Flight Cancellation compensation

[Amethyst]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

''Jet2, Thomas Cook, Ryanair, Flybe, and Wizz Air had wanted Liverpool County Court to stay, or delay, one woman's claim over a delayed Jet2 flight, while a Dutch case on the same issue was heard in the European Court of Justice.

But the judge rejected this saying: "a line should now been drawn. Justice delayed is justice denied.’ ''


Good stuff Thanks supermac.

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

There is word going round that Jet2 may be starting to pay up in respect of 'stayed' court cases - I won't get over excited until I know more, as this is completely out of character for this lot - could it be the beginning of the end for this saga?

:gossip:

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

There is word going round that Jet2 may be starting to pay up in respect of 'stayed' court cases - I won't get over excited until I know more, as this is completely out of character for this lot - could it be the beginning of the end for this saga?

:gossip:

The latest development can be found here:
http://www.bottonline.co.uk/flight-c...but-ryanair-do

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

More comedy from Jet2:
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/...-10125713.html
They state “Jet2 strictly abides by court decisions and is acting in accordance with the law, not contrary to it.” I'm not sure when they started doing this, but it must have been very recently! They have appealed and ignored every court decision on this matter.

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

More on this one:
http://www.caa.co.uk/application.asp...etail&nid=2437
:juge:

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

For those who have had experience of Jet2.com, the CAA report will offer no surprises:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%201...s%20230315.pdf
In particular:
Airline Name
Jet2.com Ltd
2) UK airports where the airline operates from
3) Mechanisms through which information is provided to passengers about their
legal rights during disruption
a) How, when and where hard copy information about passenger rights is provided
b) Whether the airline used electronic media channels to distribute information to
passengers on their legal rights.
c) Other means of informing passengers of their legal rights
4) Airline procedures and processes for informing passengers of their legal rights
during disruption
a) Job role(s) or team(s) accountable for compliance with Regulation EC261.
b) Detail of manuals/instructions setting out procedures for airline/ground handling staff.
c) Details of any training provided to airline or ground handling staff on the procedures.
5) Airline procedures and processes for assessing compliance with the
requirement to inform passengers of their legal rights during disruption
a) Details of the ‘pre-disruption’ procedures and processes for ensuring compliance.
b) Details of the procedures and processes for assessing compliance during the disruption.
c) Details of the procedures and processes for assessing compliance after the disruption.
6) Airline procedures and processes for addressing issues with compliance with
the requirement to inform passengers of their legal rights during disruption
a) Details of the procedures and processes to ensure that the necessary action is taken to
address any issues identified
CAA comment
Jet2 – Below compliance standard
Passengers carried in 2013 5. 5 million
Estimated number of passengers affected by delays and cancellations 30,000
We have not received a contribution to the report from Jet2. We expect passengers will be
disappointed that Jet2 does not seem equipped to give passengers the information they are
legally entitled to during disruption. We have begun the legal phase of our enforcement process
using our powers under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002.

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

The second CAA report:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%201...t%20230315.pdf
The bit about Jet2.com says:
Jet2.com
1. Following the Jet2 v Huzar judgment the CAA published updated guidance (CAA List)
on the incidents that could be considered to be an ‘extraordinary circumstance’. Please
confirm that you apply this guidance when considering compensation claims.
We consider the list of extraordinary circumstances published on the CAA's website as well as
the wording of the EC Regulations and the relevant CJEU and English court decisions.
2. Are you paying passenger claims for compensation that fall within the scope of the Jet2 v
Huzar judgment?
We are paying claims for compensation where the sole cause of the delay is a technical defect
within the scope of the Jet2.com v Huzar judgment. Following the judgment of the Liverpool
County Court on 26 February 2015 in the case of Allen v Jet2.com we are not currently issuing
new applications to stay proceedings pending the outcome of van der Lans v KLM.
3. If you are not paying passenger claims, please explain what approach you are taking to
these claims and your reasoning for not paying.
Not applicable for the reasons given above.
4. The Dawson v Thomson Airways judgment confirmed that the limitation period in the UK
for taking a case to court in respect of the Denied Boarding Regulations is 6 years. Please
confirm that you apply this limitation period.
Jet2.com applies a contractual limitation period of two years as clearly set out in its conditions
of carriage, which are incorporated into every contract with passengers. The Dawson judgmentdid not consider the effect of contractual time limits which are incorporated into conditions of
carriage and only dealt with the question of the general limitation period. In Jet2.com’s case
there is an overriding contractual limitation period of two years. Further detail on the reasons for
Jet2.com’s approach are set out in paragraph 5 which follows.
5. If, for any reason, you apply a different limitation period, please explain what it is, how
you apply it in practice (for example through your Terms and Conditions), and why you
consider it is not in conflict with the Dawson v Thomson Airways judgment.
(a) The Court of Appeal in Dawson made it clear that the domestic law should apply to the
time limits in which claims for compensation pursuant to the Regulation should be made.As a matter of domestic English law, it is entirely permissible to have a contractual limitation
period for claims in contract or tort. Provided that the conditions of carriage are incorporated
into the contract with the passenger, and the period is not unreasonable, an airline has a
defence to a claim if it is commenced in the courts after the expiry of that shorter contractual
period. There is nothing in the Dawson case which states to the contrary.
Civil Aviation Authority 25
Responses received to CAA request for contributions
(b) Jet2.com's conditions of carriage, which are incorporated into every contract, provide for a
2 year contractual limitation period. A 2 year limitation period cannot be considered to be
unreasonable given that it is the same period as is provided for in the Montreal Convention in
respect of much more complex and serious causes of action. Indeed it is a generous period
when one considers that in a flight delay claim, the passenger immediately has all of the
information and evidence he or she needs to lodge a claim.
(c) Such 2 year contractual limitation periods have been upheld by the courts, for instance in the
cases of Pickard v Ryanair and Clissold v Ryanair. In both cases, the Claimants' claims were
dismissed as the claims had not been commenced within the adjudged "fairly imposed" two
year limitation period in accordance with the airline’s terms and conditions. In addition, the
Liverpool County Court, where the majority of "Flight Delay" claims are allocated, has struck
out claims of its own volition on the basis that, by entering into a contract with our client, the
passenger agreed, under the relevant clause of Terms and Conditions, that the limitation for
claims would be reduced to two years.
(d) For completeness, we note that it has been suggested recently that Article 15 of the
Regulation limits an airline's entitlement to agree a period shorter than the normal contractual
time limit. Article 15 does not have this effect. It prevents an airline from limiting or waiving
"obligations". The only relevant obligation in the Regulation is the obligation of the airline
to pay compensation in the sums set out in Article 7. Article 15 prevents an airline from
imposing a term which reduces the extent of its obligation to pay compensation; it does not
prevent it from setting a reasonable period for the lodgment of claims. We are unaware of
any court decision to the contrary.

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

http://www.theguardian.com/money/201...elayed-flights

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

Jet2 up to their old tricks again.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/h...#ixzz3bzFPQyGO

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/hol...s_mchannel=rss

What a bunch they are!

[supermac9]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

Settled!!
Cheque for £574 arrived just over two weeks ago, more that two years after I first raised this with them and endless letter tennis, but no legal action!
For information, this relates to the Jet2 flight LS597 from Newcastle to Faro on 25th August 2012, just in case anyone who was on that flight is reading this.

[basa48]

Re: Flight Cancellation compensation

Well done !!

Persistence does pay