 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@faithsdaddy, you may be able to access a solicitor via home / buildings insurance. Certainly I was able to for when I got knocked off my pedal bike and the woman was disputing liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Gaza wrote: |
| @faithsdaddy, can't see how SCGB Insurance can do that. As a minimum you are entitled to the "delay" payment specified in your policy document. |
£15 each, per day. £30 total- whoop de doo. Have submitted claim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| blahblahblah wrote: |
| PowderAdict wrote: |
EJ (and other airlines) usually go with 'Operational Reasons', which seems to be the catch all get out clause when they are too embarrassed to tell you the real reason. Since they told you it was cancelled due to staffing, you should have a solid claim.
. |
Good luck with them confirming that, I assume you don't have that in writing? You will be told that it was operational reasons, not staffing, and no money. |
"Operational reasons" is not a good enough excuse for not paying out. Nor (any more) is mechanical failure of the aircraft.
But they have a;ready accepted that they owe him the £250 compensation.
The issue now is claiming anything else he is entitled to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| faithsdaddy wrote: |
| Gaza wrote: |
| @faithsdaddy, you are entitled to €250 compensation for each passenger. |
Yep, worked that bit out. Other costs incurred;
- Train fare home
- Fuel cost of driving to and from Southend Airport
- Loss of apartment
- Loss of ski & boot hire
- Loss of use of lift pass
- Loss of annual leave
- Significant stress, etc. |
The only ones I think it likely you could win on are the first two.
They are not generally liable for any costs which are not directly foreseeable to an airline. So hotels as necessary between your intended flight and your actual one, transport as necessary between airport/hotels (or home if that is better than hotel), transport to alternative airport if replacing flight is from a different one.
But they will rarely be liable for the costs of pre-booked accommodation you can't use, or similar car hire or ski hire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| queen bodecia wrote: |
| Unfortunately, adverse weather, which can include a few flakes of snow, does qualify as 'exceptional circumstances' as I found out to my detriment. Bah! |
That is what they claimed, but they would very likely have lost if you took them to court on it.
Adverse Weather has to be bad enough to be "meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned" and if other airlines with similar aircraft were taking off, that is not likely to be considered sufficient.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| alex_heney wrote: |
| faithsdaddy wrote: |
| Gaza wrote: |
| @faithsdaddy, you are entitled to €250 compensation for each passenger. |
Yep, worked that bit out. Other costs incurred;
- Train fare home
- Fuel cost of driving to and from Southend Airport
- Loss of apartment
- Loss of ski & boot hire
- Loss of use of lift pass
- Loss of annual leave
- Significant stress, etc. |
The only ones I think it likely you could win on are the first two.
They are not generally liable for any costs which are not directly foreseeable to an airline. So hotels as necessary between your intended flight and your actual one, transport as necessary between airport/hotels (or home if that is better than hotel), transport to alternative airport if replacing flight is from a different one.
But they will rarely be liable for the costs of pre-booked accommodation you can't use, or similar car hire or ski hire. |
You may well be right (about the last bit), but I feel I shouldn't be out of pocket, when it's their fault 100%. Those costs are real, they cost me actual money and it's Easy Jet's fault. It would be nice if there was some clear information 'out there' about what I can and can't claim for. I'm prepared to take them to the small claims over it, but I wouldn't bother if I knew that no-one else had ever won in this situation.
I have had a couple of helpful mails from people, so I have that to go on. I'm REALLY surprised there isn't readily available info on this to be found on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@faithsdaddy, I'm afraid that for these bits you won't see a penny of compo :-
- Loss of apartment
- Loss of ski & boot hire
- Loss of use of lift pass
- Loss of annual leave
You may have lost the use of these elements but you haven't incurred any additional costs.
