Flight Delay Compensation

Flight Delay Compensation

I think you’ll have to agree with me when I say:

It’s REALLY frustrating when you have a flight delayed.

Sitting there waiting (that’s if you’re lucky enough to get a seat). Screaming kids in one ear. The airline is announcing further flight delays in the other.

Uncomfortable and irritated. Probably not what you had hoped for on your trip away?

The worst part:

The airline is going to do nothing about it.

Or is it?

Well, it turns out, under EU regulations 261/2004 you are entitled to both care and financial flight delay compensation in a variety of circumstances from delayed flight to those that are cancelled or even if you are denied boarding due to overbooking. Don’t let that fool you. Why would the airlines want to pay out £100’s and £1,000’s? The airlines themselves will at every turn try to fob you off with “extraordinary circumstances” or ignore it altogether.

For flight delay compensation. Here’s the deal:

1. Super Easy Step: Submit your details (in 5 minutes or less). Our system will both check compensation amounts and if you have an eligible claim.
2. Even Easier Step: Our team of travel delay experts will write a personalised claim letter to the airlines on your behalf. We will fight for your EU rights, and escalate to the regulator if necessary. We will even take your claim against the airline to court for you and cover all the costs of doing it.
3. The Final (and best) Step: Receive your flight delay compensation!

What are you waiting for?
See if you are able to claim for your flight delay today! Submit your claim.

Flight Delay Compensation – The Rules

(Don’t worry, our flight delay system automatically see’s if you qualify according to these rules)

 

When delayed by more than three hours or your flight’s cancelled, under EU regulation 261/2004 you are entitled to between £198.07 and £540 in compensation – as a result,  compensation can be paid out by the airline.

Use our online web form to make your claim and we will handle the entire claim for you. We know how to stop the airlines squirming out of paying and have all the latest on the court cases surrounding claims just like yours with the first-hand experience.

 

1. It is only for EU regulated flights

But what exactly does that mean? An EU flight is when the flight departed from an EU airport. Or the flight arrived at an EU airport on an EU carrier. Also included; airports in Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland.

So if your flight was delayed Heathrow to New York flight, this qualifies, regardless of the airline. For New York to Heathrow, you are entitled to compensation from the airline flying British Airways or Thomas Cook, but not on Emirates. This is because Thomas Cook and British Airways are EU based carriers.

 

2. You can make a flight delay claim back till 2010

EU Regulation 261/2004 came into force in February 2005. Theoretically, you can claim back that far – in practice; it’s extremely unlikely you’ll be able to go back further than 2010.

Due to the statute of limitations in the United Kingdom, if we need to take the airline to court to get the cash for you, then you can only go back six years.

 

3. It must be the airline’s fault

Now here’s the tricky one. You are only eligible to the flight delay compensation if the delay was something within the airline’s control. Consequently staffing problems and underbooking all count. Political unrest in a country or terrorism doesn’t count.

For example, staff illness is out of the airline’s control, while having the staff to cover such circumstances is within their control!

Guidelines created by European regulators outline scenarios where they believe passengers can claim compensation. New case law may invalidate some scenarios. Therefore it’s best to leave the work to us. Just use our flight delay compensation webpage and complete the forms.

 

4. To Claim: Delays must be over 3 hours. Announcement of cancellations must be within seven days or less of the scheduled departure

Compensation for delays is only due on flights arriving over three hours or more late. How much you are entitled to be determined by how long the delay is.

Importantly it’s about when you arrive, and the plane doors are open for passengers to disembark. Not when the wheels touch the tarmac and not when you leave.

Follows a ruling by the European Court of Justice in September 2014. Germanwings tried to argue that as its plane had touched down in aa time under three hours late. The passenger had no right to compensation. Their argument was unsuccessful.

Hence, if you’re on a flight that takes off 3 hours 30 minutes late. But land 2 hours 58 minutes late, you’re not over the 3-hour delay needed. As a result, you would not be eligible for flight delay compensation.

Flight delay compensation is available for every passenger on the flight. So a family of four, quadruple any claim amount. Although where a passenger travels free of charge, they cannot claim. A young child who has only paid a penny for their ticket can claim. The amount you’ll get in Sterling may fluctuate. Since flight delay compensation is an EU law it is calculated euros. Therefore, the exchange rate at the time the payment is made will affect it.

 

 

There are some circumstances where you may not meet the conditions of EU Regulation 261/2004 as outlined. However, it may still be worth trying to claim for some compensation. The Montreal Convention is another set of rules. The airlines have signed up to these and therefore you may be able to get compensation under that. So use our claim system today and one of our helpful team members can assist you.

WE MAKE CLAIMING EASY

What if the airline still says no to your flight delay compensation claim?

 

Some airlines are playing hardball with claims. Many reject claimants even when the CAA (Civil Aviation Authority) or other regulators state that you have a claim. The issue is, the airlines know the law, and claimants do not. It is also the airlines who investigate themselves. So may have an extremely biased view. Who wants to pay out of their pocket? Not the airlines that’s for sure!

 

• If the carrier rejects your initial claim, we will then take it to the regulator. Unfortunately, the next step is to take it to the small claims court. Don’t worry. Going to court isn’t all about judges and wigs, though – Judges are people too and usually very fair. You will not need to attend court and do not pay a penny to claim. We do that all for you as part of our flight delay compensation service.

