MCOL...What next?
Discussion
My flight was delayed by 3.5 hours early September due to a technical fault with the plane.
I contacted the airline regarding compensation but they refused that they owed it. Got fed up of trying to discuss it with them to issued them a NBA. They didnt respond in 14 days so i opened a MCOL case
Just found out today that they have part admitted from checking the online portal. I havent been given any further information and i'm curious as to why they have part admitted.
Can anyone provide an insight as to why they've only part admitted? Also what happens now regarding the case? Will I be going to a court?
I contacted the airline regarding compensation but they refused that they owed it. Got fed up of trying to discuss it with them to issued them a NBA. They didnt respond in 14 days so i opened a MCOL case
Just found out today that they have part admitted from checking the online portal. I havent been given any further information and i'm curious as to why they have part admitted.
Can anyone provide an insight as to why they've only part admitted? Also what happens now regarding the case? Will I be going to a court?
craigsup said:
Breadvan72 said:
After reading this post I would really like ISIS to come over right now and kill us all. I give up.
Lets hope they kill you for making such an insensitive comment considering the recent happenings around the world. Prick. This thread is not going to go the way you thought it might.
OP calm down.
Now just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
Now just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
FiF said:
OP calm down.
Now just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
Its not really a point of my holiday being ruined - i worded that wrong, except that i lost time on my first day, plus the inconvience of late arrival - organising transport and accommodation etc. Now just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
There is an EU law stating any flight delayed by 3 hours or more which is not an exceptional circumstance is due compensation.
The fact the airline feels they can ignore this law is the reason i've opened the MCOL case.
This thread was simply to find out what will happen now theyve only part admitted yet people have taken it upon themselves to turn it onto abuse and unuseful comments
Edited by craigsup on Saturday 14th November 22:45
Was it a European flight greater than 1500km?
Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to f
k off.
If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to f
k off. If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
FiF said:
OP calm down.
Now just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
None of that sNow just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
t is relevant.Only relevant information is whether flight was in EU, distance of flight and length of delay.
Price of fare irrelevant. Whether holiday was ruined or not is irrelevant.
johnfm said:
Was it a European flight greater than 1500km?
Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to fk off.
If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
Thank you, finally someone that understands. Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to f
k off. If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
Yes it was over 1500km - falls under the 400 euro category. I was delayed by 3 hours 29 minutes.
As i said they have part admitted. But why only part? Also what happens with the claim noe?
BertBert said:
craigsup said:
...due to a technical fault
craigsup said:
...which is not an exceptional circumstance...
As a technical fault is not a normal circumstance, is not an exceptional circumstance?And certainly a first world problem.
Bert
Re: first world, I don;t know much about you. Maybe you get free money from a magic money tree or a generous aunt. I don't. Maybe the OP doesn't either. So when I use my taxed, hard earned money to buy a service and the service provider doesn't provide what I paid for, I get a bit pissed off. It seems so many people get let down by airline delays that the EU implemented a compensation scheme in order to keep the airlines from taking the piss. That is a good thing.
craigsup said:
johnfm said:
Was it a European flight greater than 1500km?
Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to fk off.
If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
Thank you, finally someone that understands. Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to f
k off. If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
Yes it was over 1500km - falls under the 400 euro category. I was delayed by 3 hours 29 minutes.
As i said they have part admitted. But why only part? Also what happens with the claim noe?
Ideally, they fail to defend, fail to pay and then you pay to get bailiffs to take goods to the value of the debt plus costs from their head office!!
johnfm said:
Was it a European flight greater than 1500km?
Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to fk off.
If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
How dare you bring fact and sensibility to this thread! Begone ye!Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to f
k off. If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
JustinP1 said:
johnfm said:
Was it a European flight greater than 1500km?
Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to fk off.
If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
How dare you bring fact and sensibility to this thread! Begone ye!Was it delayed by more than 3hrs (seems so)?
If so, OP has a valid claim for his delay and I join him in calling you pricks and telling you to f
k off. If, however, those conditions are not met, I join you in saying 'this thread isn't going as the OP had hoped'.
FAOD, there is nothing at all wrong in a consumer seeking compensation when they have paid for something and don't get it.
There are levels of unservicability of commercial aircraft. Airlines use some discretion in deciding when an aircraft should not fly due to technical faults.
Now would you rather wait 3 hours for a minor identified fault to be fixed, or fly with the fault still existing.
The commercial pressures on flight crews and ground engineers to allow aircraft to fly will simply increase if this sort of claim is repeated a lot. Not ideal really.
Now would you rather wait 3 hours for a minor identified fault to be fixed, or fly with the fault still existing.
The commercial pressures on flight crews and ground engineers to allow aircraft to fly will simply increase if this sort of claim is repeated a lot. Not ideal really.
Cooperman said:
There are levels of unservicability of commercial aircraft. Airlines use some discretion in deciding when an aircraft should not fly due to technical faults.
Now would you rather wait 3 hours for a minor identified fault to be fixed, or fly with the fault still existing.
The commercial pressures on flight crews and ground engineers to allow aircraft to fly will simply increase if this sort of claim is repeated a lot. Not ideal really.
Think of the children!Now would you rather wait 3 hours for a minor identified fault to be fixed, or fly with the fault still existing.
The commercial pressures on flight crews and ground engineers to allow aircraft to fly will simply increase if this sort of claim is repeated a lot. Not ideal really.
I've been stuck in eastern Europe, finding out at 10am that my 3pm flight could not fly due to 'technical difficulties'.
Everyone on that flight got bumped to the later circa 10pm flight. s
t, I thought - it's going to be rammed. How silly my presumption was proven when it was a tiny four seat width plane - with about a dozen people on it. It was sheer luck for them that the big plane on the earlier flight had 'technical difficulties' - that saved them a lot of money!
johnfm said:
FiF said:
OP calm down.
Now just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
None of that sNow just to allow the good citizens to make a judgement, how long was the flight time per the schedule, how much was the fare and why was your holiday ruined. Think of it as beginning to muster your argument to the court.
Just trying to understand the background and defuse the thread.
t is relevant.Only relevant information is whether flight was in EU, distance of flight and length of delay.
Price of fare irrelevant. Whether holiday was ruined or not is irrelevant.
We've already had an admission that it did not actually ruin his holiday but caused him a bit of inconvenience. So what else isn't quite as presented is my next thought.
The next one is thinking about the context of compensation vs fare in an industry where fares are already cut back is relevant to a wider understanding of the situation. Maybe not the mcol bit but others can give better advice on that.
Anyway you've used the "soz bit pissed" excuse so on your way.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff