Cancelled Flight - taken court action?

[algorfa]

Has anyone taken an airline to court over cancelled flights and won, if so did you think it was worth the effort.

 

Or did the airline not attend / settle out of court.

 

I know it's not much but it's the principle, airlines should be made to pay, provide a better service and perhaps be a bit more apologetic instead of taking its customers for granted.

[Thailand]

I have come across them now and again, but they are thin on the ground. There isn't much support out there, like pre Bank Charges Hell etc...

 

Also, other forums are full who people who don't like the idea of arguing against the airlines (whose fares might go up). The same selfish people who want the poor and less well off to fund their Banking.

 

I think they should do it right or not at all..... they get away with 99.99% of it and are always relying on people not knowing their rights, like Banks and DCA's etc. They also fib alot.

 

BBC NEWS | World | Europe | Airlines warned over compensation

 

This is a quiet, yet brilliant forum. I wouldn't normally link to another forum, but it's a good 'un.

 

Precedent Cases EC Regulation 261/2004 - Flight Mole Forum

 

I see Air France had such an amazing case they settled to save money. God bless them all. (It's in one of those threads)

 

All you really need is an address to serve and the confidence that you understand the regs. I don't think there is enough claims out there for them to worry the cat is out of the bag.

 

The huge problem is dis-proving their likely assertion that the cancellation was extraordinary and how to put them to strict proof of it? We are truely talking mechanical beasts here, not like those Banks!

 

I am mindful to get something in writing of anyone at any airport should my next flight get cancelled. Airport manager...ATC....airline or agent.

[algorfa]

Thanks again Thailand,

 

Always interested to get other views.

 

My case might not get that far but I am fully prepared to give it a go, why should airlines get away with treating its customers like something unpleasant they've picked up on the bottom of their shoe.

[algorfa]

Some really good reading in those links.

[Conniff]

Thanks again Thailand,

 

Always interested to get other views.

 

My case might not get that far but I am fully prepared to give it a go, why should airlines get away with treating its customers like something unpleasant they've picked up on the bottom of their shoe.

 

If your case doesn't reach court, then they 'have' got away with it again.

[algorfa]

If your case doesn't reach court, then they 'have' got away with it again.

 

Not if they pay up what is due prior to any court action.

[Conniff]

Sorry, that's not what I meant. They will have got away with it as the next person may just accept their fob off, so though they paid, they never got the bad publicity they deserve.

[algorfa]

Agreed.

[FordAnglia]

Did you take your claim further against the airline by starting court proceedings as you were thinking?

 

I was reading the Flightmole forum that Thailand linked to. This shows an increasing number of passengers taking such action (although probably quite small a number compared to those who must be affected).

 

Reading that forum I see that they talk about using legal expenses insurance that is often already bought by the passenger on their existing travel insurance policies or often more commonly on household contents insurance. (There is mention of Direct Line having this cover and others such as Churchill-these must cover quite a lot of people).

 

This appears a cost effective way of doing things-if it is an available option.

 

Presumably it might also cover the situation of an airline being difficult about paying for hotel costs following a delay or cancellation as well.

 

Is this something that you have considered or would you take court action yourself?

 

Has anybody else gone down that route of claiming legal expenses cover to pursue court action for a flight cancellation?

 

Does any body foresee any drawbacks-(apart from any excess on that policy cover)?

[geoff1248]

I am currently in dispute with Easyjet over a flight which was cancelled and took off the following day from a different airport. Easyjet have replied that the flight was not cancelled but "rescheduled". I have contacted the Airtransport Users Council (AUC) who have stated that flights are either delayed or cancelled- the EU regs do not recognise the term "rescheduled". This is a term that has no meaning and has only recently been introduced by Easyjet maybe to confuse people.

I would suggest that you contact the AUC who have the power to request the correct information from the airline. Once they have this information you have all the evidence to proceed with the matter.

I am following this course of action and am currently awaiting the AUC response.

It is also worth noting that there is a firm of solicitors who will progress your claim, right up to the court, for a fee of 20% of your claim.

Edited August 11, 2009 by geoff1248

[Thailand]

Geoff, user Zamzara did the same thing and although the AUC were slow, they resolved her claim.

 

Just in case you wanted to read that thread (search username)

 

'resheduled' lol

[geoff1248]

Thanks for that Thailand. The AUC are really helpful but also very busy. They anticipate around 6 weeks before dealing with each case. From Zamzaras point is was worth the wait.

