FAQ's to flight delay compensation queries

A question about : FAQ's to flight delay compensation queries

Now superceded by this thread: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=4896695

Best answers:

• The question of what costs are likely to be incurred, with a MCOL / County Court claim, if you should lose your case, are detailed
  here.
  No tickets? No boarding cards? No booking reference? Does the airline want proof that you were on the flight?
  Then force them to reveal their records to you!
  Use a Subject Access Report.
  .
• There appears to be a recurring theme on the various sub sections, which is the procedure to make a claim.
  It's relatively straightforward.
  Firstly you write to the airline concerned, you can use one of the template letters above in the FAQ's, or the CAA site has a template letter. You can use email or snail mail.
  You may well get a response from the airline asking you to fill in one of their claim forms. There's no legal requirement for you to do this, but, unfortunately, if you end up going to court, you will want to show the judge that you have made every effort to settle out of court, so, IMO, it is best to follow this route and fill in their claim form and return it.
  Opinions differ on the best method to do this, IMO it's best to send it recorded delivery for the sake of the few extra pence.
  Remember to enclose copies of the information they ask for, - keep the originals yourself.
  There's no requirement to have boarding cards or flight tickets to make a claim, although some sort of evidence of purchasing the service (package holiday or flight only) is likely to be required.
  You'll then need to wait awhile for the airline to respond. This is probably the most frustrating part. Ideally it's best to wait for the airline to respond, as it might well be an agreement to your claim and the payment details, but at the worst it will be a response giving the reason as to why they are denying your claim.
  The reason they give, if they deny, is quite possibly the evidence you will require in order to go to court.
  Now, you don't HAVE to wait. The CAA (as well as ABTA) recommend that the airlines should respond within 28 days. So after 28 days, you could send them a further letter titled NOTICE BEFORE ACTION - there's templates for this in the FAQ's. In this letter you give them a brief overview of the circumstances and 'put them on notice' that if they don't respond in 14 days then you will be at liberty to issue court proceedings without giving them further notice.
  Residents in England may well find the MCOL (Money Claim On Line) route the easiest. Scotland have a different claim system.
• Has anyone compiled any stats for which airlines are paying up in line with the regulation?
  I think this would be a useful guide for potential claimants and indeed for potential travellers who could use it to help decide which airlines to fly with in the future
• There's thousands though Joe. Who's going to do that for free?
  I've started listing the Monarch one's in the Monarch thread as I become aware of them.
• A question often asked is whether an EC, that effects the flight previous to yours, is also an EC on your flight, as a knock on effect.
  The answer is NO.
  Point 37. Finnair Oyj v Timy Lassooy Case C-22/11
  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...CJ0022:EN:HTML
• I am writing in response to your letter regarding your recent travel arrangements with Thomas Cook.
  It is with regret that I note your flight with us was delayed. Whilst delays are an unfortunate part of air travel, I would like to assure you that a lot of work goes on behind the scenes to ensure that any disruption to our passengers is kept to an absolute minimum.
  When a delay is initially identified, it is not always immediately apparent as to when a revised take off time can be secured. A number of factors have to be considered, which can vary dependent on the reason for the delay, and quite often we are reliant on outside influences, such as Airport Authorities or Air Traffic Control. Throughout, however, as soon as confirmed information is available, this is passed onto our customers as quickly as possible through our handling agents at the airport.
  Although delays do occur on occasion, they can arise for a number of different reasons, and having carried out a full investigation the specific circumstances surrounding the delay to your own flight were of a technical nature, which were extraordinary, despite Thomas Cook taking all reasonable precautions necessary to prevent the situation. All aircraft can experience technical problems that are totally unforeseen, despite all reasonable attempts to ensure they are maintained to a good standard, in line with CAA regulations. These situations can be compared to the maintenance of your own car, which can break down at any time without prior warning, regardless of it's service history, and would be considered completely beyond the owners control.
  I can see that customers were provided with welfare during the delay, in line with our obligations under EU Regulation 261/2004. As the events were defined as “extraordinary” no payment of compensation is considered appropriate in this case.
  Please be assured that on-time performance is a key measure for us as a business, and we constantly review our operations to ensure we deliver the best results, and service. I would like to offer our apologies for any inconvenience you were caused on this occasion and I hope that despite this, your stay was found to be an enjoyable one.
  WHAT DO I NEED TO SAY?? THAT IT ISN'T EXTRAORDINARY??
  I'm a tad confused?!
• Currypotty.
  I see you've also posted in the designated TC thread.