It is important to read the easyJet T&Cs. The sections I've pasted below absolve them from paying anything other than to what you are entitled i.e. compensation under the EU Regs. You have to agree to these T&Cs when you purchase the ticket so if you do end up in the Small Claims Court they easyJet will deny liability under these sections. You could try to agree that the terms are unfair under the Unfair Contract Terms Act but I think your chances if success there would be extremely limited.
| Quote: |
16.6 No Further Liability
Other than specified in these Terms and Conditions, We exclude all liability for any costs, expenses, losses or damages whatsoever that may arise in any way in connection with the carriage.
16.7 General
16.7.3 We shall not be liable for punitive, indirect or consequential damages of any nature whatsoever and howsoever arising. Unless expressly provided in these Terms and Conditions, nothing shall waive any exclusion or limitation of Our liability under the Convention or applicable laws and to the extent consistent with the Convention, in no event will Our obligations exceed any liability specified in these Terms and Conditions. |
The key here is to focus your efforts on what you are entitled to rather than what you think you are entitled to. The bullets above would all be classed as indirect or consequential losses and fall foul of 16.7.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Gaza wrote: |
@faithsdaddy, I'm afraid that for these bits you won't see a penny of compo :-
- Loss of apartment
- Loss of ski & boot hire
- Loss of use of lift pass
- Loss of annual leave
You may have lost the use of these elements but you haven't incurred any additional costs.
It is important to read the easyJet T&Cs. The sections I've pasted below absolve them from paying anything other than to what you are entitled i.e. compensation under the EU Regs. You have to agree to these T&Cs when you purchase the ticket so if you do end up in the Small Claims Court they easyJet will deny liability under these sections. You could try to agree that the terms are unfair under the Unfair Contract Terms Act but I think your chances if success there would be extremely limited.
| Quote: |
16.6 No Further Liability
Other than specified in these Terms and Conditions, We exclude all liability for any costs, expenses, losses or damages whatsoever that may arise in any way in connection with the carriage.
16.7 General
16.7.3 We shall not be liable for punitive, indirect or consequential damages of any nature whatsoever and howsoever arising. Unless expressly provided in these Terms and Conditions, nothing shall waive any exclusion or limitation of Our liability under the Convention or applicable laws and to the extent consistent with the Convention, in no event will Our obligations exceed any liability specified in these Terms and Conditions. |
The key here is to focus your efforts on what you are entitled to rather than what you think you are entitled to. The bullets above would all be classed as indirect or consequential losses and fall foul of 16.7.3 |
Ok. Do you think claiming for the missed transfer, fuel cost to Southend (@45p/ mile- round trip) and train ride home from Gatwick would be a goer?
Is there any leverage from the mishandling of 'article 9'?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, those are all direct costs that you incurred as a result of the cancellation. I'll be a bit pedantic; you are claiming for cost of the new transfer rather than the missed transfer. Don't give them an excuse to wriggle out of paying something.
Tis is from the easyJet website:-
| Quote: |
3. Right to care
Has your flight been delayed for more than 2 hours or cancelled without notice? If so you are entitled to:
a) meals and refreshments in proportion to the waiting time;
b) hotel accommodation and transport between the airport and the hotel, where a stay of one or more nights becomes necessary;
c) two telephone calls, or telex or fax messages, or emails.
Has your flight been delayed or cancelled before you arrive at the airport without notice to you? You are entitled to a) and c) above.
Have you had to postpone your flight to at least the day after the original flight departure time because of delay or re-routing? If so, you are entitled to b).
