Thread: Any advice on a claim for delayed flight plz

Sorry - haven't time just now to look into this completely, but here's something which may be of interest from The Times:

The Times

November 04, 2006

Do you know your flight rights?
Cath Urquhart explains the new EU rules on compensation entitlements for air travellers


New rules over compensation for cancelled flights are leaving passengers baffled and angry, according to the Air Transport Users’ Council (AUC), the watchdog body that deals with complaints.
In February last year the EU’s Denied Boarding Regulation came into force, with the aim of strengthening passengers’ rights. Essentially, it means that if your flight is delayed, you are entitled to refreshments, a hotel room if necessary and, ultimately, a refund of the ticket price. If your flight is cancelled or you are "bumped off" it, you are entitled to all this plus, in some cases, financial compensation.
The rule applies to flights leaving from EU airports, or from other airports if the airline is based in the EU and you are flying into the EU, provided that you have a confirmed reservation and have turned up on time.
But if the airline can cite "extraordinary circumstances" as the reason for cancelling a flight, it can avoid paying compensation. This is intended to refer to things such as very bad weather or strikes by air traffic controllers. However, Simon Evans, spokesman for the AUC, says: "An amazing range of things seems to fall into this category. For example, if there is a technical problem with the plane, the airlines say it is an ‘unexpected flight safety shortcoming’, which is one of the ‘extraordinary circumstances’."
He adds that some airlines are coy about their obligations. The new rule states that if your flight is cancelled, you should be given the option of a refund or an alternative flight. But Mr Evans says that airlines often do not offer this choice, automatically giving them the refund. If you request an alternative flight, some carriers — particularly budget airlines — insist that you wait until their next scheduled departure, which may be days later, instead of booking you on a rival’s flight, or even a train.
Mr Evans says: "We think that airlines should offer the option of flying with other carriers if they cancel your flight, rather than saying, ‘The next flight we can get you on is in three days’ time’."
If your flight is cancelled, you are also entitled to meals and refreshments, a hotel room if you have to stay overnight and two free telephone calls or e-mails. On top of this, you are entitled to financial compensation if you arrive late at your destination because of a cancelled flight. This is between €125 (£83) and €600, depending on the length of delay and the destination.
If your flight is delayed, you cannot claim financial compensation, regardless of how long you wait, but after a delay of two hours or more, you now have a legal right to food, refreshments and a hotel room, where necessary. The rules apply after a two-hour delay on flights of up to 1,500km, after three hours on flights of 1,500km to 3,500km and after four hours on longer flights. After five hours, if you decide to abandon the journey, you are entitled to a refund of the ticket price.
If you are bumped off a flight against your will and are flying from an airport within the EU, or into an EU airport on an EU carrier, you are entitled to the same compensation as for a cancelled flight.
Take a flyer

Check your travel insurance policy. Your travel cover may pay out.
If you are on a package holiday, your tour operator may be able to help.
Further advice is available from the AUC (Air Transport Users' Council, 020-7240 6061, www.auc.org.uk)
Cath Urquhart is author of The Times Holiday Handbook — The Essential Trip-Planning Guide (Navigator Guides, £12.95), available for £11.50, postage free, from The Times BooksFirst (0870 160 8080,

The above certainly seems to me to suggest that technical difficulties as an excuse would not stand up in court.

The EU Regulation ONLY relates to if the passenger chooses to cancel their flight due to a delay. If they accept the change of flight to a later flight then they are not entitled to a refund of their original airfare.

The flight delays section of the new legislation states that if a customer experiences a delay of greater than 5 hours, they now have the right to cancel their flight and claim a refund. As your daughter travelled on the flight this particular section does not apply to her im afraid, but it is the section that has confused alot of passengers and airport staff and crew as well. The legislation does not make provision for compensation for a flight delay itself and you will very rarely receive compensation from any tour operator for flight delays. Nearly all tour operators cover this in the their terms and condtions which you agree to at the time of booking. You could however try seek recompense through your daugheters travel insurer.

