Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Monarch - Flight delayed by 3 hours refusing to give compensation


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2459 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

I recently got back from a holiday in Portugal where our flight was delayed by 3 hours going out there.

 

I submitted the claims form and this is the rubbish I get back;

 

Dear XXXXX

 

Flight No. XXXXX Gatwick to Faro 25th June 2017

 

 

 

Further to your claim for delay compensation, we are writing to advise the outcome of our investigation into your case.

 

 

 

Monarch Airlines aims as its first priority to provide its passengers with a safe and efficient service. We are sorry for the delay you experienced that has led to your claim for compensation. We would like to reassure you that every reasonable effort is made to ensure that our flights depart on time and in the unlikely event we are unable to do so through disruption, we aim to provide a solution at the earliest opportunity.

 

 

 

As previously advised, in some circumstances passengers may be entitled to compensation for delay arising from such disruption under European Union laws. However, any monetary payments are subject to certain criteria being satisfied. Under these laws where the disruption is caused by an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ which the airline was reasonably unable to prevent, the carrier is not obliged to pay compensation. The Civil Aviation Authority and European National Enforcement Bodies have published guidelines regarding what can and cannot be considered as extraordinary circumstances and we base our decision on these guidelines.

 

 

 

Our records show that due to high winds three of our aircraft were unable to return from Spain and were forced to remain overnight in Arrecife on 24th June. As a consequence of these aircraft being unavailable for their planned flights as a result of the weather, there was severe disruption across the entire flying programme. This led to a number of flights being cancelled leaving many passengers unable to travel to their intended destinations.

 

 

 

However, and in order to avoid cancelling your flight, our operations team were able to implement changes to the flying programme and utilise our standby aircraft. Unfortunately and despite our best efforts this did lead to the unavoidable delay to the departure of your flight.

 

Having considered the factual background of this case in accordance with the published guidelines and applicable case law, we are satisfied that the disruption was caused by an extraordinary circumstance that could not have reasonably been prevented by Monarch Airlines. We are, therefore, unable to accept your claim for compensation for the reasons given.

 

All flight delays are fully documented in accordance with the requirements of our regulator and the relevant legislation in place. Please note that this documentation cannot be disclosed to passengers nonetheless we actively supply this to the Civil Aviation Authority and National Enforcement Bodies upon request.

 

Yours sincerely

 

XXXX XXXXX

 

EU Claims Advisor

 

Monarch

 

I find this unacceptable as the delay was caused by flights the day before!

 

Also if it was caused 24 hours before they had ample time to inform us. This also lead to us missing the first day of our villa as we didn't arrive until the early hours of the 26th June.

 

I would appreciate your input on this and advice as to whether I am being unreasonable and I am not entitled to compensation. Or the best way to proceed in getting compensation that might be due.

 

Kind Regards,

 

tissot

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their explanation seems plausible, but you have to check with caa if the flights were really grounded for high winds.

It's not unusual for airlines to make up porkeys to avoid paying compensation.

Send an email to caa and ask for full details of the aircrafts that monarch claims of having been grounded.

Caz is pretty good, they gave me a BA flight information exposing some lies.

If indeed the aircrafts were prevented from flying because of wind, I think that it's unlikely you'll get compensation.

The fact that the wind prevented aircrafts to take off the day before is relevant because you can't reasonably expect the airline to have spare planes in every airport in Europe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the weather affected your flight directly, then you are not due compensation. If - as in this case - it is caused by a knock on, operational problem, then this is not extraordinary circumstances.

 

As one of the leading legal firms who specialise in this area have written: "Bad weather must affect the ‘flight in question’ in order for airlines to use it as a defence. If your flight was delayed because of the knock-on effects of a different flight being affected by bad weather, your flight should be claimable."

 

This is because of the way the Regulation itself it written, which talks about bad weather being an "extraordinary circumstance" (where compensation isn't payable) where there are "meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned" - which isn't the case in your circumstances.

 

Monarch are slippery on this kind of thing - I had to take them to court myself (and won) - so keep at it. The MSE Flight Delay Forum is a good source of advice for flight delay issues.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

nock on problem = then that is their problem as they could lease anoither aircraft to comply with regulation - especially long notice yet failed to inform passengers before their departure, even BA lease Quatar airways aircraft if needed and have done in the past 2 weeks mainly european internal flights

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all of your advice.