In the unlikely event it is not possible for easyJet to arrange care set out in this paragraph, easyJet will reimburse you for reasonable expenses upon application via the website. You will need to provide us with fully itemised receipts detailing the expense incurred. Please note that re-imbursement for alcohol will not be made. |
You could ask for a 'gesture of goodwill' for the lack of 'care' that they should have provided under Article 9; pointing out that they should have provided you with information on your rights but failed to do so. This in itself is a breach of the EU Regs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| GrahamN wrote: |
| Talking to one of the Gib airport staff...he said the Monarch pilots are mostly ex-RAF so will land in most anything, whereas the EJ crews are simply commercial-trained so nowhere near as competent. So it sounds like your problem may have been equipment - I think mine was just incompetent pilots. |
Maybe, or maybe EJ crews are put under less pressure by management to take risks with passengers lives than their Monarch counterparts? There have been many accidents, serious and otherwise where pressure from the airline on aircrew to avoid delays was sighted as a significant contributry factor. It's possible the forecast was for the winds to get worse and the EJ crew were able to take the risk-adverse decission not to take off until the forecast/risk was reduced while the Monarch crew felt they HAD to fly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
@alex_heney, the reason for the flight cancellation was actually staff shortages due to adverse weather. Manchester airport was open and operating, but short staffed due to people not having turned up to work due to snow. Which considering I got there, with luggage, across the Peak District and using public transport, is pretty poor to be honest. I have been advised by a solicitor that I have no claim as the circumstance of cancellation was 'adverse weather conditions'. To be honest I'm not that bothered, I was £90 out of pocket and I lost a day's skiing, so no big deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
but I feel I shouldn't be out of pocket, when it's their fault 100%
|
Which is why it is important to have good 'independent traveller' travel insurance when DIYing your trips.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| kat.ryb wrote: |
| Quote: |
but I feel I shouldn't be out of pocket, when it's their fault 100%
|
Which is why it is important to have good 'independent traveller' travel insurance when DIYing your trips. |
Can you give an example? Would they have offered compensation where the ski club didn't?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
Whenever anyone intentionally flames like this, I always wonder if they would be so rude to my face, or if they hide, cowardly, behind the anonymity of their keyboard. They would certainly get a reaction they didn't like were they to do so. Personally, I wouldn't be rude this way. I would offer help or say nothing. Unconstructive criticism brings nothing to the table.
|
Well, you DO seem very stressed. As a result of your stressful traveling, or if that's just you, who knows.
I did say it sounded rubbish and I hoped you got your cash back. If that's not supportive what more do you want. You weaken your argument with the airlines by trying to list 'significant stress' as something you should be compensated for.
BTW your elderly mum didn't have to get up at 2AM and get ill to drive you - you could have booked a taxi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Its going to be a pain in the bum trying to get cash out of them - to be successful you need to massively calm down and be in it for the long haul.
Remove the emotion from your complaints.
EJ don't care about your emotion. They just care about what they *legally* have to do and what they can get away with *not* doing. Think nice 'the little book of calm' thoughts 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| alex_heney wrote: |
| blahblahblah wrote: |
| PowderAdict wrote: |
EJ (and other airlines) usually go with 'Operational Reasons', which seems to be the catch all get out clause when they are too embarrassed to tell you the real reason. Since they told you it was cancelled due to staffing, you should have a solid claim.
. |
Good luck with them confirming that, I assume you don't have that in writing? You will be told that it was operational reasons, not staffing, and no money. |
"Operational reasons" is not a good enough excuse for not paying out. Nor (any more) is mechanical failure of the aircraft.
But they have a;ready accepted that they owe him the £250 compensation.
The issue now is claiming anything else he is entitled to. |
If this was down to staffing because of weather issues then so be it. C'est la vie! You cannot keep flight crew and planes flying when their hours are so strictly regulated. There is not an endless supply of aircraft with any airline. People are quick to blame airlines and "Queezyjet' or whatever you wish to call them, but we all do have or should have travel insurance. That is what it is for. Our flight was affected the same way with Thomson many years back. We were delayed 14 hrs and used out travel insurance. Lots of sceptical comments on here about pilots from various airlines which is all dribble and make no sense what so ever. Sh@t happens and airlines cannot control everything so stop blaming them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| emmaski wrote: |
| alex_heney wrote: |
| blahblahblah wrote: |
| PowderAdict wrote: |
EJ (and other airlines) usually go with 'Operational Reasons', which seems to be the catch all get out clause when they are too embarrassed to tell you the real reason. Since they told you it was cancelled due to staffing, you should have a solid claim.