  This thread is for easy to find FAQ's & answers, which is kinda funny really, seeing as the answer to your Q's is in the OP, just 8 posts above yours.
  It depends on what you wrote to them in the first instance. But they have not proved to you that EC's exist (did you ask for proof in your first letter?). So IMO you write back one more time and ask for this proof. They can't just claim it out of hand with no explanation. Failing a proper explanation, then a court claim beckons.
• Thankyou for your advice on "Notice before Action."
  I am incredible frustrated with my Monarch claim from September 2012. I feel that the airline are simply stalling for time and waiting for me to give up.
  I have complained to AESA (the departure airport was in Spain) and they have responded that the airline didn't respond to their request for information and so they have advised the airline to pay. Since then I have had an e-mail from the airline telling me they will contact me again in a month but it might take longer because they are still investigating.
  No investigation takes this long!
• can anyone tell me if I can claim for my delayed flights? my flight was booked with all connections on 1 ticket. the flight delay started in dehli with emirates but the final connection was with fly bmi. after all connections were missed and our luggage went missing, we were told by emirates that regardless of where the luggage went missing (and things had been stolen from the cases) it was fly bmi that was resposible. so would this apply as far as the delays were concerned.
• This thread is for questions of a non-specific nature or for questions regarding the Regulation or precedent case law, and it is starting to become overly long with questions that should be in one of the specific airline threads.
  Please repost your question in the airline-specific thread in this sub-forum which has been set up to answer questions related to the airline involved in your claim.
  You may well find the answer to your question in the FAQ's above.
• FAQ OP amended to include 'Which' magazine draft letter to commence the claim.
  https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-righ...lled-flights-/
• Thomas Cook contact details amended
• Wallentin - Hermann link added
• The question of whether a fault with the previous flight (knock on effect) is a good enough reason for an airline to claim that an Extraordinary Circumstance exists, has arisen more than once, so I'll attempt to explain it as I see it.
  Firstly, I'm not a lawyer, so this is just my take on it.
  You won't find in any of the EU rulings a line that says 'knock on effects are ok / not ok'. You have to read different parts of different regs and rules to arrive at the conclusion.
  In the EU 261/2004 ruling, at points 14 & 15, you will read that;
  "(EC's exist)...in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier."
  and:
  "Extraordinary circumstances should be deemed to exist where the impact of an air traffic management decision in relation to a particular aircraft on a particular day gives rise to a long delay, an overnight delay, or the cancellation..."
  So, there are two mentions of situations where circumstances exist which could be claimed as EC's, but ONLY in relation to the flight concerned, on a particular day.
  So, leaving aside the separate argument of whether a 'tech issue' is indeed an EC or not, the 'tech issue' offered by the airline, as an EC, to absolve them from compensation payouts, has to pertain to the flight concerned, ie YOUR FLIGHT, and not a previous flight, for it to be covered within the wording of the EU261 Regulation.
  The separate argument is of course whether this said 'tech issue' stems from an event, - an EC - that is beyond the control of the airline. Like whether the weather caused the problem, or whether a terrorist attack started it off.
  An unexpected issue like a flat tyre is not something that is not inherent in the normal exercise of the running of an airline on a day to day basis.
  A further judgement, referred to as Finnair Oyj v Timy Lassooy Case C-22/11, at point 37, states that;
  " In addition, it is apparent from recital 15 in the preamble to Regulation No 261/2004 that 'extraordinary circumstances' may relate only to 'a particular aircraft on a particular day', which cannot apply to a passenger denied boarding because of the rescheduling of flights as a result of extraordinary circumstances affecting an earlier flight. The concept of 'extraordinary circumstances' is intended to limit the obligations of an air carrier - or even exempt it from those obligations - when the event in question could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. "
  So further evidence of knock on effects not counting as EC's (from a previous day/flight) exists.
• Yes I agree. The whole of the text from within point 37 of Finnair goes further:
  "extraordinary circumstances' may relate only to 'a particular aircraft on a particular day', which cannot apply to a passenger denied boarding because of the rescheduling of flights as a result of extraordinary circumstances affecting an earlier flight"
  So, later delays - even on the same day - are not EC's because there was an earlier EC.
• We were delayed about 4 hours last March on a flight from Heathrow to Nova Scotia,Canada with Air Canada. Since we departed a UK airport can we claim flight delay compensation?
  Thanks Jackie
• Im new to these forums so please help. I travelled back from Spain in 2008 with Flyglobespan (now bust). We were delayed over 9 hours and given meal voucher as soon as we arrived at airport so they knew there was a long delay. I did however book this through a local travel agent who are still operating and paid on my visa debit card. I still have the receipts and full paperwork. Can I claim and who do I claim from?? Any help would be appreciated.