Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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

BMI Baby: Madrid - Manchester, Cancelled last night.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5413 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

Hi all, the CAG isn't new to me, but I'm new to the forum. :-)

 

I'm pretty irate about how BMI Baby treated myself and fellow passengers last night and could use some advice, please!

 

Our flight was scheduled to leave at 18:25 last night, we were told it was delayed for several hours and they finally admitted that it would not be flying at about 10 or 11pm.

 

There was no offer of accommodation or help with finding alternative flights. We were told there was no BMI flight until Monday morning (though, looking at their timetable, it looks like they fly Sunday night too) and hurried out of the building by airport staff.

 

I can only imagine (hope?) a full refund for the flight will be forthcoming but I am interested in pursuing them for some compensation. We ended up booking a flight, through Ryanair, to Liverpool at the cost of another 80 quid. Others booking onto the same flight half an hour later were paying upwards of £300. It seems only fair to me that we are reimbursed!

 

Anyway.. here is the relevant section from the T/C's:

 

9.2 CANCELLATION, REROUTING, DELAYS, ETC.

 

 

9.2.1 We will take all necessary measures to avoid delay in carrying you and your baggage. In the exercise of these measures and in order to prevent a flight cancellation, in exceptional circumstances we may arrange for a flight to be operated on our behalf by an alternative carrier and/or aircraft.

 

 

9.2.2 Except as otherwise provided by the Convention, if we cancel a flight, fail to operate a flight reasonably according to the schedule or, fail to stop at your destination, we shall, at your option, either:

 

 

9.2.2.1 carry you at the earliest opportunity on another of our scheduled services on which space is available without additional charge and, where necessary, extend the validity of your Ticket; or

 

 

9.2.2.2 within a reasonable period of time re-route you to the destination shown on your Ticket or an alternative destination acceptable to you by our own services without additional charge.; or

 

 

9.2.2.3 make a refund in accordance with the provisions of Article 10.2.

 

 

9.2.3 Upon the occurrence of any of the events set out in Article 9.2.2, except as otherwise provided by the Convention, the options outlined in Article 9.2.2.1 through 9.2.2.3 are the sole and exclusive remedies available to you and we shall have no further liability to you.

 

 

9.2.4 If we are unable to provide previously confirmed space, we shall provide compensation to those Passengers denied boarding in accordance with applicable law and our denied boarding compensation policy.

 

 

Details of our denied boarding policy can be obtained at the check-in desk.

9.2.3 sounds pretty grim, I know.

 

The bit I've highlighted, I'm unsure if it's relevant and, if so, what it means? If anyone can shed any light on that, I'd much appreciate it!

 

Looking at the Civil Aviation Authoritiy's website, I've got this:

 

Financial compensation is due unless you were informed 14 days before the flight, or you were rerouted close to your original times, or the airline can prove that the cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances.
However, in the airport we were handed a sheet of paper listing their definitions of extraordinary circumstances. Those being; "meteorological conditions, flight security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings, strikes, political instability, or air traffic management decisions".

 

We were told that it was a technical fault with the aircraft and I'm concerned that this falls under "unexpected safety shortcomings". I don't think it was as extra-ordinary all that!

 

It only gives us the option to rebook (within 7 days for travel within 21 days) or cancel, but I think trying to book 100 people onto the next available flight on Sunday night would have been a pretty unreasonable suggestion!!

 

Anyone got any thoughts?!

 

Cheers,

 

Tim :-)

(Apologies for the heavy reading!)

Edited by orwell84
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking into.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Martin.

 

I just came across this page - www . caa . co . uk /default.aspx?catid=306&pagetype=90&pageid=9367

 

...which defines 'extra ordinary' circumstances in line with how BMI Baby do. I imagine compensation might become difficult, as they will say our technical fault falls under 'unexpected flight safety shortcomings'..?

 

(It seems to me that these 'extra-ordinary' circumstances cover just about all the ordinary cases in which a flight might be cancelled. I'd argue it's up to them to keep their aircraft in good repair!)

 

Of interest are the entitlements towards the bottom of that page, though.

 

We were offered a sandwich and a drink in the 5 or so hours up to them admitting the flight was cancelled. During that time, a lot of people had already spent a fair amount on overpriced food.

 

We were also offered no accommodation or transfers. (Older folks and children sleeping on the airport floor - delightful.)

 

If we chose to reschedule with BMI, we would be there until Sunday night (in the very best case!). In this case, the provision would be woefully inadequate.

 

We were also not offered (but we did not ask for) phone calls. We probably spent about 10 quid trying to get the Ryanair flights booked.

Edited by orwell84
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim,

My daughter was on the same flight. She was absolutely broke (the end of a music festival), with 42p to her name. She is a 1st year Uni student so didn't even have a credit card. We got to Manchester airport and knew before you guys (at 08.30pm) that the flight had been cancelled. The help-desk guy at Manchester even phoned BMI up because we knew she was broke, and reassured us BMI would look after them and pay for accommodation/and rebook their flights. My daughter called us to tell us she (and a couple of others) had been offered hospitality by some bloke they met at the airport - WHAT - NIGHTMARE!!! This guy ended up being a star and put them up for the night, fed them, paid for tube fares, helped them rebook flights (because he had internet). You're right about the flight prices hiking up - Easyjet was 80 euro when we looked, but by the time she booked (with our credit card) the price had gone up to 120 euro. I cannot believe in this day and age how BMI can get away with something like this, and only refunding the ticket price. Anyway I'll keep an eye on what happens here, because I'm 120 euro down, BUT things could have been a lot worse if the good samaritan hadn't been 'good'. Cheers Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad that worked out reasonably for your daughter Rob! I'm not surprised she was skint - drinks were not cheap at that festival!

 

I've not written to BMI yet, but when I do I'll be arguing the case for compensation. I had my wallet pinched in Madrid, so our flights were all booked by a mate back home. I hope that doesn't get in the way!

 

I wonder if you knowing about the cancellation by 8.30 detracts any from the idea that this was an 'unexpected' safety shortcoming. Certainly makes it more of an annoyance!

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone....

 

Firstly, for flight delays and cancellations, please check out the Flightmole website where you'll find heaps of information regarding how to claim compensation under EU Regulation 261/2004.

 

Regarding cancellations due to technical problems, these do not all fall into the category of extraordinary circumstances.

 

It is up to the Airline to prove that the technical fault is extraordinary and not to claim that all faults are extraordinary and therefore, do not attract compensation. The explanation you were given was misleading and by law, you should have been given an explanation of your rights under EU261/2004 which includes the right to be given a refund, flown to your destination via another route/carrier and offered compensation.

 

I have been through all of this recently and today, finally received 250 Euros compensation (the legal entitlement under EU 261/2004) from an airline who initially claimed a last-minute flight cancellation due to a technical fault was an extraordinary circumstance. After writing several letters and then filing a claim at the small claims court (filed online for £25), the airline filed their defense - a week later, they paid up in full because they didn't want to go to Court.

 

You may need to take it this far with some airlines but please do not be put off. It will probably involve writing a few letters, filing a Court action and being patient (it took 5-6 months for me to be reimbursed) but it will pay off in the end.

 

-Mikee-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

 

Very encouraging story, thanks for that! I'll see what I can manage. :-)

 

If you fancy passing on any of the letters you sent, I'd be very interested and most grateful!

 

Cheers,

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst this may seem draconian to some, we have always resisted the use of PMs to exchange information of this nature.

 

The primary reason being that using documents to challenge a legal position etc should be open to scrutiny - letters that can be used as a template can be shown on the forum and, where appropriate, could be added to our template library for everyone to use.

 

This is not intended to highlight a problem with the letters being discussed here, per se, simply a general position.

 

In short - be aware of communication by PM.

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst this may seem draconian to some, we have always resisted the use of PMs to exchange information of this nature.

