Refused boarding by Ryanair - MCOL - sorry it's long!

[refusedboarding]

Here is the back story:

 

Booked

11th September 2021

Travel Date

24th September 2021

Travelling      

2 fully vaccinated adults with vaccination certificates
1 unvaccinated 13 year old
1 unvaccinated 8 year old
Paperwork        

2 NHS vaccination certificates both expiring 11th October 2021
1 PCR negative test certificate for 13 year old
4 Spanish QR codes passenger locator forms

 

Story

We arrived at Birmingham Airport after having checked all entry requirements continuously in the run up to travelling. We were staying at the Novotel Birmingham Airport when we received an email at 5.45am on the day of travel  reminding us to check we had all the correct paperwork necessary to travel. The email contained a link to the Spanish Government website which stated that PCR tests for unvaccinated travellers need to be taken within 72 hours of arrival in Spain. We were due to arrive at 12.40pm on Friday 24th September and the date/time of swab was Tuesday 21st September at 15.30hrs which was 69 hours, giving us 3 hours comfort room within the 72 hour timescale. My parents reside in Fuerteventura so we are well versed with the rules and regulations.

 

There was one agent on duty at the boarding gate and we were the third party in the queue. A couple in front of us were denied boarding as they had failed to complete the Spanish QR codes and were unable to locate their proof of vaccination so this delayed the start of boarding. The Swissport agent checked our paperwork and asked us if we realised there had been a change in the rules in the past 24 hours and that PCR tests now had to be taken within 48 hours of arrival in Spain. We said that we were not aware and she then told us we could not travel using the PCR certificate we presented as it was outside the permitted timescale. She asked us to stand to one side whilst she boarded the other passengers.  When we asked her to call a supervisor or manager, she told us she would have to email them but “couldn’t guarantee one would come”. 

 

Our flight was due to depart at 8.30am and boarding did not commence until 8am, there was one agent alone managing the desk and by the time she had checked the entire queue, the gate was marked as closed. She then proceeded to show us “official correspondence” confirming that the rules were now 48 hours and not 72. We showed her various pieces of information, including the official government website for Spain, the UK government website and various links sent to us by Ryainair. The handling agent then told us she had made a note on our booking to say that we had the correct relevant paperwork and had been unaware of the change in rules regarding the timings which should make it easier to get a refund. We later discovered from Ryanair that the note on our reservation in fact states “the test results were out of time”.

 

We were then escorted out of the airport, along with the other couple refused boarding plus another gentleman who had been off-loaded from the flight. The humiliation of this was awful and made worse by having to console two very upset children, one of whom (the 13 year old) is autistic and was so upset to think that it was her test results which had caused us to be unable to travel.  We spend a lot of time in the run up to a trip discussing it with our daughter, we have to go over the plans, explaining what will happen and what she can expect. She has to be comfortable with the arrangements and any sudden change in arrangements is extremely distressing for her. This is why we always check and double check we have the correct paperwork in place so that we are confident of everything before we travel.

 

We were later made aware by a Swissport representative (Joanne) that there were other families who had been affected by this sudden rule change when we returned to the Swissport desk to enquire about the situation. Since this situation, it has been confirmed in an email from the Spanish government that there has been no such update and the rule of 72 hours for PCR tests still applies.

 

I started a MCOL on 6th June 2022, RA have defended the claim, claim has been transferred to our local court, we are awaiting case management directions.

 

Any advice for me? Is it good news the case has been transferred as I was under the impression that mostly the defendant gets to choose the court.

 

Any help welcomed!
 

[FTMDave]

That sounds horrific - especially for the children.

 

On what basis are Ryanair trying to defend?

[refusedboarding]

They are saying that the test should have been taken within 24 hours so are therefore disputing that we were given  incorrect information.

 

Our teen is autistic and the humiliation was just too much, coupled with the fact that we were flying out to surprise my mum whom we had not seen throughout lockdown, they were devastated

[FTMDave]

Well you seem to have made excellent progress going through the court system as far as getting the claim transferred to your local court, as well as gathering evidence including an e-mail form the Spanish government.

 

At some point you will get an order from the court with a hearing date, and 14 days before that you will have to file a Witness Statement outlining your side of the story.

 

I too went to Spain during QR/PLF time (as well as Germany, Cyprus, Croatia and Austria).  Most countries had sites where a constant updating of COVID rules for visitors were shown.  It should be fairly simple, if a little time consuming, to look up all the regulations for visitors to Spain in 2021 and dates when they changed, to show to the judge.

[refusedboarding]

I have all of that evidence, ironically, RA would always link to the Spanish government site which clearly stated 72 hours plus I have an email from the government confirming this. I am hoping RA will make us an offer of settlement. I am assuming it will cost them a fair whack to get a barrister to deepest, darkest West Wales

[FTMDave]

Well you look home and dry.  I'm bemused as to why they are even defending.  Surely it can't take much for them to look up the Spanish regulations for September 2021 and see you're right.

 

When you mention "make us an offer", do you mean you've opted for mediation?

[refusedboarding]

Yes we have opted for mediation

[FTMDave]

Well at mediation you should stick to your guns.  You have absolute proof that you're right and they're wrong.  You want payment in full.  Alternatively later at the court hearing you will point out to the judge their unreasonable behaviour in defending when there is no defence and request extra costs.