. |
Good luck with them confirming that, I assume you don't have that in writing? You will be told that it was operational reasons, not staffing, and no money. |
"Operational reasons" is not a good enough excuse for not paying out. Nor (any more) is mechanical failure of the aircraft.
But they have a;ready accepted that they owe him the £250 compensation.
The issue now is claiming anything else he is entitled to. |
If this was down to staffing because of weather issues then so be it. C'est la vie! You cannot keep flight crew and planes flying when their hours are so strictly regulated. There is not an endless supply of aircraft with any airline. People are quick to blame airlines and "Queezyjet' or whatever you wish to call them, but we all do have or should have travel insurance. That is what it is for. Our flight was affected the same way with Thomson many years back. We were delayed 14 hrs and used out travel insurance. Lots of sceptical comments on here about pilots from various airlines which is all dribble and make no sense what so ever. Sh@t happens and airlines cannot control everything so stop blaming them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| emmaski wrote: |
| emmaski wrote: |
| alex_heney wrote: |
| blahblahblah wrote: |
| PowderAdict wrote: |
EJ (and other airlines) usually go with 'Operational Reasons', which seems to be the catch all get out clause when they are too embarrassed to tell you the real reason. Since they told you it was cancelled due to staffing, you should have a solid claim.
. |
Good luck with them confirming that, I assume you don't have that in writing? You will be told that it was operational reasons, not staffing, and no money. |
"Operational reasons" is not a good enough excuse for not paying out. Nor (any more) is mechanical failure of the aircraft.
But they have a;ready accepted that they owe him the £250 compensation.
The issue now is claiming anything else he is entitled to. |
If this was down to staffing because of weather issues then so be it. C'est la vie! You cannot keep flight crew and planes flying when their hours are so strictly regulated. There is not an endless supply of aircraft with any airline. People are quick to blame airlines and "Queezyjet' or whatever you wish to call them, but we all do have or should have travel insurance. That is what it is for. Our flight was affected the same way with Thomson many years back. We were delayed 14 hrs and used out travel insurance. Lots of sceptical comments on here about pilots from various airlines which is all dribble and make no sense what so ever. Sh@t happens and airlines cannot control everything so stop blaming them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I think we got that, @emmaski 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@queen bodecia, I'd get another solicitor as I think that one is talking nonsense. To be honest, you don't even need a solicitor. I have a 100% success record from direct contact with airlines.
If you went to court they would lose. Staff shortages due to weather would not be accepted as "extraordinary circumstances" especially if you can show that others made it to the airport.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gaza wrote: |
| If you went to court they would lose. Staff shortages due to weather would not be accepted as "extraordinary circumstances" especially if you can show that others made it to the airport. |
Good luck with that. Adverse weather conditions are quite clearly an extraodinary circumstance in the terms of the EU flight compensation rules.
OK, so the queen bodecia came from one place to another and made it OK. Unless she shares a house with half the employees of EJ that doesn't mean conditions where they were coming from were the same and that it was safe for them to get to work. Remember that EJ as an employer has a duty of care to it's staff. If a member of staff phones in to say road conditions on their journey to work would make travelling unsafe they could tell them they HAD to come in but if they had a weather-related accident on the way the EJ would be legally liable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Mjit, I disagree. The "Adverse Weather" get-out is about the ability of the aircraft to operate and not about staff getting to their base. The various judgements that have been handed down focus on things that are unavoidable and could not be considered as a risk to the normal day to day operation of the airline. For example; if bad weather was forecast what steps did the airline take to ensure that staff would be available to crew the aircraft e.g. did they bring them in ahead of the problems and put them up in hotels? It would be up to the airline to prove that they took all reasonable steps to ensure the flight operated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| queen bodecia wrote: |
| @alex_heney, the reason for the flight cancellation was actually staff shortages due to adverse weather. Manchester airport was open and operating, but short staffed due to people not having turned up to work due to snow. Which considering I got there, with luggage, across the Peak District and using public transport, is pretty poor to be honest. I have been advised by a solicitor that I have no claim as the circumstance of cancellation was 'adverse weather conditions'. To be honest I'm not that bothered, I was £90 out of pocket and I lost a day's skiing, so no big deal. |
Fair enough, but the solicitor was almost certainly wrong. Although prior to recent court judgments, many thought that way.
