Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Excellent

About garygumps

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. My insurers rejected my claim as they came to the conclusion that it was Ryanairs fault that I was not transported to the new airport, which of course it was ! According to their definitions the bus would've had to break down or be delayed somehow. Simply not turning up is not covered!
  2. Exactly, and this is the whole crux of my complaint. They failed spectacularly in all aspects and why I feel I have a good case. My own travel insurance has refused a claim as they feel Ryanair are wholly liable in the circumstances. I will be sending a LBA shortly and keep you up to date as my case progresses. Thanks for all the input so far. Just one last question. I only have anecdotal evidence of the number of passengers (10ish) that actually made the eventual flight. Is there anywhere that I can verify this?
  3. Thank you Dave. That is interesting. You said your experience was positive. Did you successfuly claim anything in your case? From what I have garnered from research, you would be correct in your assumption that the proceedure to transfer passengers to another airport is not a one off. This happens quite frequently in Krakow so should be a well oiled plan. Indeed on the night in question there were I estimate some 10 flights from Ryanair and other airlines that were using this proceedure and they all seemed to get away ok. It is obvious that there has been some sort of logistical screwup. As I say, their excuse about the weather is a red herring here.
  4. Thank you VAUBAN and FTMDave. Flight was scheduled to leave Krakow and was moved to Katowice, about an hour away. The way I see it is that Ryanair are hiding behind delays due to weather (it was foggy) which lead to knock on delays to their tight schedule. Their usual fob off excuse. Firstly, I'm willing to fight them on the legality of the extraordinary circumstances excuse in that I'm sure there is precedent that the "knock on" aspect has been overuled on several occasions (hence my original request for rulings). The delay to my flight was not caused directly by "bad weather" because some flights did leave Krakow. Secondly, and this is my main bugbear, the fact that Ryanair failed to provide transport to Katowice caused the whole situation. They then failed to adhere to EU261 by failing to provide care and assistance.
  5. Sorry, I should have explained. Will try to keep this as brief as possible. Flight was delayed due to weather initially. After 3 hours flight was moved to depart from another airport and busses were to be arranged but to cut a long story short Ryanair, in my opinion (and over 100 other passengers), failed to provide this transport due to some logistical error on their part. The plane took off from the other airport some 12 hours later with about 10 passengers on board. Ryanair offered no assistance as per EU261 and we were basically left to arrange our own way home. Finally took off over 30 hours later. Ryanair have claimed exceptional circumstances due to weather causing a knock on effect to their schedule. At least 2 other flights from other airlines took off from original airport during delay. So I'm looking to claim back the costs I had to pay out in new flights and accommodation and expenses to get home plus €400 *2 as standard compensation under EU261. Ryanair have refunded part of my original fare for unused flight. Total amount I would be looking to claim would be just over £1000.
  6. Hi everyone, I am considering taking Ryanair to small claims court (SCC). I have been refused compensaton under EU261quoting the usual "exceptional circumstances" excuse and they have stonewalled/refused to correspond any further. After some research I have decided to take them straight to SCC and would like to quote some ealier rulings regarding in particular that the "knock on effect" is not sufficient. Thinking ahead, is it ok to just quote the case or do I need the full transcript of the ruling. I have been able to get a few case headlines but can't seem to track down online a copy of the actual ruling. Thank you Gary
  7. Sorry to hear about your business problems legend21. I'm not sure if the fact that your cars are company cars would make any difference. I'm no expert but I assume that the cars would have had to be leased/bought under business terms and the finance company would have been aware of this? The reason I'm saying this is it may make a difference when reasonable wear & tear comes into play as you would expect company vehicles to suffer a bit more abuse than a private car. But then again if they have been regularly serviced etc what more can you do? Anyway, only you will know if the cars are in a reasonable state.