In the preamble to the regulations a an unexpected flight safety problem is mentioned as being an exceptional circumstance. Since a technical problem that grounds the aircraft away from base is generally unforseen and if it is serious enough to ground the aircraft then it is a safety problem such things do "just happen" to aircraft with no warning even with the best maintenance programs.

Article 7 compensation is provided in the event of a cancellation only when extraordinary circumstances do not apply. Whether or not this is an example of an extraodinary circumstance would be for a judge to decide in the event it went to court, wou could write to the AUC but don't expect a meaningful response.

Originally Posted by androobe

That doesn't sound right. I'm not expert on this, but what you (Sp00ky) are saying applies to DELAYED flights, not cancelled flights. The OP stated clearly the flight was cancelled (different flight no. different day too) not delayed. Even the reponse from VS suggests they know this - their argument for not making a compensation payment was that the cancellation was out of their control. As it was technical failure, I don't see how they can argue this one - it is no-one but the airlines responsibility to make sure they have a suitable and working aircraft available for a flight. So in response to the OP, I would send an lba stating on what basis they consider the delay wasn't under their control - or pay up.

To be honest, I'm surprised at Virgin, I thought they were a fairly decent lot, so a second push will hopefully be all it takes. Although as this was a school trip was it a largeish party - because once they pay you, they will expect all the other parents to claim too, so they could fight this one harder than most. NEVER accept the first response (unless it meets all your demands). This is what they want you to do and rely on to save a bunch of cash!

Let us know how it goes.

I think you will find that was quoted in Virgins response, the flight was delayed due to technical reasons. As such, the flght could not take off on that date and had the passenger chosen to cancel the flight and rearrange another flight, then they would have received compensation. As Virgin fullfilled their contract to transport the passenger from Point A to Point B at no extra expense, and they also fullied the passengers air rights for delays over 5 hours by providing accommodation and food, there is no compensation due. beleive me, if Virgin had refused to offer any monies under the EU regs, they would be in serious trouble. You think ABTA have got power, they have nothing onthe AUC !!

Nowhere in Article 5 does it mention the passenger cancelling the flight, compensation is due in accordance with Article 7, I am not sure that a refund of the ticket is due though as presumably the OP's daughter accepted a reroute on a later flight.

Your all missing the main part. Look on the AUC website and READ what it says.

All flights Overnight and more than 5 hours Meals and refreshments in relation to waiting time Two free telephone calls, emails, telexes or faxes
Hotel accommodation and transfers
Reimbursement of ticket (if passenger decides not to travel*)




* If you decide not to travel you are entitled to a refund, within seven days, of the parts of the tickets not used. If it is a connecting flight and you have already made part of the journey and do not want to continue with it, reimbursement of the total price of the ticket (including parts of the journey not made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to your original travel plan) within seven days and a free flight back to point of departure. You are not entitled (under Regulation 261/2004) to reimbursement of any other components of your trip such as hotel and transfer costs.


http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...90&pageid=4404

From the info given by war n pieces her daughter was on a flight TO an EU airport, from an airport OUTSIDE the EU on an EU airline. Therefore this is the section you should all be looking at.



Addtitionally it also stated this on the AUC

6. My flight has been cancelled but the airline is saying it doesn’t have to compensate me because my flight was cancelled because of “extraordinary circumstances”. What are “extraordinary circumstances”?
The Regulation does not define “extraordinary circumstances” but states that airlines do not have to pay compensation when an “event has been caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken”. It lists examples of such circumstances – political instability, weather, security, safety, strikes etc.

And with that in mind, i would advise that it is then up to you to prove that the airline could have avoided the delay. Beleive me, the airline would not have cancelled the flight if that was not a significant reason. It costs them a small fortune in fines to do this, as it does to divert to another airport mid flight. the decision will not have been taken lightly.

Originally Posted by androobe

Virgin have confused the reply, they start of saying "...delay to your daughters flight" then at the end they say "...the cancellation was beyond our control." The OP's initial letter made it very clear it was a cancellation (different date and different flight number). This is not a delayed flight - if they could pull that one off where is the limit of the difference between a delay and a cancellation - what if the next flight was 24 hours, or 48 - would that be a delay? Sure, it was a delay to the passenger, but the flight did not run.

