proof of being a passenger on delayed flight
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So as i understand it most of you think that a delay of fifteen hours is quite acceptable. As for the joker comparing that to the local bus running late, it defies belief. Have any of you actually experienced a 15 hr delay l, possibly with kids, at some grotty tourist airport? EU261 keeps airlines on their toes. Long may it last. I'm quite happy to fork out a premium of 3 quid or so on top of the fare to cover for it.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
What twaddle!
EU261 won't prevent delays, they are just a matter of fact when travelling. They are frustrating & annoying, but they always did and will continue to happen.
Claiming compensation often to a greater value than what you had paid for the service is utterly ridiculous unless the airline doesn't have to look after you during that delay.
If passengers are looked after, ie fed, watered and accommodated if necessary then there should be no compensation due at all, it was always an insurance claim up till recently. If the airline doesn't provide any service then passengers should be able to claim compensation for their out of pocket expenses.
People seem to want their cake and to be able to eat it too! I hope that this claim takes hours and hours of time to put together, and that the blood sucking claim company spend many many man hours for the claim to be rejected!
EU261 won't prevent delays, they are just a matter of fact when travelling. They are frustrating & annoying, but they always did and will continue to happen.
Claiming compensation often to a greater value than what you had paid for the service is utterly ridiculous unless the airline doesn't have to look after you during that delay.
If passengers are looked after, ie fed, watered and accommodated if necessary then there should be no compensation due at all, it was always an insurance claim up till recently. If the airline doesn't provide any service then passengers should be able to claim compensation for their out of pocket expenses.
People seem to want their cake and to be able to eat it too! I hope that this claim takes hours and hours of time to put together, and that the blood sucking claim company spend many many man hours for the claim to be rejected!
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 39
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So as i understand it most of you think that a delay of fifteen hours is quite acceptable. As for the joker comparing that to the local bus running late, it defies belief. Have any of you actually experienced a 15 hr delay l, possibly with kids, at some grotty tourist airport? EU261 keeps airlines on their toes. Long may it last. I'm quite happy to fork out a premium of 3 quid or so on top of the fare to cover for it.
It is perfectly reasonable to compare it to bus, train or any other method of public transport. All of them provide a contract and service to get you from A to B. If an airline fails to do so then why must they provide the Earth to someone at great expense and then also give them more money? Why can my local train operator not to that every time I arrive late?
This OP, who I am sure is on the wind up anyway, has been reminded of his 15 hour delay 5 or so years after the event by some dodgy company looking to take a handsome cut of whatever he "wins". Quite why the ruling needs to allow for claims from 6 years ago is beyond me. If someone wants to claim for EU261 then why wait 5 years to do so? In my opinion there should be a limit of no more than 1 month after the flight to lodge a claim, there really is no reason to drag a 5 year old holiday flight up. Like others, I sincerely hope the OP goes through a long, tedious process and eventually gets nothing at all.
Why are the amounts fixed so that someone who spends maybe €80 on a flight from London to Berlin can magically receive a hotel room worth around €150, meals worth around €40 and then also claim compensation for up to €250 when their flight is disrupted? Why is that person set to make a profit off of the airline? How does this money drain in any way improve the performance of the airline or its service to passengers?
Once Hotac and meals have been provided, they should not get a penny more. This is why travel insurance was created. The airlines cannot even defend themselves properly as the rules on what counts as an extraordinary event have been decided by people have no experience or knowledge of running something as complex as an airline or airport. If they had either the rules would be far more reasonable.
The whole ruling is utter madness and is clearly designed to put airlines out of business (especially targeting the smaller, regional airlines with very little profit margin as it is and very little in the way of contingency) and in no way actually improves the situation for passengers. No one should be surprised that many of the professionals on this board are irritated by EU261. The majority of this boards livelihoods depend on aviation. Those who set out to deliberately suck money out of the industry for no reason other than because some rent-a-claim call centre cold called them out of the blue will clearly come under attack.
I have lost count of the number of times, in my role at the airport, that in the event of a delay or cancellation, the first and sometimes only question on peoples lips was "...and how much compensation can I claim from this?". The actual Hotel, meals, rerouting etc was totally irrelevant to a lot of them, they just wanted money.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I fail to understand after reading various posts on this and other forums is that if people feel so strongly that the law is an ass why do they do little or nothing about it?
When the CAA/NEB produced their list of what were deemed to be extraordinary circumstances when compensation payment should not be paid I understand the EU received representation regarding issuing the list (not confirmed whether these representations were for or against but I believe the vast majority were against) from 22 parties with private individuals being the major contributors. Ask the airline you work for if they contacted the EU in support of this list …. I bet the answer is no.
In talking to my local MEP (who did sit on the EU Transportation Committee) he confirmed that I was the only person who had ever contacted him regarding 261/2004. How many of you (whether in agreement or not) have contacted your MP, your MEP, the UK representatives on the EU Transportation Committee, The EU itself or indeed the EU Ombudsman (who happens to be a lady!) ?
Any representation (which I can assure you is very limited) the airlines make is generally through the CAA however our NEB is, in effect, funded by the airline industry so you can understand why the EU have some difficulty with this.
There is an election coming up in the UK soon…. Some of you might vote, others not however there is no point in complaining about how the country is run if you don’t vote. Likewise there is no point in arguing with the odd poster on this or other forums if you believe that 261/2004 is flawed, you would be better spending your time taking the matter up with the people who matter.
When the CAA/NEB produced their list of what were deemed to be extraordinary circumstances when compensation payment should not be paid I understand the EU received representation regarding issuing the list (not confirmed whether these representations were for or against but I believe the vast majority were against) from 22 parties with private individuals being the major contributors. Ask the airline you work for if they contacted the EU in support of this list …. I bet the answer is no.
In talking to my local MEP (who did sit on the EU Transportation Committee) he confirmed that I was the only person who had ever contacted him regarding 261/2004. How many of you (whether in agreement or not) have contacted your MP, your MEP, the UK representatives on the EU Transportation Committee, The EU itself or indeed the EU Ombudsman (who happens to be a lady!) ?
Any representation (which I can assure you is very limited) the airlines make is generally through the CAA however our NEB is, in effect, funded by the airline industry so you can understand why the EU have some difficulty with this.
There is an election coming up in the UK soon…. Some of you might vote, others not however there is no point in complaining about how the country is run if you don’t vote. Likewise there is no point in arguing with the odd poster on this or other forums if you believe that 261/2004 is flawed, you would be better spending your time taking the matter up with the people who matter.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really don't understand why so many of you are blaming the victim here. The law is the law, and apparently allows claims up to 6 years after the the fact. If the law if flawed, that's a separate issue, and for now it is what it is and this fellow is within his rights. Similarly, if you have issues with lawyers, attack the lawyers. Do you also think it was "immoral" or bad form for people to demanded compensation from various European governments 50 or 60 or more years after WWII for losses suffered back then, some of whom are still trying to have their property returned? In many of these cases, proper documentation was also unavailable, yet ways were found around that. Sure, the magnitude may be different, but not the principle.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>Not sure if I am unique in this but at the bottom of this thread appears an advert from Bott and Co, the leading lights of pressing 261 claims in the UK!
I guess your browser isn't equipped with Ad Blocker Plus.
I guess your browser isn't equipped with Ad Blocker Plus.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are the amounts fixed so that someone who spends maybe €80 on a flight from London to Berlin can magically receive a hotel room worth around €150, meals worth around €40 and then also claim compensation for up to €250 when their flight is disrupted? Why is that person set to make a profit off of the airline? How does this money drain in any way improve the performance of the airline or its service to passengers?
I don't think that you will get overnight accommodation and food paid for you by all carriers. To a certain extent that is why EU261 was set up! Also don't forget that EU261 applies to a delay of more than 3 hours. That is a considerable time and it does give the airline some time to organise alternatives. How often is your bus or train delayed by more than 3 hours? Yes, back in the days that we paid excessive fares and airlines consequently looked after their stranded passengers there was no need for EU261. Today it's a different ball game, created in part by the low cost model. When purchasing a fare on a scheduled service from A to B, I am entering into a contract to be provided that service as advertised, and not with the sole guarantee that I get to B at a time of their choosing!
Paxing All Over The World
Porky Speedpig
As I understand it, the ad system looks for key words and picks accordingly. I think it's very clever the way it 'follows' the thread and i enjoy seeing what it will offer next.
Not sure if I am unique in this but at the bottom of this thread appears an advert from ...
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HT,
Regulation 261 requires airlines to cover the costs for food, refreshment and accommodation regardless of the length of delay of the flight. This is regardless of the cause of the delay, I.e. No extraordinary circumstances defence.
Cash compensation is payable only ünder certain circumstances, based on vague rulings of the ECJ. There are no rules set out in the regulation of when and where compensation for delays is payable.
Regulation 261 requires airlines to cover the costs for food, refreshment and accommodation regardless of the length of delay of the flight. This is regardless of the cause of the delay, I.e. No extraordinary circumstances defence.
Cash compensation is payable only ünder certain circumstances, based on vague rulings of the ECJ. There are no rules set out in the regulation of when and where compensation for delays is payable.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The right side of the Pennines
Age: 73
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way did Thomson not accommodate you and provide refreshment vouchers during your delays?
"National" airline at main base - Auckland. 3rd World treatment.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ancient Observer
Ancient Observer ..... what you have to do is hold the ALT key down and use the number key pads generally starting with 128 ....
EG
â (131) ....ü (129) ....é (130) .... ¿ (168)
etc
EG
â (131) ....ü (129) ....é (130) .... ¿ (168)
etc
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AO, if you are using an iOS device or a Mac just hold the u key. You are presented with a choice ū, ù, û, ü, ú. Works with any accented characters ŵ, ė, ŷ, ū, ì, õ, ã, š, ł, ż, č, ñ,
Obviously I was not paying attention.
Obviously I was not paying attention.
Last edited by ExXB; 20th Mar 2015 at 17:18.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yorkshire,
Non EU based carriers are only subject to regulation 261/2004 for flights within or leaving the EU, NOT inbound flights.
Non EU based carriers are only subject to regulation 261/2004 for flights within or leaving the EU, NOT inbound flights.
Last edited by Porky Speedpig; 21st Mar 2015 at 15:46. Reason: Typo
Son of Slot
Super Senior Moderator
Super Senior Moderator
I think it's best to post this here and keep the topic in one place as it exactly covers the point of this thread:
BBC News - Airlines face court threat over customer services
BBC News - Airlines face court threat over customer services
Some years back, weather caused cancellation of an internal Air France flight from CDG to Strasburg. I was bounced from the following flight......AF put me on a later flight (subsequently cancelled and I was sent to Mulhouse and a taxi provided from there) but without me asking, gave me a voucher for €350....
And they didn't lose my bag......which for CDG, is a bonus!
And they didn't lose my bag......which for CDG, is a bonus!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: moraira,spain-Norfolk, UK
Age: 82
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Antipodean compensation
I don't think there is any compensation down here in NZ.
I missed my very long connection in Sydney last Monday.
The incoming aircraft which was to carry us out was diverted
due to weather and spent 4 hours and more on the ground
in Canberra being refueled. Apparently after my incoming
flight landed at Sydney the Airport was closed for incoming,
although the weather did not seem that bad. Of course the Airline
which I had booked on made all kind of promises in Sydney,
and then refused to honour them in Auckland.
My hope is that the new regulations will lead to better procedures
and better operational decision making, so that the need for compensation
will be reduced. Of course there is no hope of such a rule here.
Just off to claim on my travel insurance, we shall see if that works.
I missed my very long connection in Sydney last Monday.
The incoming aircraft which was to carry us out was diverted
due to weather and spent 4 hours and more on the ground
in Canberra being refueled. Apparently after my incoming
flight landed at Sydney the Airport was closed for incoming,
although the weather did not seem that bad. Of course the Airline
which I had booked on made all kind of promises in Sydney,
and then refused to honour them in Auckland.
My hope is that the new regulations will lead to better procedures
and better operational decision making, so that the need for compensation
will be reduced. Of course there is no hope of such a rule here.
Just off to claim on my travel insurance, we shall see if that works.