Flybe-V2

[TartinTon]

Some nice chunky fares on the Flybe site now...look like either sales have been pretty good or they're chancing their arm! Either way, good luck to them.

[ETOPS]

Wishing everyone good luck today

[rolladyce]

All appears to be getting a little more interesting now for the new flybe......

Understand there are some creditors now circling collectively to place a LIEN on the nose of the first aircraft on day one...... especially when creditors totaling £650m such as BRAL Trustees at £90m, NAC who remain owned £60m and Environment Agency £48m and even GE at £17m among the larger.... a LIEN on day one would certainly make those still owed a small fortune including the many thousands of passengers think twice....

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news...-twist-6927831

Looking forward to the launch now....

[ATNotts]

Originally Posted by rolladyce

All appears to be getting a little more interesting now for the new flybe......

Understand there are some creditors now circling collectively to place a LIEN on the nose of the first aircraft on day one...... especially when creditors totaling £650m such as BRAL Trustees at £90m, NAC who remain owned £60m and Environment Agency £48m and even GE at £17m among the larger.... a LIEN on day one would certainly make those still owed a small fortune including the many thousands of passengers think twice....

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news...-twist-6927831

Looking forward to the launch now....

Absolute fantasy! A lien has to be taken out against a debtor. Unless the leasing company owes money to the alleged creditor no law firm would be so reckless.

[Albert Hall]

I can't see how that can possibly be true. NAC has leased the Q400s to Flybe 2 and so it is hardly likely to seek to detain an aircraft which it has just delivered! It is a standard term of a lease that the lessor confirms that the aircraft is free and clear of all liens anyway.

Of the other creditors from Flybe 1, none has the power to detain an aircraft and if it did seek some form of legal process to do so, I'd expect that to be overturned PDQ.

[SWBKCB]

I thought the debt remained with the a/c - sure when I worked for a handling agent there was a list of a/c we had to report to the airport authority because of old debts? Long time ago though!

[Albert Hall]

The aircraft lessors had to do a pretty significant negotiation with the airports when Flybe 1 fell over. They will also have had to guarantee to a new lessee (Flybe 2) that the aircraft are clear of liens.

You do sometimes get a position where the debt is so big that a lessor will agree with a new operator that a certain aircraft can't be flown into a certain country - I remember some BAE146s years ago which had flightdeck placards saying that the aircraft must not be flown into Italy. I can't see that any of this will be relevant here after the mopping up exercise between airports and lessors which led to the Q400s being released from detention about two years ago. I can't see how they would/will have a problem.

[davidjohnson6]

Is there anything in Flybe2's argument with the CAA over the LHR slots... or some other piece of corporate communication... which somehow leads to a plausible case around continuity of the company from Flybe1 ?
I'm not a lawyer... but wondering if this is perhaps a bit of a tightrope whereby it is easy for somebody to accidentally say the wrong thing. There's an awful lot of obscure and surprising pieces of case law

Getting things legally watertight is not always easy

[ETOPS]

Congratulations to the new team at FlyBe

Succesful ontime departure of the first flight BEE404 from BHX to BHD.............

[RogueOne]

Well done to all at Flybe. Amazing job.

[ATNotts]

Originally Posted by SWBKCB

I thought the debt remained with the a/c - sure when I worked for a handling agent there was a list of a/c we had to report to the airport authority because of old debts? Long time ago though!

Your posting does remind me that following the Courtline bankruptcy all the 1-11-500s were registered in UK, with none of them retaining their former Courtline identities; but then again following British Eagle's demise (I am showing my age!!!) the Britannias all retained their British Eagle identities when they were operated by Monarch.

I wonder if there are legal differences between leased and owned airframes, or the wording of the leases perhaps.

[tallaonejuliet]

Originally Posted by ETOPS

Congratulations to the new team at FlyBe

Succesful ontime departure of the first flight BEE404 from BHX to BHD.............

Fingers crossed they can start paying money back to the BRAL pension fund
There is probably more chance of Boris resigning than this shower of charlatans paying their creditors back.