[algorfa]

Did you take your claim further against the airline by starting court proceedings as you were thinking?

 

I was reading the Flightmole forum that Thailand linked to. This shows an increasing number of passengers taking such action (although probably quite small a number compared to those who must be affected).

 

Reading that forum I see that they talk about using legal expenses insurance that is often already bought by the passenger on their existing travel insurance policies or often more commonly on household contents insurance. (There is mention of Direct Line having this cover and others such as Churchill-these must cover quite a lot of people).

 

This appears a cost effective way of doing things-if it is an available option.

 

Presumably it might also cover the situation of an airline being difficult about paying for hotel costs following a delay or cancellation as well.

 

Is this something that you have considered or would you take court action yourself?

 

Has anybody else gone down that route of claiming legal expenses cover to pursue court action for a flight cancellation?

 

Does any body foresee any drawbacks-(apart from any excess on that policy cover)?

 

Hi,

Haven't got that far, received the refund which took 3 weeks, was waiting for them to confirm that the flight in question and the next days flight was also cancelled so I could make a claim on my travel insurance as well as the precise reason of cancellation.

Nothing for my insurance and technical fault was the reason.

 

I have today sent a letter requesting EUR 250 suggesting that Technical Fault cannot be classed as extraordinary circumstances plus my out of pocket expenses and will take it further if need be.

[FordAnglia]

I am currently in dispute with Easyjet over a flight which was cancelled and took off the following day from a different airport. Easyjet have replied that the flight was not cancelled but "rescheduled". I have contacted the Airtransport Users Council (AUC) who have stated that flights are either delayed or cancelled- the EU regs do not recognise the term "rescheduled". This is a term that has no meaning and has only recently been introduced by Easyjet maybe to confuse people.

I would suggest that you contact the AUC who have the power to request the correct information from the airline. Once they have this information you have all the evidence to proceed with the matter.

I am following this course of action and am currently awaiting the AUC response.

It is also worth noting that there is a firm of solicitors who will progress your claim, right up to the court, for a fee of 20% of your claim.

 

I'm trying to understand what powers the AUC do have.

 

I see that they might manage to obtain a change of view if the AUC challenge that view on behalf of the passenger but dont understand what evidence I will have to proceed. Presumably I then need to proceed-unless the AUC sponsors civil court action on my behalf. Does the AUC sponsor such litigation-isnt that why they have only very limited "success".

 

What if the AUC are not successful in causing the airline to "change their view"?

 

The point regarding Solicitors taking action on a 20% retainer is understood -at least up to a certain extent- but I dont understand what "right up to court" means. Does that mean initiation of court proceedings, up to filing of defence, hearing or subsequent appeal?

 

If I have already paid for legal expenses insurance cover why should I be obliged to pay that 20% even? Wouldnt a Solicitor be obliged to advise me on alternative methods of funding at the time of retainer? I thought that was in the Solictors Practise Rules.

[FordAnglia]

Geoff, user Zamzara did the same thing and although the AUC were slow, they resolved her claim.

 

Just in case you wanted to read that thread (search username)

 

'resheduled' lol

 

From Zamzara's thread I read that she obtained an outcome from taking court action herself-not because of anything the AUC/CAA did.

I'm I getting this wrong?

 

If this were the case would there be any point in waiting 6 weeks-perhaps after that time a passenger wouldbe increasingly be less inclined to take action?

[Thailand]

From Zamzara's thread I read that she obtained an outcome from taking court action herself-not because of anything the AUC/CAA did.

I'm I getting this wrong?

 

If this were the case would there be any point in waiting 6 weeks-perhaps after that time a passenger wouldbe increasingly be less inclined to take action?

 

No, I got it wrong. I was thinking of this thread and recalled it all wrong. I think I have heard of successes with the AUC, but got Zamzara's victory muddled up.

 

Having said that I don't know much about their role as a NEB either. All I know is if I wanted information about a cancelled flight I'd be utelising their services. :grin:

[FordAnglia]

No, I got it wrong. I was thinking of this thread and recalled it all wrong. I think I have heard of successes with the AUC, but got Zamzara's victory muddled up.

 

Having said that I don't know much about their role as a NEB either. All I know is if I wanted information about a cancelled flight I'd be utelising their services. :grin:

 

Has the AUC obtained the same successful outcome for the OP in that referred thread as Zamzara through her own actions did-isnt that the point Zamzara was making?

 

It requires an examination of what service that the AUC do in fact offer that is capable of utilisation. Otherwise a passenger may be expecting more of the AUC than it can in fact deliver.

