Thomson Airways
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: At the foot of the Lammermuirs
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Following a recent 4h 3m delay on SSH-EDI I submitted my EU 261 delay compensation claim. After no response whatsoever to my initial email I resent it copying in the Tui Group Legal Director. 2 days later I received an email saying my claim for €1800 (£1300) would be paid within 28 days. That was roughly half the cost of my holiday.
It made me wonder just how many of the c.223 people on-board that flight would have made a claim.
The delay was initially caused by the diversion of the outbound leg to MAN with gear problems but according to the captain the delay was compounded by failures of the ground handling agents at MAN to disembark the pax from the faulty aircraft and on to the replacement. Then there was a further delay with refuellers.
I wonder if Thomson have any claim against their handlers and fuellers to offset some of the cost of claims?
It made me wonder just how many of the c.223 people on-board that flight would have made a claim.
The delay was initially caused by the diversion of the outbound leg to MAN with gear problems but according to the captain the delay was compounded by failures of the ground handling agents at MAN to disembark the pax from the faulty aircraft and on to the replacement. Then there was a further delay with refuellers.
I wonder if Thomson have any claim against their handlers and fuellers to offset some of the cost of claims?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure why a 4 hour delay on one of your flights entitles you to a refund of 50% of the cost of your whole holiday. These sort of claims are going to either send a number of airlines out of business or significantly raise fares. Good old compensation culture eh?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: At the foot of the Lammermuirs
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't set the rules. If you disagree with them then complain to your MP or MEP.
If the rules exist and they form part of the contract between me and a supplier I will take full advantage of them. Just as an airline/TO will enforce their T&Cs on me i.e. no refunds, extra charges, etc. Quid pro quo.
If the rules exist and they form part of the contract between me and a supplier I will take full advantage of them. Just as an airline/TO will enforce their T&Cs on me i.e. no refunds, extra charges, etc. Quid pro quo.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Passengers whose flight is heavily delayed or cancelled have the right to compensation under European law.
Under EU Regulation 261/2004, passengers are entitled to up to £460 in compensation when their flight lands at their destination more than three hours late.
Airlines can avoid paying out if the delay is caused by an extraordinary circumstance, such as bad weather or crew strikes.
Previously, airlines routinely refused to pay out for delays caused by a technical fault, claiming they counted as extraordinary events. Yet last year, two landmark Supreme Court rulings declared that carriers should pay out when a delay was caused by a technical fault.
Compensation: A new landmark ruling in the UK means that customers should be able to get compensation from airlines if they're subject to delays
Compensation: A new landmark ruling in the UK means that customers should be able to get compensation from airlines if they're subject to delays
How does it work?
Under EU rules, airlines must pay compensation for cancelled or heavily delayed flights, however, they can escape this under some 'extraordinary circumstances'. This can include sudden severe weather events, such as the hurricane and the volcanic ash cloud episode almost three years ago will fall into this bracket.
Compensation is €250 (£190) for inter-EU flights of 930 miles or less, €400 (£310) for flights between 930 and 1,860 miles and €600 (£460) for other journeys.
It applies to any flight leaving an EU airport and any flight into the EU on an EU-based airline.
It is important to remember that
WHAT IF EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES DO OCCUR?
Airlines have a duty of care to look after stranded passengers, even if cancellations are due to extraordinary circumstances out of their control.
If you have been left stuck and out of pocket by your airline, then you will need to keep a record of what you have spent, including receipts and try to reclaim from airline using the EU rule.
The ruling that outlines these rights is Regulation (EC) 261/2004 and it applies to all flights wholly within the EU/EEA or Swiss region, or departing an EU/EEA or Swiss airport, or arriving in the region and run by an EU/EEA or Swiss airline.
This means any direct flight from the UK should be covered, along with any flight to it run by a European airline.
Originally this ruling only covered cancellations or denied boarding, although passengers could argue if a flight was delayed beyond a certain point it was effectively cancelled.
However, in 2009 the ECJ ruled in the Sturgeon case that compensation should also apply to long delays of more than three hours.
Passengers can claim by telling the airline their flight number, names and reason for the delay. If rejected, they can take their case to court.
Airlines will often try and claim extraordinary circumstances to wriggle out of paying, often this use to involve citing technical faults as being covered by this.
However, extraordinary circumstances are judged to be something unexpected and out of an airline's control, and it was argued that an airline should be prepared for mechanical problems as a matter of course - and thus that these are not extraordinary.
Airlines trying to run their operations on a shoe-string have been accused of failing to put in back-up plans to get parts, repairs or replacements in place swiftly.
The nub of the matter is that if your flight is delayed by more than three hours, cancelled or overbooked, you may be able to claim.
Taken from this is money.
Under EU Regulation 261/2004, passengers are entitled to up to £460 in compensation when their flight lands at their destination more than three hours late.
Airlines can avoid paying out if the delay is caused by an extraordinary circumstance, such as bad weather or crew strikes.
Previously, airlines routinely refused to pay out for delays caused by a technical fault, claiming they counted as extraordinary events. Yet last year, two landmark Supreme Court rulings declared that carriers should pay out when a delay was caused by a technical fault.
Compensation: A new landmark ruling in the UK means that customers should be able to get compensation from airlines if they're subject to delays
Compensation: A new landmark ruling in the UK means that customers should be able to get compensation from airlines if they're subject to delays
How does it work?
