Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Thomas Cook ONLY

cdufall wrote: »

Been battling Thomas Cook since February and after taking them to small claims court they are now offering me compensation but only for the 2 adults on the flight, not the 2 children who were aged 13 and 16. I don't feel this is correct, especially for 16 year old , as they pay full price for flight. Cannot find any info on this, only refers to amount per passenger. They have only given me until 4 December to accept their offer, think they're being a bit pushy. Anyone know the correct answer ?

Any fare paying passenger, whatever age is due compensation. Tell TC in no uncertain terms to stop being t***s and pay up. And don't let them put conditions on their stupid antics.
Just read thru reg 261/2004, it'll be in there somewhere.

Hi, my son has been told
'On arrival at the airport engineers found a gouge in the forward cargo door skin forward area of the door. Damaged assessed as per the Structural Repair Manual (SRM) None Destructive Testing (NDT) check required and carried out by an external agency. Airbus tech support contacted and authority issued to continue in service. Area re-worked and re-protected as per SRM. Concession issued for tracking purposes.

Due to the nature of the delay we do not believe that a payment under the rules of the scheme is relevant in this particular case. etc'

Can anyone please advise if this is worth fighting?
Thank you

flymeaway wrote: »

Due back in court on 9 December and got a call from TC today to say they plan to request a stay because of Huzar and if I agree that would be good - so twist or bust ?? Appreciate all comments pls

Go to court armed with paperwork that states, for a start, that leave to appeal Huzar is not yet granted, and that in any case, your claim can be defined by existing case law, ie Wallentin, also Sturgeon, ignoring any findings in Huzar.

Huzar got to court, and a win, without *huzar*, if you see what I mean. The existing case law is enough for you to win against EC claims.

I have 2 questions. I booked a flight with Thomas Cook for several people, I was, therefore, the lead passenger, however, the event we were travelling to was cancelled and only my daughter and her boyfriend used the flight. The flight to Turkey was delayed and my daughter has followed the advice on this website.
She has now received a defence from TC admitting the flight was delayed but also stating that, “In the absence of information to the contrary it is not possible to admit or deny the number of persons for whom the booking was made. Further no evidence has been provided as to whether the Claimant was the lead name on the booking. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the same.”
Ques. No.1, Since my daughter was not the lead passenger (I was but did not travel) does this mean she and her boyfriend cannot claim?
Our only proof of travel is a baggage tag for her boyfriend for the Return Journey, a boarding pass for my daughter for the Return Journey, Facebook messages between myself and my eldest daughter, who lives in Turkey and was collecting her sister from Dalaman airport, and a Turkish Passport Control stamp. My daughter sent photocopies of both the baggage tag and boarding pass to TC. TC eventually replied to an email providing a Case Ref. No. but did not, and have not disputed the proof we provided. We don’t know if this might be because just after take off from Gatwick, the plane had to make an emergency landing and later TC stated a new plane was provided but we have proof this was not so and perhaps TC might want to keep this low key.
Ques. No. 2, Will her proof of a return journey plus our other proof we have suffice as evidence of travel and if not what can we do?