 

Presumably if the AUC has ineffectual powers then airlines wont be pointing this out to passengers-the airlines will just allow passengers to discover this on a piecemeal basis and then rely on the fact that passengers dont routinely talk to each other.

 

I'm sure the AUC are "very nice" to passengers-that is indeed what they are meant to be. I'm sure also they are on the "side of the passenger". But do they get any results -other than sporadic "results" that are entirely at the whim of the carrier?

 

What is the point of using their services if they dont get results? Again isnt that the point the Zamzara is making?

 

What "legal duty" is an airline under to respond to a passenger? Presumably they give the same or similar reponse that they give to passengers themselves.

 

Surely the point Zamzara is impliclitly making is that the carrier must make a choice of responding formally to her court action. If the carrier chooses not to respond then she wins by default. The carrier would be under a much clearer "legal duty" to respond to a court summons than a nebulous "duty" to "reply" to any advance made by the AUC on the passenger's behalf

 

If court action is the more certain option-then explore whether somebody has already agreed to fund this action (i.e a legal expenses insurer) or, as Zamzara did, do it yourself. As a last alternative instruct any available Solicitor willing to take proceedings on a fixed fee basis-if that option is available as a previous poster mentioned. However on this alternative the passenger would presumably need to be very clear about the nature and terms of the retainer with the Solicitor.

[geoff1248]

The AUC are the "complaints" wing of the Civil Aviation Authority. The airlines are legally bound to give the AUC all details they have on why the particular flight was delayed/cancelled. As a passenger the airlines can tell you what they want. If an airline quotes technical reasons for the cancellation the AUC will be told exactly what those reasons were. Remember technical reasons alone are not sufficient reason to cancel a flight and avoid compensation.

Regarding the solicitors, they will issue the court papers and arrange to attend court to put your case. They only get paid if you win. Solicitors details are below

 

Arnhemsestraat 47

6971 AP Brummen

The Netherlands T

I

F

E 0901 8800090 (25 p/min)

+31 (0)575 468730

+31 (0)575 563042

[email protected] Dear claimant,

 

Based on the information you have submitted to us, we might be able to claim

€ 250 per passenger for you.

 

In order to complete this claim of € 250 per passenger , we will need some extra information. Click here to enter this information. We advise you to have your travel details at hand.

 

Filing a claim with us is simple. There are no hidden costs, and we continuously keep you updated about your claim's progress. If the airline does not pay out then you do not have to pay us anything. When they do, you receive 73% of the total amount paid out. You have nothing to lose; we will even take your case to court if we have to.

 

After you have entered the final data, we will start an investigation into whether the airline company can rightly appeal to extraordinary circumstances. If that is not the case, we will proceed with the claim process.

With EUclaim you stand strong in claiming your right.

 

Right to compensation

In 2005, a new European legislation (EC Regulation 261/2004) came into force, protecting the consumer rights of air passengers. At EUclaim we specialise in collecting compensation for passengers whose flight has not been properly carried out. Passengers are not entitled to compensation if the airline company can prove that the situation was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.

 

Unique service

What makes us unique is that since 2005 we have been observing all commercial aircraft worldwide. All these data on aircraft, flight movements and additional information are stored in our database. On the basis of these data we can determine exactly what happened with your flight.

 

For more information, please look at the page about EUclaim on our website. Of course you can also contact us using the details given above. Yours sincerely,

 

Hendrik Noorderhaven, CEO

EUclaim

 

Although Dutch based all papers are obviously issued in the UK and they have UK representatives.

[FordAnglia]

The AUC are the "complaints" wing of the Civil Aviation Authority. The airlines are legally bound to give the AUC all details they have on why the particular flight was delayed/cancelled. As a passenger the airlines can tell you what they want. If an airline quotes technical reasons for the cancellation the AUC will be told exactly what those reasons were. Remember technical reasons alone are not sufficient reason to cancel a flight and avoid compensation.

Regarding the solicitors, they will issue the court papers and arrange to attend court to put your case. They only get paid if you win. Solicitors details are below

 

Arnhemsestraat 47

6971 AP Brummen

The Netherlands T

I

F

E 0901 8800090 (25 p/min)

+31 (0)575 468730

+31 (0)575 563042

[email protected] Dear claimant,

 

Based on the information you have submitted to us, we might be able to claim

€ 250 per passenger for you.

 

In order to complete this claim of € 250 per passenger , we will need some extra information. Click here to enter this information. We advise you to have your travel details at hand.

