to know if this is indeed a valid argument on their behalf.

    The CAA state that they are unable to share the information received from AM, and whereas I can to a point understand this, how can you out together a potential legal challenge when you don't have all the information to hand?

    If the AM claim is indeed valid, and the airline and CAA are correct in their assertions, then I would not hesitate to back off and accept the decision. However as a result of the aircraft being diagnosed with this fault some 24 hours prior to our own aircrafts intended departure leaves somewhat of a bitter taste in my mouth in that we suffered a 30 hour delay as a result of this.
  • Hi All

    Would appreciate your views on this. I was booked LHR-DXB-JNB and because of a 2 1/2 hour late start in UK, missed my connecting flight to South Africa meaning I was 6 hours late overall.

    I contacted Emirates with appropriate wording and they have now responded with

    "....The departure of flight EK030 was delayed by two hours and thirty eight minutes for operational reasons. Flight EK030 arrived in Dubai at 05.10 hours which was two hours and twenty minutes 24 minutes later than scheduled. It is unfortunate that this caused you to misconnect with your onward flight to Johannesburg.



    Nevertheless, as the delay to your arrival in Dubai was less than three hours, EU compensation does not apply.



    For further clarification to avoid any doubt, your departing flight from Dubai to Johannesburg, has no connection with the EU and does not involve an EU carrier and is therefore not governed by EU regulations. "


    As you can see, there is no hiding behind "exceptional circumstances"

    I thought that because I had a single end to end booking the EU rules applied for the whole not just the first segment.

    Thanks in anticipation.
  • purplelemon
    purplelemon Posts: 20
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    On the 23rd October 2010 my Heathrow to Reykjavik, Iceland flight was delayed by 10 hours.

    I've written to Icelandair to claim, but they are stating that I'm too late:
    According to Icelandic Civil Aviation Law, passengers must initiate a claim for compensation not more than 2 years from the date of travel.
    I told them that the rules state I can claim back to Feb 2005, but they replied:
    You are here referring to the Sturgeon rule, which only applies if a passenger had made a claim to the carrier and had been denied compensation. If this is the case, then the passenger can request an appeal of the denial.
    So I'm a bit confused, as Iceland isn't in the EU. Should they be going by EU rules regarding the time limit because the flight departed in the UK? Or as an Icelandic airline can they use the time limit from their Icelandic rules?

    Any advice on how to respond would be much appreciated!
  • stoneyard_2
    stoneyard_2 Posts: 4 Newbie
    edited 15 May 2013 at 9:10AM
    Thanks Centipede, was just composing e-mail to emirates with the link.

    Will update the thread with next installment.

    I have now had response back from Emirates

    My email......

    Dear Ms xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Thank you for your reply.

    However, I do not agree with your conclusion.

    Under Case C 11/11,REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFFEU, from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany), made by decision of 9 December 2010, received at the Court on 11 January 2011, I am allowed full compensation for the end to end trip, not just the first segment.

    From the ruling.

    37 If follows that the fixed compensation to which a passenger is entitled under Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004, when his flight reaches the final destination three hours or more after the scheduled arrival time, is not dependent on the conditions laid down in Article 6 of that regulation being met.

    LINK REMOVED TO CASE



    Emirates response

    Dear xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Thank you for your e-mail.

    Whilst I regret that you are unhappy with our response, I would like to assure you that your file has been fully investigated.

    I am sorry that you remain disappointed with our final position and if we have been unable to bring this matter to a totally amicable conclusion on this occasion.

    Yours sincerely,


    What are my next steps? Write CAA or go legal? i am pushing this because I lost a days work as a result of the delay.
  • Liberty1577
    Liberty1577 Posts: 81 Forumite
    DWayneLove wrote: »
    Having previously posted the details of our claim in the main, now huge forum, this now seems like the appropriate place for an update.
    We had a 20 hour delay from Manchester to Abu Dhabi with Etihad in October 2010. When we made our claim under EU261 in November 2012, Etihad cited their 2 year time limit T&Cs several times. Naturally we pointed out their error under law, but to no avail.
    We then referred our complaint to the CAA, who in turn pointed out to Etihad that they are in fact subject to the 6 year time limit applicable to UK delayed departures. Etihad have now emailed me, appearing to concede this point, but now requesting proof that we were indeed on the delayed flight. This proof has been supplied, so we are now awaiting their next excuse!
    If anyone else has had any dealings with Etihad, we would be very interested to hear of their progress.

    Thanks as always to the regular contributors to these forums - their help is invaluable.

    Any further update? I'm currently dealing with etihad and have not read of anyone having a success with them. Hoping you did?
  • Hi, can someone point me in the right direction for making claims against Etihad. As it is a non-EU airline and my flight was from a non EU airport to a non-EU destinations; what are my rights and which authority can I approach for a complaint if Etihad in uncooperative? Many thanks for any hints or tips.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards