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
Page 97
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 8th Apr 18, 5:07 PM
    • 1,386 Posts
    • 638 Thanks
    Tyzap
    There is nothing in the regulations which suggests knock-on effects from bad weather cannot be extraordinary.
    Originally posted by jpsartre
    Understanding the regulations is all a matter of interpretation, which is why there is such a lack of clarity about their meaning.

    I base my understanding of this particular area of the regs upon what a leading firm of solicitors say about it (see below) and on case law.

    What Are Extraordinary Circumstances?

    The term Ďextraordinary circumstancesí may apply to a number of scenarios where the delay/cancellation was caused by something out of the ordinary; things like:

    Acts of terrorism or sabotage
    Security risks
    Extreme weather conditions e.g. volcanic ash cloud
    Political or civil unrest
    Hidden manufacturing defects
    Industrial action (strikes unrelated to the airline such as baggage handlers or air traffic control)

    What Are NOT extraordinary circumstances?

    If your long delay was caused by one of the following, you may be entitled to compensation according to EU law:

    Issues with airline staff e.g. crew turning up late or understaffing
    Bad weather affecting a previous flight, causing your flight to be delayed
    Denied boarding due to the flight being overbooked
    Technical problems with the aircraft (except hidden manufacturing defects or problems caused by sabotage)

    I also have seen cases where using the above argument has been won at CEDR and court level, which does not set a precedent, but it does suggest you are on the right track.

    Just to diversify slightly.

    There are many areas of the 261 regulation where a precedent has not been set and I do not believe that this is an accident. Airlines will often not pursue a case to a higher court level, where a precedent could be set, so that it remains a grey area, thus allowing them wiggle room to avoid legitimate claims.

    How happy do you think the airline industry was with Jet2 when they caused a precedent to be set over technical faults?

    It was a massive area where the airlines had been avoiding compensation claims for years by claiming technical faults with aircraft were EC's and exempt from compensation.

    When the supreme court decided tec faults were not EC's it cost the whole industry many millions of £s in claims and gave them one less avoidance tactic.

    So keeping things in this grey area helps the airlines.

    The solicitors, who supplied the above information on their website help to put an end to this situation, but lots of areas remain unclear.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide. To find it Google and then download 'vaubans guide'.
    • jpsartre
    • By jpsartre 8th Apr 18, 5:34 PM
    • 3,162 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    jpsartre
    If your long delay was caused by one of the following, you may be entitled to compensation according to EU law:
    [...]
    Bad weather affecting a previous flight, causing your flight to be delayed
    Originally posted by Tyzap
    I take what Bott and Co say on their website with a grain of salt, they are not an unbiased part and have an interest in getting as many people as possible to claim through them. E.g. they also suggest that bad weather must be "'freak' or 'wholly exceptional'" to be extraordinary which I think is fairly dubious. Aside from that, I don't disagree with the qouted part above. Again, I'm not saying knock-on delays from bad weather are always extraordinary, I'm saying they *may* be if the airline can show that they took all reasonable steps to avoid it. The flipside is that they may well not be.
    • NoviceAngel
    • By NoviceAngel 8th Apr 18, 8:00 PM
    • 2,034 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    NoviceAngel
    The discussion could continue indefinitely until such a case reaches the Supreme Court and I agree with Tyzap that it probably never will because of the precedent that it would set.

    My own opinion has not changed and my own interpretation of the regs is that the OP has a clear cut case for compensation, although I fully take on board jpsatre opinions.

    The fact that Botts will and do issue Court proceedings on knock on weather delays at their own expense when other Solicitors refuse is testament to their tenacity and no doubt also profit driven.

    There are many Solicitors that do this work and I wouldnít recommend any of them for a straightforward case but sometimes you just need their professional help, and if its on a NWNF basis then theres no harm in having a go.

    I still think that blaming the weather from a previous flight which subsequently made the crew late is all a little too convenient for BA. Iíve recently witnessed airlines cancelling flights hours in advance and making no effort whatsoever to either help passengers with right to care or re routing behaving disgracefully and just blaming weather on a previous flight. So much so that Botts have issued court proceedings on my behalf for a knock on weather delay that I suffered myself.

    I do feel slightly sad that I donít have the legal experience to argue such a case, but just maybe they will be able to get some compensation for me. The previous case that I was involved, I handled myself and the airline settled out of court after the Huzar ruling, so Im certainly not afraid to get stuck in myself on a more straightforward case.

    At the end of it all it will be the OP that decides which course of action they decide.