Under EU rules, airlines must pay compensation for cancelled or heavily delayed flights, however, they can escape this under some 'extraordinary circumstances'. This can include sudden severe weather events, such as the hurricane and the volcanic ash cloud episode almost three years ago will fall into this bracket.
Compensation is €250 (£190) for inter-EU flights of 930 miles or less, €400 (£310) for flights between 930 and 1,860 miles and €600 (£460) for other journeys.
It applies to any flight leaving an EU airport and any flight into the EU on an EU-based airline.
It is important to remember that
WHAT IF EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES DO OCCUR?
Airlines have a duty of care to look after stranded passengers, even if cancellations are due to extraordinary circumstances out of their control.
If you have been left stuck and out of pocket by your airline, then you will need to keep a record of what you have spent, including receipts and try to reclaim from airline using the EU rule.
The ruling that outlines these rights is Regulation (EC) 261/2004 and it applies to all flights wholly within the EU/EEA or Swiss region, or departing an EU/EEA or Swiss airport, or arriving in the region and run by an EU/EEA or Swiss airline.
This means any direct flight from the UK should be covered, along with any flight to it run by a European airline.
Originally this ruling only covered cancellations or denied boarding, although passengers could argue if a flight was delayed beyond a certain point it was effectively cancelled.
However, in 2009 the ECJ ruled in the Sturgeon case that compensation should also apply to long delays of more than three hours.
Passengers can claim by telling the airline their flight number, names and reason for the delay. If rejected, they can take their case to court.
Airlines will often try and claim extraordinary circumstances to wriggle out of paying, often this use to involve citing technical faults as being covered by this.
However, extraordinary circumstances are judged to be something unexpected and out of an airline's control, and it was argued that an airline should be prepared for mechanical problems as a matter of course - and thus that these are not extraordinary.
Airlines trying to run their operations on a shoe-string have been accused of failing to put in back-up plans to get parts, repairs or replacements in place swiftly.
The nub of the matter is that if your flight is delayed by more than three hours, cancelled or overbooked, you may be able to claim.
Taken from this is money.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: At the foot of the Lammermuirs
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@rjay259I think adfly is fully aware of EU 261. The point being made was rhetorical.
Personally, I think the EU have set the compensation higher than it needs to be. However, I am not going to turn down the opportunity to claim something I am legally entitled to.
Personally, I think the EU have set the compensation higher than it needs to be. However, I am not going to turn down the opportunity to claim something I am legally entitled to.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe but the question was why nearly 50%, the article explains how and it just means that it was more than just you going.
Also it was not just for the benefit of you or adfly, there are others of whom might not have known.
Cheers.
Also it was not just for the benefit of you or adfly, there are others of whom might not have known.
Cheers.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm often intrigued by these claims. I sway more towards the Airline in these cases but agree that if you are left out of pocket for an Airlines delay then the passenger should be compensated to a REASONABLE level.
So, knowing that most SSH flights land back in the uk late at night, I'm guessing you booked the next day off work?
Can I ask what costs you incurred due to the 4hr delay? Extra parking charges? Missed onward connection?
The £1300 paid to you, was it sufficient to cover additional costs? Or paying for the next holiday.
Just because it's legal, doesn't mean you need to take it.
I fear for the prices of my future holidays....
So, knowing that most SSH flights land back in the uk late at night, I'm guessing you booked the next day off work?
Can I ask what costs you incurred due to the 4hr delay? Extra parking charges? Missed onward connection?
The £1300 paid to you, was it sufficient to cover additional costs? Or paying for the next holiday.
Just because it's legal, doesn't mean you need to take it.
I fear for the prices of my future holidays....
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: clackmannan,scotland
Age: 33
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glasgow-Bodrum S16
just a question about Thomsons use of the Thomas cook flight to bodrum next year do Thomson have sole use of this flight ?
as it is unbook able though Thomas cook Airlines or Thomas Cook Holidays
as it is unbook able though Thomas cook Airlines or Thomas Cook Holidays
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: At the foot of the Lammermuirs
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as airlines and TOs continue to levy swinging penalties for extra baggage or no refunds or punitive cancellation charges, then I will continue to claim what I am legally entitled to.
I had next to no additional costs as a result of the delay. I run my own business and the only issue I had was I had a later than planned start on the Monday.
I had next to no additional costs as a result of the delay. I run my own business and the only issue I had was I had a later than planned start on the Monday.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: At the bar
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
767 will operate to all of the following over the summer 
PMI / IBZ / MAH / ALC / TFS / LPA / ACE / FUE / NBE / DBV / HER / CFU / RHO / KGS / PFO / LCA / DLM / BJV / AYT / SSH
PMI / IBZ / MAH / ALC / TFS / LPA / ACE / FUE / NBE / DBV / HER / CFU / RHO / KGS / PFO / LCA / DLM / BJV / AYT / SSH
Seeing zakynthos is on the list,then yes.
Anyway yes, ZTH is cleared for 767 with some caveats.
What's more impressive is Air Italy's 767s into JSI. Granted they've only got to hop back a few hundred miles to Italy.
Can TOM's 767 make it all the way home from ZTH, or is there a fuel stop?
Can TOM's 767 make it all the way home from ZTH, or is there a fuel stop?