 

Point taken.

 

Actually, I fully intend to post the letters I send to BMI in this thread (hopefully with Mikee's permission, assuming I use any of his text). I'll also be posting a synopsis of any responses I get, and look forward to the input of those more experienced CAG forum users!

 

I just didn't want to publish my email address and thought Mike might find it easier to send a collection of pdfs or Word docs. :-)

 

Anyway, while I'm at it, one of the issues Mike mentioned to me via PM is the level of information given to us at the time and BMI giving their own interpretation of EC 241/2004 rather than the text of the regulation itself.

 

I thought they might have covered themselves reasonably well on that front but maybe not! They handed us this on their headed paper:

 

Dear Passenger,

 

We deeply regret that your flight has been cancelled.

 

Rest assured that we have taken all possible measures to minimise this inconvenience.

 

All cancellations for reasons of extra-ordinary circumstances such as meteorological conditions, flight security reisks, unexpected flight safety shortcommings, strikes, political instability or air traffic management decisions are exempt of compensation payments.

 

We will do our upmost to transport you to your destination as soon as is practically possible.

 

Nevertheless you are free to change your travel plans; either

 

- you have 7 days to rebook for travel within 21 days subject to availability, or

 

- you can choose to cancel your reservation.

 

To change your reservation please contact........blah

Of course, we were then just thrown out of the airport with not a BMI Baby representative in sight!

 

I'll draft a letter today and post it in this thread later. On Mike's advice, I'm initially going to simply ask for my compensation without listing their miryad of failures. I'll come back to the thread with their defence.

 

Thanks all,

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, back again. Apologies for my consistently-lengthy and now back-to-back posts. :-)

 

The text of the letter I'm planning to send is below:

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I am writing regarding the cancellation of my flight from Madrid to Manchester (WW3584) on 25th July 2008.

 

Passengers were notified of this cancellation several hours after the flight was due to depart, having previously been advised of an ongoing delay due to a technical fault. No other aircraft was available to operate the service and therefore I was forced to take an alternative flight to Liverpool.

 

I eventually arrived in Manchester at 09:00, 13 hours behind schedule. This was at significant extra cost and inconvenience to myself.

 

Under EU Regulation 261/2004, I am entitled to claim compensation for the inconvenience and costs associated with the cancellation of my flight. As the flight was up to 1500km in length and my delay to destination was more than two hours, I request that BMI Baby compensate me the sum of €250, as laid down in EU Regulation 261/2004.

 

In addition, I require a full refund of €100.20 for the two tickets I purchased, including the taxes and duties, to which I am entitled. Should you wish to charge administration costs for this refund, I would also request that you issue me with a breakdown of how this cost is derived. This should include stationery, postage and minutes of staff time used in processing the request.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

T xxx

There are two aspects of it that I would appreciate some input on:

 

Firstly, am I pushing my luck with the admin fee thing in the final paragraph? I intend to argue that they're excessive and unlawful, bank charge style.

 

Secondly, I'm a bit unsure how to structure my 'attack'! I'm going to take this job on for the 3 of us who traveled together. I bought 2 of the tickets on my card and the other fella bought his own.

 

I'm thinking of sending the letter above, another one signed by the guy who's ticket I bought, just asking for the 250 compensation and a further letter from the other chap asking for his refund and compensation.

 

Does that seem logical, or should I ask for 500 compensation in this letter, or even lump all 3 together?

 

Many thanks, all...

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tim/all,

 

Personally, I would not mention anything about administration costs in your letter as it gives them an opportunity to pay you less. Even if they did deduct admin costs, I don't believe this would stand up in court since you are the one who has been financially affected. Besides, there is nothing in the Regulation which allows an airline to deduct such costs.

 

As you have already done, just request the compensation due under 261/2004 and a full refund of your costs. I would take copies of your receipts and send the letter + receipts via recorded delivery so that you have proof they arrived at BMI.