    1.. Accept what BA say
    2.. Issue the NBA then either go to 3 or 4
    3.. Follow the NBA with court proceedings youself
    4.. pass it all over to a NWNF Solicitors

    I wish the OP all the best of luck with their decision.

    Cheers

    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
    • jpsartre
    • By jpsartre 8th Apr 18, 8:06 PM
    • 3,162 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    jpsartre
    My own opinion has not changed and my own interpretation of the regs is that the OP has a clear cut case for compensation, although I fully take on board jpsatre opinions.
    Originally posted by NoviceAngel
    Thanks and same here. I fully realize this is somewhat of a grey area and much comes down to how the regulations are interpreted so it's no surprise that opinions can differ. I hope the OP will pursue the case and come back to report the outcome.
    • legal magpie
    • By legal magpie 8th Apr 18, 10:51 PM
    • 870 Posts
    • 382 Thanks
    legal magpie
    It is a grey area but I am in the Tyzap camp on this one. I consider that crews going out of hours is part of the normal operation of an airline. Airlines can and sometimes do send out replacement crews on other airlines.
    I also don't agree that it makes sense for Botts to take cases if they know they can't be won as unless the case is won they don't get paid.
    But given that it is a grey area, I would recommend pursuing this through a NWNF solicitor on the basis that 65% (or whatever) of the compensation is better than nothing.
    • jpsartre
    • By jpsartre 9th Apr 18, 7:51 AM
    • 3,162 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    jpsartre
    I also don't agree that it makes sense for Botts to take cases if they know they can't be won as unless the case is won they don't get paid.
    Originally posted by legal magpie
    That's not what I said. Again, I'm *not* saying knock-on delays are always extraordinary, there are no doubt cases where an airline could have avoided a knock-on delay and where compensation would be due. But I also have little doubt the opposite is sometimes the case. It all depends on the circumstances of the specific case.
    • U.N.C.L.E.
    • By U.N.C.L.E. 10th Apr 18, 9:39 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    U.N.C.L.E.
    Thanks for all the advice everyone. Clearly there are grey areas, and itís great that you are able to offer such advice all with the best intention - I really appreciate all the honesty and genuine opinions. Iíll go for the NBA and see what effect that has - I think I have little to lose. Then if not successful (or ignored!) Iíll look at the NWNF option most likely, just because of the ambiguities involved.

    Thanks to you all again for your advice and time!
    • NoviceAngel
    • By NoviceAngel 10th Apr 18, 10:02 PM
    • 2,034 Posts
    • 608 Thanks
    NoviceAngel
    Thanks for all the advice everyone. Clearly there are grey areas, and itís great that you are able to offer such advice all with the best intention - I really appreciate all the honesty and genuine opinions. Iíll go for the NBA and see what effect that has - I think I have little to lose. Then if not successful (or ignored!) Iíll look at the NWNF option most likely, just because of the ambiguities involved.

    Thanks to you all again for your advice and time!
    Originally posted by U.N.C.L.E.
    Youíre welcome and I think youíve come to a reasonable and sensible conclusion, Iím pretty sure youíll get a successful outcome and please do keep us all informed of your journey.

    All the best,

    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
    • ghol26
    • By ghol26 12th Apr 18, 3:48 PM
    • 64 Posts
    • 57 Thanks
    ghol26
    Success!
    Having contacted BA through their own website about a 24hr flight delay back on 28/12/17 and having had little success apart from being offered Avios points and highlife vouchers for my son (somehow despite having had a reply about an Avios household account I cannot add his membership to my bookings with BA) I decided to try Resolver last month. Today I got a reply from BA offering me flight compensation! Success in the end! Thanks to Resolver
    • gettingtheresometime
    • By gettingtheresometime 15th Apr 18, 1:34 PM
    • 3,611 Posts
    • 8,990 Thanks
    gettingtheresometime
    Our BA flight was delayed Easter weekend by nearly 4 hrs partly due to them having to take a no show passenger's luggage off (or at least that's the story that gave out).

    Put in a claim using Martin's link & we've received an email to say that a cheque is on its way to us for £520.
    Lloyds OD / Natwest OD / PO CC / Wescott / Argos Card cleared thanks to the 1 debt v 100 day challenge


    Next on the list - JD Williams
    • Justice13075
    • By Justice13075 15th Apr 18, 3:55 PM
    • 1,124 Posts
    • 459 Thanks
    Justice13075
    That seems an odd number where were you flying from and where to and how long were you delayed getting to your destination. Aslo haw many of you were there.
    • gettingtheresometime
    • By gettingtheresometime 15th Apr 18, 5:38 PM
    • 3,611 Posts
    • 8,990 Thanks
    gettingtheresometime
    That seems an odd number where were you flying from and where to and how long were you delayed getting to your destination. Aslo haw many of you were there.
    Originally posted by Justice13075
    Heathrow to Toronto , 3 hrs 54mins 2 passengers.

    In fairness the email said Ä300 each which equated to £521 plus a couple of pence .
    Lloyds OD / Natwest OD / PO CC / Wescott / Argos Card cleared thanks to the 1 debt v 100 day challenge


    Next on the list - JD Williams
    • Justice13075
    • By Justice13075 15th Apr 18, 6:04 PM
    • 1,124 Posts
    • 459 Thanks
    Justice13075
    Just 6 mins short of 600euro each was the 3.54 mins when the plane landed or when the doors opened? have you checked bottonline and euclaim see what they say. What day did you fly and do you have your flight number
    Last edited by Justice13075; 15-04-2018 at 6:10 PM.
    • gettingtheresometime
    • By gettingtheresometime 15th Apr 18, 7:47 PM
    • 3,611 Posts
    • 8,990 Thanks
    gettingtheresometime
    Flew on 29/3 flight no ba099.

    Bottom line says !!!8364;600 so I'm now confused as to what I should do
    Lloyds OD / Natwest OD / PO CC / Wescott / Argos Card cleared thanks to the 1 debt v 100 day challenge


    Next on the list - JD Williams
    • Justice13075
    • By Justice13075 15th Apr 18, 7:55 PM
    • 1,124 Posts
    • 459 Thanks
    Justice13075
    Easy, contact them and inform them that you believe you are due 600euro each and for them to cancel the cheque. If they disagree send them a letter before action. Download vaubans guide and on page 6 is a template. if they refuse you either issue them with court proceedings or hand it to a no win no fee solicitor like bott. They will take around 30% for their troubles. So you will end up with around £700 if they win your case.
    • gettingtheresometime
    • By gettingtheresometime 15th Apr 18, 8:24 PM
    • 3,611 Posts
    • 8,990 Thanks
    gettingtheresometime
    Thanks Justice - I'll let you know how I get on !
    Lloyds OD / Natwest OD / PO CC / Wescott / Argos Card cleared thanks to the 1 debt v 100 day challenge


    Next on the list - JD Williams
    • jpsartre
    • By jpsartre 15th Apr 18, 9:34 PM
    • 3,162 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    jpsartre
    Just 6 mins short of 600euro each
    Originally posted by Justice13075
    What do you mean? The delay was more than 3 hours, the poster is due 600 euros (assuming the delay was not for extraordinary reasons).
    • Justice13075
    • By Justice13075 15th Apr 18, 10:09 PM
    • 1,124 Posts
    • 459 Thanks
    Justice13075
    If the distance is more than 3,500km which it was and you are delayed between 3 and 4 hours compensation can be cut from 600euro to 300euro which it was. But the 3hours 54 mins must have been the time they landed and by the time they got to the gate and opened the doors it went passed 4 hours which entitles them to 600euro each. Bott & co obviously believe that also as they say they are due the 600euro. Its in the regulations.
    Last edited by Justice13075; 15-04-2018 at 10:27 PM.
    • jpsartre
    • By jpsartre 16th Apr 18, 7:57 AM
    • 3,162 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    jpsartre
    If the distance is more than 3,500km which it was and you are delayed between 3 and 4 hours compensation can be cut from 600euro to 300euro which it was.
    Originally posted by Justice13075
    I assume you're talking about article 7.2 of the regulations? If so, I thought that only applied in cases of rerouting on another flight?
    • Caz3121
    • By Caz3121 16th Apr 18, 8:09 AM
    • 11,195 Posts
    • 7,343 Thanks
    Caz3121
    Easy, contact them and inform them that you believe you are due 600euro each and for them to cancel the cheque. If they disagree send them a letter before action.
    Originally posted by Justice13075
    It is also worth noting that whilst Bott may say Ä600, EUClaim show Ä300
    Flightaware show the landing time, 13 minute taxi and the gate arrival time...the gate arrival being 3:54 late...what is the likelihood that it took more than 6 minutes to open the doors?
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

2,365Posts Today

5,707Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • It's the start of mini MSE's half term. In order to be the best daddy possible, Im stopping work and going off line? https://t.co/kwjvtd75YU

  • RT @shellsince1982: @MartinSLewis thanx to your email I have just saved myself £222 by taking a SIM only deal for £7.50 a month and keeping?

  • Today's Friday twitter poll: An important question, building on yesterday's important discussions: Which is the best bit of the pizza...

  • Follow Martin