Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for that. I will give them till Tuesday. Thanks for your help, very much appreciated. 
    • Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted. Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something. When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!
    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
  • 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

ryanair:change of schedule


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5144 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

:mad:hi.any help much appreciated.

i recently booked flights with ryanair.flght 1:uk to france,flight 2 france to spain.i received a email from ryanair telling me that the schedule for flight 2 had been changed.it now leaves before flight 2 leaves the uk.

i was offered a refund for flight 2 but not for flight 1(which is obviously of no use to me now).

they do also have direct flights available either the day before or the day after(these are however much more expensive than the sum of my 2 original bookings).

do ryanair have any obligation either a:to offer me a direct flight or b;to reimburse me for both flights.

any advice on my rights and/or a decent contact at ryanair to seek resolution would be brilliant.

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, this has happened to us as well, but only with one Ryanair flight and no connecting one. I understand your problem, but don't know the answer, sorry.

 

Did you book both fllights at the same time? I'd hazard a guess that it could help your case. Also, do Ryanair have a flight on the day before maybe, if that helps? I mean to the French airport.

 

Where do you want to get to in France, if you want to tell us?

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When was the flight booked?

 

A consumer owns the right cancel a distance contract under section 10 of the Distance Selling Regulations, within a cancellation period of seven working days beginning with the day after the day on which the contract is concluded.

Statutory Instrument 2000 No. 2334

 

Otherwise, you need to refer to EU Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 :

 

EUR-Lex - 32004R0261 - EN

 

According to Article 14

 

"An operating air carrier denying boarding or cancelling a flight shall provide each passenger affected with a written notice setting out the rules for compensation and assistance in line with this Regulation."

 

Did Ryanair do that?

 

If not, a prosecution of the offence is possible under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, in so far as "it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.".

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's very interesting, perplexity. When we were caught in this last year, when Ryanair started tinkering with all the times and days of flights, we were only offered a refund. And it took 2-3 weeks to be credited to us, even though we had to pay for a new flight straight away.

 

So if you booked early and got a good fare, you could be re-booking much nearer to the date of the flight and pay quite a bit more........

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is hardly a secret that the idea is to suck in the suckers with the cheaper fares in order to steer toward an extra cost once they've taken the time off work to commit to a course of action, etcetera.

 

The Terms of the Unfair Trading Regulations allow for a remarkable range of activities to be prosecuted as offences but the legislation is recent, already overdue when it came to force so the power that it grants is not yet so widely appreciated, which is to regret that a prosecution is not going to happen before the fuss is made to wake them all up.

 

A good local Trading Standards office may be worth a try, if there is such a thing as a good one, rather than the OFT or the The Air Transport Users Council. if Ryanair were scared of them none of this would be happening to start with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should be better off to complain about a business elswhere in Europe because it gives the choice of legislation, home or abroad, and no theoretical restriction apart from the complication!

 

Within the European Union "A consumer may bring proceedings against the other party to a contract either in the courts of the Member State in which that party is domiciled or in the courts for the place where the consumer is domiciled."

 

(c.f. Article 16) EUR-Lex - 32001R0044 - EN

 

In any case a European Union Regulation applies directly, as if it were the law of a member state, and section 212(2) of the Enterprise Act provides that:

 

The laws, regulations or administrative provisions of an EEA State which give effect to a listed Directive provide additional permitted protections if—

 

(a) they provide protection for consumers which is in addition to the minimum protection required by the Directive concerned, and

(b) such additional protection is permitted by that Directive.

 

Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40)

 

which applies in effect to the Unfair Trading Regulations.

 

 

Section 210 of the Enterprise Act also insists that

 

"For the purposes of a domestic infringement it is immaterial whether a person supplying goods or services has a place of business in the United Kingdom",

 

a domestic infringement being a matter covered by UK law but not by the EU Consumer Protection Legislation.

 

What more could you want?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is as well to be prepared because it is not unknown for a Trading Standards Officer to say that something can't be done when it can.

 

We had a Ryanair flight from Italy cancelled because of fog, and they failed to stick to the rquirements of the Regulations, the purpose of which is above all else to prevent the event of travellers sleeping rough in an airport foyer overnight. That is what happened to some of them, short of the ready money to book into a Hotel.

 

Ryanair eventually refunded our extra hotel and travel cost but I never got around to complaining about the rest of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they have now told me that they are a point to point airline and don't offer connecting flights.so although will fully refund me for the changed flight im am stuck having to pay for the first one which i cant use as well as my return flight.

OTHERS BEWARE.

I have spent a total of £450 on flights which are now useless and entitled to a refund of about £60!!!

Thanks ryanair!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Ryanair conform to the terms of the Regulations?

 

Article 5

Cancellation

1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:

(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8; and

(b) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 9(1)(a) and 9(2), as well as, in event of re-routing when the reasonably expected time of departure of the new flight is at least the day after the departure as it was planned for the cancelled flight, the assistance specified in Article 9(1)(b) and 9(1)©; and

© have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7, unless:

(i) they are informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departure; or

(ii) they are informed of the cancellation between two weeks and seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than two hours before the scheduled time of departure and to reach their final destination less than four hours after the scheduled time of arrival; or

(iii) they are informed of the cancellation less than seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure and to reach their final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival.

Article 8

Right to reimbursement or re-routing

1. Where reference is made to this Article, passengers shall be offered the choice between:

(a) - reimbursement within seven days, by the means provided for in Article 7(3), of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought, for the part or parts of the journey not made, and for the part or parts already made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to the passenger's original travel plan, together with, when relevant,

- a return flight to the first point of departure, at the earliest opportunity;

(b) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity; or

© re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at a later date at the passenger's convenience, subject to availability of seats.

Article 8 refers to the "passenger's original travel plan", so I would not put up with Ryanair's "point to point" nonsense.

 

EUR-Lex - 32004R0261 - EN

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all so alarming, so thanks for alerting us to it.

 

Is the possibility covered by the small print, the terms and conditions of Ryanair, that the departure time of a flight may be changed by ... how much exactly?

 

If it allows for a change of several hours, I think it a dubious term, and if there is no such provision the alteration is what I would call a cancellation. If you sued Ryanair I doubt that a judge would stand for it as anything other than a cancellation if it exceeds the two hours specified by Article 5 whereby the re-routing, has to allow the traveller to depart "no more than two hours before the scheduled time of departure".

 

On the other hand, if you failed to leave as much as 2 hours to spare, to connect your flights, that would be seen as reckless. UK Airlines advise travellers to check in well before the departure time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks again and all credit to the lovely guy i spoke to at ryanair today who rebooked me on a direct flight foc although this was far more expensive!

just spoke to the right person today maybe.

no questions asked a no need to get stroppy!

thanks ryanair!!!

and perplexity!

Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go!

 

With all said and done Ryanair's cheap flights are a cheap way to advertise, relying on word of mouth etcetera to put the idea about that their deals are the best.

 

It is thus in their interest as much as ours that their reputation as the World leaders in doing whatver it takes to cut the cost is not overdone, with regard to whatever it takes.

 

We survived our experience at Treviso Airport intact, because I persuaded the wife to proceed to a Hotel, confident that Rayanair would eventually have to pay for that. She was going to rough it for the night in the foyer, which would not have been fun!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...