[refusedboarding]

FURTHER UPDATE we now have a hearing date, 16th December, at our local court. We have received their evidence pack which is a one page screenshot of their website advising travellers to check rules of destination country. I've submitted everything I have including a copy of the BOE, an email from the Spanish government,  etc.

 

Ryanair gave now asked for a remote hearing "due to lack of counsel availability" but I haven't seen a response from the court yet. They declined mediation, I'm still holding out gor a settlement prior to the hearing date.

 

A few questions...

• Can they offer a lesser settlement and would we be silly to refuse this?
• how close to the hearing data are they likely to offer a settlement if they choose that route?
• if the court agrees to a remote hearing, can I still attend in person?

Thanks in advance!

Louise

 

 

Edited December 5, 2022 by refusedboarding
Spelling!

[FTMDave]

I think this is excellent news.  Their case is rubbish.  You have clear proof you did check the rules of destination country and did everything right.

 

To answer your questions:

 

1.  Yes they can before the hearing, not during.  Whether a refusal is "silly" depends on how much they offer and how strong your case is.  You seem to have an extremely strong case and personally i would stick to my guns. 

 

2.  No idea.  You may well hear nothing.

 

3.  No, what the judge decides goes.

 

So am i right in understanding that you have submitted a Witness Statement with exhibits?

[refusedboarding]

 In answer to your question, yes I have submitted my witness statement with exhibits, these include:

1. my flight itinerary
2. email from RA with link to Spanish government website
3. screenshot of Spanish government website showing PCR test is required within72 hours 
4. PCR test result certificate with date and time clearly shown
5. copy of email from Spanish Government Travel Health team confirming 72 hours
6. copy of official BOE from Spain confirming timescale

 

Edited December 5, 2022 by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed

[refusedboarding]

They have asked for a virtual hearing as they don't have staff to travel, we have not heard anything from the court and the hearing is next Friday... any thoughts?

[dx100uk]

why don't you ring the court and ask?

because if they have changed it to a video hearing then it's usual you have to register phone numbers etc for that and also test things work by them giving you the portal details.

 

pers i doubt it.

 

dx

 

[refusedboarding]

I have rung the court and been advised that the hearing will still be in person. I have this afternoon received an email from the defendant outlining their costs to the sum of £1270.80. I haven't put in a breakdown of my claim, should I do that now? 

[BazzaS]

What track of the County Court has this been allocated to?

if small claims track, costs of £1270 would be ‘reaching’: how have they broken it down?

 

By all means put in for costs, but only those you can justify when asked!

[refusedboarding]

This is their breakdown

 

I have receipts for every item on my breakdown

 

These are the costs stated:

 

Counsel’s fee for advising on,
preparing for, and appearing
at hearing on 16 December
2022

£400+VAT for the
Hearing: £480
Travel expenses: £60
Total: £540

 

Solicitors 1. Defence - £350
(fixed fee) from
10/06/2022.
2. Please see attached
schedule for
27/10/2022.

£350 plus VAT: £420.00
£259.00 plus VAT:
£310.80

Edited December 13, 2022 by refusedboarding

[refusedboarding]

Oh and it's small claims track. Sorry what do you mean by "reaching"?

[BazzaS]

Personal detail (name) showing. Post reported so site task can hide it

Edited December 13, 2022 by BazzaS

[BazzaS]

“Reaching” as costs in small claims track are strictly limited.

Approx £100 for solicitors, and counsel (barristers!) fees for small claims track : no way judge should allow…….

I’d suggest they are trying (unreasonably) to scare you.

Edited December 13, 2022 by BazzaS

[refusedboarding]

Oh really? That's very interesting.

Do you think they might be trying to frighten me?

[BazzaS]

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27#27.14

CPR 27.14

counsel’s fees for small claims track?

you’d have to:

a) lose, and even then

b) have to have behaved unreasonably,

for them to stand a chance.

 

I suspect they are “Willy-waving”.

Bring it to the judge’s attention and wonder out loud if the person who attached the statement of truth to it was:

a) trying to mislead you, or

b) trying to take advantage of you being self-represented, or

c) they made a mistake by not appreciating the costs implications of the small claims track, but if this is the case, should their costs application be rejected in it’s entirety even if they win!

[refusedboarding]

OK so I need to do some "thinking out loud" on Friday. I am hoping the judge will allow my hubby as my McKenzie friend

 

I still can't believe they are sending a barrister to West Wales to defend a £700 claim

[BazzaS]

That’d be another grounds to oppose such a costs schedule : wholly disproportionate to the value of the claim.

 

Unless, of course, the barrister isn’t going to turn up, on the basis of “inability, as the application to have the case heard remotely was turned down”. Shocked, I’d be, if they went for such shenanigans!!

Edited December 13, 2022 by BazzaS

[refusedboarding]

The remote request hasn't been turned down, the judge just hasn't responded - is that the same thing?

 

I am swinging between being excited ti get into court to see what happens, and dreading that I have missed something and they smugly know they will win!

[FTMDave]

Bazza is right.  They are allowed about £50 legal costs.  They are trying to frighten you.