 

See what their response is and we can take it from there. I agree it would be best to post the progress here so that others can see how things are progressing which might help in members own claims.

 

Regarding claiming on behalf of multiple people, I think it would be better to make individual claims. I think airlines would be more prepared to go to court and defend a "large" claim rather than a "small" one. To defend multiple small claims at different courts may be difficult to justify financially for an airline....maybe others have a view on this but this is the reason Air France decided to pay me compensation rather than go to court.

 

-Mikee-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim,

 

What happened about accommodation? I assume you took the Ryanair flight the following morning? If you had to pay for overnight accommodation then this needs to be included in your claim.

 

Having re-read your draft letter, I would also remove the reference to "no other aircraft available to operate the service". Let BMI state this.

 

The Regulation gives you the option of taking an alternative flight (on another airline) to get you to your destination earlier than BMI's own flights but this choice wasn't offered to you at the time of cancellation - another failure of BMI to adhere to the rules.

 

The letter they gave you is a poor interpretation of the Regulation and is basically incorrect. To state that "extra-ordinary circumstances such as meteorological conditions, flight security reisks, unexpected flight safety shortcommings, strikes, political instability or air traffic management decisions are exempt of compensation payments" is incorrect.

 

Again, there are a catalogue of failures to adhere to the Regulation which you could base your case around but it's best to see BMI's response before getting into the nitty-gritty!

 

-Mikee-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mikee,

 

Thanks again for your input. I've been away from my computer for a day or so! I will put letters in post today with suggested amendments.

 

With regards to accommodation, everyone 'slept' on the airport floor. I read something on flightmole saying, if you sleep on the airport floor then you've squandered your opportunity for an expenses-paid trip to the Hilton and you can't go after that money retrospectively! If only we'd known our rights eh!

 

It was a very difficult (impossible?) night to get accommodation in Madrid anyway, as it was a national holiday and people had flocked to the city. BMI didn't use this excuse though. They were silent on the matter.

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the silence from BMI and total disregard for the well being of its passengers can only strengthen your case for compensation. Naturally there is no compensation due for hotel accommodation that you did not take so in fact, BMI has already saved itself a pot of money by not abiding by the "duty of care" obligation, afforded to passengers under the Montreal Convention and also under EU Regulation 241/2004.

 

Of course, this can be brought into the "negotiations" with BMI if their response to your next letter is not favourable.

 

-Mikee-

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, this can be brought into the "negotiations" with BMI if their response to your next letter is not favourable.

 

I like that thought. I'm almost excited about drafting a response to their stock 'get lost' letter. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Tim

Did you send the letter off to BMI, my daughter is holding back from sending anything until we see what you have sent. If you have sent it, it would be very helpful if you could post on here what you sent .

Thanks Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi,

Has anyone heard anything back from BMI Baby - we haven't. I posted the first letter on 20/8/2008 but I didn't send it recorded delivery (probably a mistake). I'm thinking of sending a follow up (this time recorded) - anyone any suggestions about what a follow up letter should be.

Cheers Rob

 

p.s. The first letter was a copy of the one put together by Tim/Mikee

Link to post
Share on other sites

Air Wales has a strange reputation in the north west - they did try to operate a 2 weekdaily Do228 operation on the CWL-MAN route before giving it up quite quickly and they've had 2 bashes at CWL-LPL (with extensions at both ends) and not made that work! So I couldn't guess why they would want to operate, I presume, a more "touristy" route even they couldn't get domestic services to work.

 

James

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope that Air Southwest are able to make the CWL-MAN route work. There is definitely a market for the route and with a bit of marketing the route should become viable. I am hoping to use it soon to hop up to MAN to do some spotting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other bits and pieces - Belavia's service to Minsk looks like it will be returing in the summer - weekly on Mondays from Jun 4 to Aug 28 and I can't find Portugalia's service to LIS/OPO on Amadeus for the summer so they may be finally giving up the ghost after a few years of tinkering with the timings of the service with barely any beneficial results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...