It is clear from the recent court judgments that a few staff members not turning up (for whatever reason) is not enough to classify as "exceptional circumstances" as they should have backup plans in place with standby staff.
And yes, we all know that airlines running on very small profit margins can't afford as many standby staff as would be needed, but if they don't, then they can't claim "exceptional circumstances" when it comes back to bite them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mjit wrote: |
| Gaza wrote: |
| If you went to court they would lose. Staff shortages due to weather would not be accepted as "extraordinary circumstances" especially if you can show that others made it to the airport. |
Good luck with that. Adverse weather conditions are quite clearly an extraodinary circumstance in the terms of the EU flight compensation rules.
OK, so the queen bodecia came from one place to another and made it OK. Unless she shares a house with half the employees of EJ that doesn't mean conditions where they were coming from were the same and that it was safe for them to get to work. Remember that EJ as an employer has a duty of care to it's staff. If a member of staff phones in to say road conditions on their journey to work would make travelling unsafe they could tell them they HAD to come in but if they had a weather-related accident on the way the EJ would be legally liable. |
As I said above, "Adverse weather conditions" are only an extraordinary circumstance if they are such that they are "meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned" (That phrase is a direct quote from an EU page explaining your rights).
That doesn't mean "incompatible with some staff reaching the airport". It means the aeroplane would not be able to take off or land safely even if appropriate staff were on board. The only time staffing issues is a valid excuse is if it is something like a strike called at very short notice, meaning ALL relevant staff are unavailable with virtually no warning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| faithsdaddy wrote: |
| Quick update- Ski Club insurance have washed their hands of me. All I asked for was for the 1/2 hour solicitor consultation, which is mentioned as a benefit on their policy. |
Have you checked you contents / buildings policy for "family legal protection" you should be able to get that through that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
It was Lufthansa, not Easyjet. Yes I could have claimed on my travel insurance, but I didn't see the point when I was only £90 out of pocket and the excess is £50. There were 12 cancellations at Manchester that day, and all were attributed to 'adverse weather conditions' so no claims acceptable against any airlines. The customer information there did specify they had staff shortgages, but I suspect clearing the runway of snow and de-icing planes forced the number of cancellations.
I've binned all the receipts as soon as I heard I would have no claim against the airline. I'm not bothered now, it's done, these things happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| queen bodecia wrote: |
I've binned all the receipts as soon as I heard I would have no claim against the airline. I'm not bothered now, it's done, these things happen. |
Very sensible attitude. For the amount you were out of pocket, it really isn't worth stressing over too much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@alex_heney, + 1.
We claimed for our late Monarch flight. They said no. OH then wrote in with all the evidence from the flight-tracker website to show that whilst our plane was circling round and finally flying off to another airport, several others, including one of the same type, had taken off and landed, despite the so-called "low cloud". Monarch replied, no means no, don't write again because we won't answer. Now, I was a bit cross at their attitude but to me, life's too short and taking people to court too stressful so I let it go. OH, however, still has the paperwork and it's now over two years ago. He still says he's going to "do something"!  
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@maggi, ah yes, my husband is very similar when he says he is "going to do something" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@faithsdaddy, shocked at apparent unsupportive SCGB insurance response given the poor service and aftercare you suffered. That may be worth a separate thread to warn snowHeads. However.. back to your claim.
No doubt you have solid technical case for more compensation. I've won about 5 similar cases over the years, most recently 2015. In my experience, the key ingredient was bloody-minded persistence. Airlines and TOs nearly all try to grind you down. Just play the long game. Everything in writing. Keep correspondence factual and short. Plenty free online advice available. Many supportive snowHeads will offer practical help too. Either on Forum or PM if you prefer.
Noli illegitimi carborundum!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