  8. The last letter i got from RCI was in February 2008. Haven't had any word from RCI since I complained to the FOS in March 2008, so I have "assumed" the matter is dealt with. Certainly I do not think that even RCI would have the cheek to contact me now again over a year later. Follow the advice in this thread. I personally do think that they " chance their arm" in trying to get a few extra ££££££. Good luck! Gary
  9. Any solicitors company will have someone who will specialise in this type of work. Or try Citizens Advice?
  10. Seeing as matters are so advanced, I would advise you to seek professional help asap.
  11. This sounds really messy. I've never had a car repossessed, so not sure what the procedure is exactly, but I've experience of Vt'ing a car with RCI, see my other thread in this forumhttp://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/vehicle-retailers-manufacturers/130470-vt-problem-rci-finance.html Anyway, it seems to me that the car has deemed to be repo'ed by RCI I'm afraid. You say you had 14 months of phone calls and letters from RCI. What were they about?
  12. Write to them and state in no uncertain terms that you reject their assessment of money due and say that if you do not get a satisfactory response within 8 weeks then you will lodge a complaint with the Financial Ombudsman. See their website, its very easy and free! You have to give them (RCI) a maximum of 8 weeks before the FO will become involved. Of course, knowing RCI they will write back well before 8 weeks or on second thoughts probably not at all! Be proactive, don't wait for RCI to sort this out, they will only pass it on to a Debt Collection Agency.
  13. Hello Hacked Off! Welcome to the group:p My first bit of advice? Don't pay or do anything else! You say you handed the car back in perfect condition with full service history. So what are they charging you for? Was this damage noted at the time of takeover? How old was the car? When did they write to you about this? Without knowing exact details it is difficult to advise you on what you may be able to do next. RCI's modus operandi seem to be to bill you out of the blue many months down the line. In my own case, a Debt Collection Agency never seemed to get involved and RCI have totally backed off (I'm assuming as I've had no correspondence from them) once the FSO got involved.
  14. LOL ! An 8 year old car and they're complaining about a dent and some scratches! Just out of interest, was the damage incurred while you owned the car or perhaps was it on it when you bought it, it was 6 years old then was it not? Just to clarify Martin, you did buy this car on finance right? Its just unusual imo to VT an agreement on a car so old so to speak, no offence intended. In my case I had the car from brand new on a 3 year deal and VT'd it after 2. In any case, get your complaint off asap. It should put the brakes on any legal action. Although, given the circumstances, I would love to go up in front of a court and have my day, although that would be a bit stressfull maybe? Anyway, good luck & keep in touch. ps, my letter to FOS off today, so fingers crossed!!
  15. Martin, Sorry to hear about your "problem" with RCI First things first, when the car was handed over you should have got a "receipt" which would have detailed the state of the car at handover and noted any "damage" or suchlike. What did it say? How old was the car when you handed it over. You do say that there was a small dent and scratch on the car and it all depends on if this can be qualified as reasonable wear & tear depending on the cars age/mileage. How long was it from hearing from RCI and them passing off the matter to the debt collection agency (DCA). the way I read your original post it seemed to be straight away and did not give you time to reasonably correspond with RCI on the matter. I'm no expert, but this seems unduly hasty and stinks of RCI suddenly "remembering" your case and passing it on to the DCA realising they've f***ed up big style. I thought my delay was ridiculous, but 11 months is outrageous:-x Above all Martin, DON'T PANIC and don't be bullied by the DCA or any threats of court action or whatever they've said in their letters. The way I see it you have an excellent case for a complaint to the Ombudsman. It all depends on if you agree that (a) the damage is reasonable in the circumstances and (b) if you do then you can complain about the lengthy delay. Or © if you don't agree then you can dispute that any damage is reasonable wear & tear and ask for proof etc. I can't believe that RCI are telling you that this delay is not unusual. Do yoy think the car has been sitting all this time? Of course not, it will have been sold off at auction long ago. What you need to do is write one last time to RCI(don't bother with phone calls, they're a waste of time and money) and state your case. Mention that if you do not get a satisfactory or final resonse then you will lodge a complaint to the FOS. You need to give them up to 8 weeks to get a reply before contacting the FOS. You can print off a complaint form from their website and then get copies of all correspondence before sending it off. Regarding my own case, its been 6 months now since my last letter to RCI and sending my complaint documents to the FOS. I haven't heard anything back from them since so I'm cautiously tempted to think that the matter is closed but who knows???? I think I'll drop a wee letter to the FOS for an update.
  • Create New...