Back to the "extraordinary circumstances"... this argument could run and run, but it would be interesting to see what a court's interpretation was - after all they are the only ones who can really decide. Too right the decision would not have been taken lightly, but if the flight wasn't particularly well loaded and they could combine the passengers with the next mornings flight, it may have been a commercial decision. (I know of one rather small airline that does that very frequently, but in this case the next flight is only about 3 hours later,low loadin). Surely if they did go to court, Virgin would have to produce evidence regarding the fault and their reasoning why it was extraordinary.

the flight would have started off as a delay whilst they tried to correct the problems with the aircraft. When time was getting on and they realised that the flight would not be able to make it out that day then they would have changed it to cancelled. Surely however, the fact that they spent so much time in trying to repair the problem would be seen as doing all they could to avoid the cancellation.

Originally Posted by androobe

You're making a lot of assumptions here... unless you have some inside knowledge of this specific flight? How do you know it started off as delayed.. how do you know they "spent so much time trying to repaire the problem"? What if the aircraft fault happened before it's outbound flight - in London and never even got to the US? If that was the case I expect they cancelled the flight hours before it was due to depart and never marked as delayed. Even if this isn't the case, there is a high chance the flight developed it's fault on it's outbound flight and could have reported ahead what was needed for it to be fixed. I'm no legal expert on this compensation law, but I am a very frequent flyer, long and short haul, so I know the how the airlines handle these situations. I have on more than one occasion turned up at an airport to be told my flight was cancelled due to technical reasons - or will be X hours late (they know the fault, but need to fly a part in from somewhere else, for example) they do know these things in advance most of the time - aircraft may go wrong but they're usually have advanced enough equipment to diagnose the fault quickly. Of course in this case, if the flight was due to be anywhere near to capacity, they would have had to fly it as soon as the aircraft was fixed, (just because they can't fly out on the night in question, they can still fly it as delayed the next morning) or transfer everyone to other flights/airlines as soon as possible. The fact that a group managed to get on the following morning flight immediately sounds to me like there were low loadings on these flights and a cancellation was more commercially viable than a (serious) delay.

Anyway, I'm not sure this is all helping the OP... so for their benefit, I would recommend that you write back to Virgin again, at least asking them to outline the exact nature of the fault and how they justify it as being extraordinary, along with proof they did all they could not to cancel the flight (questions such as when did they discover the fault, why did they not have parts available etc?) as with such a technologically advanced piece of machinery surely it can't be extraordinary for a fault to develop? This is only what they would be asked in court. It is definately worth the price of a stamp.

i make no assumptions my friend. I have read the response from Virgin and deemed the neccesary information from that.

The pax has stated in her letter that "In addition to a full refund of the ticket price ". This is incorrect as her daughter did NOT opt to cancel her seat on the flight and make her own way home. The airline arranged for another flight and got her home as per her contract. That is to say that the airline will get you from point a to point b and back again, but flight times and dates are not guaranteed. This is how it has ALWAYS been with the aviation industry.

And no, i know nothing about this specfic flight in the slightest and do not understand what you are incinuating with regard to this. However, i do work in the travel industry myself and i know how these things work, but that should not make any difference to anyone on here except that my comments are educated ones.

Your all missing the main part. Look on the AUC website and READ what it says.

And you're relying on someones interpretation of the regulations to form your opinions. If you want to read the actual wording of the regulations you can do so here

Pay particular atttention to Articles 5,7,8 and 9 which are relevant here.

I cannot believe that this flight was cancelled due to it being nearly empty due to the fact that it took 2 days for the OPs daughter to travel home unless the nature of the booking played a part. Newark is not some backwater country airstrip, there are many daily services to the UK and airlines regularly reroute stranded passengers on other carriers, additionally there are quite a few services from JFK. As this was a school trip perhaps Virgin or the school party leaders did not want to break the party up and this compounded the problem?

Regrettably I don't think you will get the answer you want from the AUC. A line on their website states that they have no power to force an airline to do anything with regard to the regulations (or something to that effect).