[BA318]

I saw in pictures that a drink and snack were provided. Is this just a first flight thing or are they offering this? It so it’s a great addition to at least mark them out as slightly different.

[oapilot]

Originally Posted by BA318

I saw in pictures that a drink and snack were provided. Is this just a first flight thing or are they offering this? It so it’s a great addition to at least mark them out as slightly different.

Loganair already do this as standard.

[pabely]

Originally Posted by tallaonejuliet

Fingers crossed they can start paying money back to the BRAL pension fund
There is probably more chance of Boris resigning than this shower of charlatans paying their creditors back.

I'm with you, too much of a bad taste from FlyBe #1 for me to give cash to these guys. Myself and friends seriously still out if pocket still and I'm sure this will end the same way whilst directors walk away scot-free again whilst boosting their own pension pots!

[JobsaGoodun]

Originally Posted by tallaonejuliet

Fingers crossed they can start paying money back to the BRAL pension fund
There is probably more chance of Boris resigning than this shower of charlatans paying their creditors back.

Why would they? This is a brand new compnay that just shares the old brand name.
Perhaps your question should be directed at British Airways who left a large hole in this scheme when they transferred BAConnect to Flybe back on 2007.

[bean]

Originally Posted by JobsaGoodun

Why would they? This is a brand new compnay that just shares the old brand name.
Perhaps your question should be directed at British Airways who left a large hole in this scheme when they transferred BAConnect to Flybe back on 2007.

Correct
It was all contained in the Flybe Plc reports and accounts

All this stupid fixation with Flybe is only because of the new airlines choice of that name. If they had maybe called themselves bloggs airways we wouldn't have the umpteenth degenetating Flybe thread in the last nine years

[RogueOne]

Originally Posted by JobsaGoodun

Why would they? This is a brand new compnay that just shares the old brand name.
Perhaps your question should be directed at British Airways who left a large hole in this scheme when they transferred BAConnect to Flybe back on 2007.

Exactly. Different company, different airline, only bearing the same name. If anyone is aggrieved from Flybe v1, they should vent in that thread not here.. and speak to the Joint Administrators to whom they have a claim

But just to humour them for a minute, I'm sure there was a court victory for ex-Monarch pilots against the Govt not too long ago, who had their pension fund put into the PPF. They got back most of what they were owed from what I can recall. Anyway here's the old Flybe company: (now renamed) https://find-and-update.company-info...mpany/02769768

..and here's the thread for people to go and moan in: Flybe-V1

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Originally Posted by bean

All this stupid fixation with Flybe is only because of the new airlines choice of that name. If they had maybe called themselves bloggs airways we wouldn't have the umpteenth degenetating Flybe thread in the last nine years

They chose to call themselves the same name.
Use the same branding and font.
Use not only the same aircraft type but the same airframes and registrations.
Fly the same routes.
Hire the same staff.
Use the same airports.
State in their own words that they were "returning" and "relaunching".
Use the same IATA and ICAO codes and I believe they're using the same "Jersey" callsign.

The only new thing about this is the legal piece of paper that calls it "new". Anyone with eyes knows when it walks like a duck and makes a quacking sound that it's a duck.
Let's give them a chance and see how they do, but every time you bleat this fiction about an all new airlines, expect the counterpoint.

[ATNotts]

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

They chose to call themselves the same name.
Use the same branding and font.
Use not only the same aircraft type but the same airframes and registrations.
Fly the same routes.
Hire the same staff.
Use the same airports.
State in their own words that they were "returning" and "relaunching".
Use the same IATA and ICAO codes and I believe they're using the same "Jersey" callsign.

The only new thing about this is the legal piece of paper that calls it "new". Anyone with eyes knows when it walks like a duck and makes a quacking sound that it's a duck.
Let's give them a chance and see how they do, but every time you bleat this fiction about an all new airlines, expect the counterpoint.

This broken record is becoming tiresome. For pitys sake give it a rest.

I appreciate some people have enormous chips on their shoulders, but like remainers smarting from the outcome of a certain referendum keep being told, 'get over it'.