 

Looks like the first place to start is the CAA to get the information first before I take this any further.

 

Once I have the information needed, is it a case of I write them a letter stating all of the facts and that if they do not offer compensation I will take the to court ?

 

Or is that just a pointless exercise and I should just go for legal action ?

 

Regards,

 

tissot

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all of your advice.

 

Looks like the first place to start is the CAA to get the information first before I take this any further.

 

Once I have the information needed, is it a case of I write them a letter stating all of the facts and that if they do not offer compensation I will take the to court ?

 

Or is that just a pointless exercise and I should just go for legal action ?

 

Regards,

 

tissot

 

You know enough about the circumstances of your delay - what more information do you need?

 

Write a LBA - and then take them to court if they continue to mess you about (which they will).

 

CAA unlikely to be of much help - they can't (or won't) make the airlines pay up, even if they agree you have a claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its more to do with the CAA providing written evidence should it go to court, that way I have an authorised body agreeing with my claim.

 

Would a judge see more favourably with this evidence or am I barking up the wrong tree ?

 

If I am then I shall start drafting up the lba and get you guys to give it the once over before I send it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

I recently got back from a holiday in Portugal where our flight was delayed by 3 hours going out there.

 

I submitted the claims form and this is the rubbish I get back;

 

Dear XXXXX

 

Flight No. XXXXX Gatwick to Faro 25th June 2017

 

 

 

Further to your claim for delay compensation, we are writing to advise the outcome of our investigation into your case.

 

 

 

Monarch Airlines aims as its first priority to provide its passengers with a safe and efficient service. We are sorry for the delay you experienced that has led to your claim for compensation. We would like to reassure you that every reasonable effort is made to ensure that our flights depart on time and in the unlikely event we are unable to do so through disruption, we aim to provide a solution at the earliest opportunity.

 

 

 

As previously advised, in some circumstances passengers may be entitled to compensation for delay arising from such disruption under European Union laws. However, any monetary payments are subject to certain criteria being satisfied. Under these laws where the disruption is caused by an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ which the airline was reasonably unable to prevent, the carrier is not obliged to pay compensation. The Civil Aviation Authority and European National Enforcement Bodies have published guidelines regarding what can and cannot be considered as extraordinary circumstances and we base our decision on these guidelines.

 

 

 

Our records show that due to high winds three of our aircraft were unable to return from Spain and were forced to remain overnight in Arrecife on 24th June. As a consequence of these aircraft being unavailable for their planned flights as a result of the weather, there was severe disruption across the entire flying programme. This led to a number of flights being cancelled leaving many passengers unable to travel to their intended destinations.

 

 

 

However, and in order to avoid cancelling your flight, our operations team were able to implement changes to the flying programme and utilise our standby aircraft. Unfortunately and despite our best efforts this did lead to the unavoidable delay to the departure of your flight.

 

Having considered the factual background of this case in accordance with the published guidelines and applicable case law, we are satisfied that the disruption was caused by an extraordinary circumstance that could not have reasonably been prevented by Monarch Airlines. We are, therefore, unable to accept your claim for compensation for the reasons given.

 

All flight delays are fully documented in accordance with the requirements of our regulator and the relevant legislation in place. Please note that this documentation cannot be disclosed to passengers nonetheless we actively supply this to the Civil Aviation Authority and National Enforcement Bodies upon request.

 

Yours sincerely

 

XXXX XXXXX

 

EU Claims Advisor

 

Monarch

 

I find this unacceptable as the delay was caused by flights the day before!

 

Also if it was caused 24 hours before they had ample time to inform us. This also lead to us missing the first day of our villa as we didn't arrive until the early hours of the 26th June.

 

I would appreciate your input on this and advice as to whether I am being unreasonable and I am not entitled to compensation. Or the best way to proceed in getting compensation that might be due.

 

Kind Regards,

 

tissot

 

What was the flight number, scheduled arrival time and actual arrival time.?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Disgruntled,

 

Details are as follows,

 

ZB214 Gatwick to Faro 25th June 2017

 

Scheduled arrival: 1900hrs

 

Actual arrival approximately: 2215hrs

 

Regards,

 

tissot

Link to post
Share on other sites

The NWNF online calculators (that have a database of flights deemed eligible for compensation) reckon this flight qualifies for €400 compensation.