 

Filing a claim with us is simple. There are no hidden costs, and we continuously keep you updated about your claim's progress. If the airline does not pay out then you do not have to pay us anything. When they do, you receive 73% of the total amount paid out. You have nothing to lose; we will even take your case to court if we have to.

 

After you have entered the final data, we will start an investigation into whether the airline company can rightly appeal to extraordinary circumstances. If that is not the case, we will proceed with the claim process.

With EUclaim you stand strong in claiming your right.

 

Right to compensation

In 2005, a new European legislation (EC Regulation 261/2004) came into force, protecting the consumer rights of air passengers. At EUclaim we specialise in collecting compensation for passengers whose flight has not been properly carried out. Passengers are not entitled to compensation if the airline company can prove that the situation was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.

 

Unique service

What makes us unique is that since 2005 we have been observing all commercial aircraft worldwide. All these data on aircraft, flight movements and additional information are stored in our database. On the basis of these data we can determine exactly what happened with your flight.

 

For more information, please look at the page about EUclaim on our website. Of course you can also contact us using the details given above. Yours sincerely,

 

Hendrik Noorderhaven, CEO

EUclaim

 

Although Dutch based all papers are obviously issued in the UK and they have UK representatives.

 

I cant find this business registered with the Solicitors Regulation Authority in England and Wales as Solictors. (Did you recive the impression they were Solicitors?) They appear to have a Dutch address in any event.

 

Has this business taken your instructions-as a Solicitor would be obliged to do-to take your "claim to court".

 

Do you understand what "taking your case to court means"? How can they attend Court -if they are not Solicitors?

 

 

I presume as a consequence they "cant take your case to court" as only Solicitors are legally allowed to do this.

 

If they employ "agents" those "agents" would need to be Solicitors to conduct litigation. If they are their agents can they also be your Solicitor-remembering that those Solicitors would be required to deliver to you unfettered advice-including such aspects as whether you had your own legal expenses insurance?

 

 

Furthermore your relationship with them would not be bound by the Solicitors Code of Conduct and other regulatory requirements-including advice to clients on the client's ability to make a claim under any available legal expense insurance.

 

You say " The airlines are legally bound to give the AUC all details they have on why the particular flight was delayed/cancelled". What is that legal duty-isnt that the point-you believe that "power" exists -but where in law is this delivered?

 

Has it ever been enforced-if it exists- by the AUC-(which in fact although a "wing" of the CAA doesnt have any separate legal identity from the CAA?

 

 

You are free to contract with whomever you choose. If I was planning to engage in litigation I personally would instruct a firm of proper Solicitors in England-that could deliver what they promise, be bound by professional codes of conduct and regulatory sanction if they didnt meet their promises. If they did this on a similar fixed fee fine-even better if I could get my legal expenses insurer to pay for them and save this percentage.

 

Alternatively I would do as Zamzara did and not rely upon anybody else to enforce my rights-conduct my own litigation- and have the good grace to tell other passengers the outcome so they could follow my example.

[geoff1248]

I was not suggesting that the OP does use these people, just pointing out an alternative strategy. How they operate I do not know but if necessary further info. can be obtained. Obviously they are Dutch and will use UK solicitors to carry out certain aspects of the work.

Also I think that you have very seriously underestimated the powers of the CAA, but that is not a subject for this particular thread.

[algorfa]

I'm going alone on this one and going to see what happens.

 

Quite prepared to submit a claim with the small claims court.

[MARKWHEETY]

Hi All

 

If it helps flights can be rescheduled in the sense you are found the next available flight within the company resources (not always airlines often pay for you to travel on another carrier) to take you to your destination. If the company has placed you in hotels, paid for meals this means they have not abandoned you (ie cancelled the flight) they have rescheduled it (but this delay will still find them possibly liable for further compensation).

 

However, the airline has by this time had incredible expense to look after you , hotels etc and would have asked you if you want to travel the following day. If you refuse dthen it has been cancelled. If you have accepted and then taken the hotel etc you have been rescheduled.

 

Most airlines will work overtime to get you to your destination (I have worked for an airline that used to be subbed in when other airlines went tech) and I know just how expensive the whole costs are for bringing in another plane.

 

The AUC is there to rule generally on abuse of the system by airlines and to see if that the "ATC delay" was really that. However, I know most airlines will not anymore try to cover their tracks a delay for whatever reason is what it is, a delay for whatever reason..... The fine for misleading the situation is not worth the risk nowadays.