 

I really wouldn't bother with the CAA - on past form they'll take ages to respond and even if they write you a helpful letter, you're not going to need this to win your case. But if you're in no rush, it certainly shouldn't do any harm to write. (The CAA isn't on the passengers' side though - they produced a list of "extraordinary circumstances" which exempted the airlines from a range of scenarios for which compensation was legally due - and had to withdraw it when the Supreme Court said it was nonsense.)

 

 

Hi Disgruntled,

 

Details are as follows,

 

ZB214 Gatwick to Faro 25th June 2017

 

Scheduled arrival: 1900hrs

 

Actual arrival approximately: 2215hrs

 

Regards,

 

tissot

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Disgruntled,

 

Details are as follows,

 

ZB214 Gatwick to Faro 25th June 2017

 

Scheduled arrival: 1900hrs

 

Actual arrival approximately: 2215hrs

 

Regards,

 

tissot

 

Records show that flight landed at 22.10 WEST.

 

On the face of it you do have a claim and I would write back to Monarch stating you do not accept their excuse of extraordinary circumstances as the met event didn't affect your specific flight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently drafting the lba as we speak, the Monarch 'eu compensation form' that I originally filled outlines this :

 

Guidance on Regulation 261/2004

 

1) EU Regulation 261/2004 provides that, in the event of cancellation or long delay, passengers are

entitled to compensation in certain situations.

 

2) If your flight arrived at its destination more than 3 hours behind schedule, then you may be entitled to

compensation. The amounts of compensation payable are:

 

i) Euro 250 for flights of 1500km or less

ii) Euro 400 for Intra-Community flights of greater than 1500km & all other flights

between 1500 and 3500km

iii) Euro 600 for all flights over 3500km*

 

Note: *If we are able to offer an alternative flight and your arrival is within 3 and 4

hours of your original scheduled time of arrival, then the compensation

payable is reduced by 50%

 

I am claiming for two passengers including myself so going by the guidance should the compensation not be 2 x Euro 250 = Euro 500 ?

 

Will get the lba posted up hopefully today for you guys to have a pick at (Please bare in mind this is the first lba I have ever done so will probably need some help)

 

regards,

 

tissot

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that in the lba is the time to ask for documentation in accordance with the PA on Pre-Action Conduct.

 

Is there anything I should ask for. They did state in their response that they cant disclose the flight delay details and that information is give to the CAA.

 

Or should I just skip the request ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does having multiple claimants complicate things at all ?

 

Otherwise I can do it just for myself and then the others should just be able to claim if I win the case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really do think you should read the guide I wrote - it answers all these questions and more (even if I say so myself!)

 

One post-script: there's one other option not mentioned in my guide (it only became live last week I think) and that is to use an Alternative Dispute Resolution provider - there's one endorsed by the CAA (fwiw) called AviationADR, which covers a lot of airlines. Monarch just signed up last week I believe. I have no idea about how genuinely impartial this outfit is, or whether they have any success in getting the airlines to pay out if they find in your favour (the one that Thomson uses - CEDR - doesn't seem too good at getting the airline to pay out, even when they find for the passenger). But I understand the service is free to the consumer, and might (might) be a quicker way of getting your money than court - assuming ADRAviation does what it says on the tin!

Link to post
Share on other sites

One post-script: there's one other option not mentioned in my guide (it only became live last week I think) and that is to use an Alternative Dispute Resolution provider - there's one endorsed by the CAA (fwiw) called AviationADR, which covers a lot of airlines. Monarch just signed up last week I believe. I have no idea about how genuinely impartial this outfit is, or whether they have any success in getting the airlines to pay out if they find in your favour (the one that Thomson uses - CEDR - doesn't seem too good at getting the airline to pay out, even when they find for the passenger). But I understand the service is free to the consumer, and might (might) be a quicker way of getting your money than court - assuming ADRAviation does what it says on the tin!

 

Thanks for all the info so far Vauban, I have had a brief look over your guide and you have definitely surpassed yourself on that one. Extremely well written! So for anyone looking at this thread because you are in the same situation I would probably go straight to Vauban's guide.

 

when I get a chance this week I shall take a look at AviationADR before I send the lba.

 

Regards

 

tissot

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...