• If the airline is ignoring your claim: The best way to force the carrier to deal with your request is to take it to court. It could be your claim has been delayed due to the ongoing legal battles. We may have a similar case to yours going to court where we expect a positive ruling, and it will help assist your claim, we may decide it’s best waiting for them. However, if your application is nearing the six-year time limit for taking court action, we will consider filing proceedings fast. Court claims which go over the 6-year limit while on hold will still be heard, the Ministry of Justice has confirmed.

Unfortunately for delayed flights, there’s no central database collating why. It’s the airline’s word against yours. However, the onus is on the airline to prove the cause of the delay. As a result, to back up your claim, try and recall whether the pilot told you anything. Or even by the airline and airport staff at the time of the delay. If you don’t think the airline has cited the exact cause of the delay, it may be worth challenging in court.

 

How we can take your case to court:

If your flight delay compensation claim is legitimate and the airlines are not cooperating, we will look to proceed to take the airline to court to find a favourable ruling.

 

• Booked flights in the UK? We can take your case through the courts in the relevant country you’re based in, regardless of where the carrier is based.

• Got a UK address for the airline? The European Consumer Centre states you can take an airline to court here, even if the head office is based elsewhere.

• The flight departed or arrived in the UK? The ECJ ruled in a flight cancellations case that you can take a carrier to court in the country the plane was due to depart or arrive. Regardless of where the airline is based.

 

If none of the above apply:

You can use the European Small Claims Procedure for cross-border complaints of claims for under €2,000.

You can only appeal a court decision within 21 days of it being made should it not go in your favour.

Flight Delay Compensation – Latest Landmark Ruling

 

 

I’ve never understood why they wear wigs in court.

One thing I do know is the bliss of a summer holiday. And the sad end to it.

Picture this:

Your walking across the warm pavement, the sun beating down on your back as it begins to set. Leaving the coach and the heavenly air con, the heat hits you as you casually stroll with your baggage in tow gliding across to the large sliding glass doors that effortlessly open. You can see your families smiling faces looking back at you; your golden glow is still apparent. The perfect holiday.

Or is it?

You then arrive in the queue to check-in for your return trip. You wait.

You are told to abandon the queue after an hour. Due to your flight delayed for a whopping 5 hours. 5 hours in which you turn into a hot sticky mess (though it takes less than 1). Uncomfortable and frustrated, the airline does little to explain.

This is how Michael Evans and his partner Julie Lee experienced travelling home from a beautiful holiday, only to have it swiftly ruined by a flight delay. Due to lighting striking the plane on an earlier flight.

After the lighting had hit, the plane landed in Gatwick safely. Basic repairs needed to be made to the wingtip before the flight could take off again. Monarch again safely made the full flight from Gatwick to Egypt after already completing the previous trip without issue.

 

The Ruling:

In Evans vs. Monarch Airlines, January 2016. A judge ruled that lightning strikes are NOT a valid excuse. Often used by airlines to avoid paying flight delay compensation.

Judge Clarke ruled in favour of passengers Michael Evans and Julie Lee. The appeal case of Evans v Monarch Airlines Ltd at Reading County Court. The Judge awarded the passengers €600 (£450) each for the five-hour flight delay.

It follows an appeal hearing at Luton County Court and is the leading case on the issue of lightning strikes.

The design of planes is such that when lightning mid-air hits them it is not considered a danger to passengers. The vast majority of aircraft that are struck by lightning arrive safely and on time without issue.

This results in delays when the plane lands. It is subject to mandatory safety checks. Also, the airline does not have relief aircraft in place to ensure passengers on any subsequent flights are not delayed.

In this case, Monarch did not have spare aircraft available at Gatwick or Egypt. Meaning passengers had to wait for the plane that had been struck by lightning to go through safety procedures in Gatwick.

 

Key Points:

• Judge ruled that lightning strikes are NOT an ‘extraordinary circumstances’ that may excuse airlines from paying flight delay compensation
• European Flight Delay Regulation EC 261/2004 dictates that €600 compensation is repaid to passengers delayed by three hours or more in the last six years.
• The Regulation does not provide an accurate list of extraordinary circumstances, leading to long court battles between airlines and passengers

 

How the judgement was made:

Mr Evans legal representative Matthew Mawdsley successfully argued:

“Aircraft fly through the skies. On rare occasion, they are struck by lightning. However, they are designed to withstand such lightning strikes, continue operating, reach their destination and then be investigated. Any repairs can then be carried out according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

“This isn’t extraordinary. It is entirely inherent in the normal exercise of the carrier’s activity, and that is what happened in this case.”

The Judge stated, “Damage caused by a lightning strike may well be an unexpected flight safety shortcoming, but that does not make it an exceptional circumstance… it is only an exceptional circumstance if it is not inherent in the ordinary exercise of the carrier’s activity.”

 

What does this mean for airlines?

With another case, added clarity. Flight delay law is relatively new. Case law has pushed direction as guidelines initially set up were far from explicit and detailed. Inevitably Evans vs. Monarch will be a much-cited case.

But really, has it taught us anything new?

No. While a situation may not be an airlines fault, they are expected to plan and deal with it accordingly in a reasonable manner.

• Should safety checks be mandatory? Yes.
• Was it made? Yes.
• Was it within Monarch’s power to mitigate such circumstances? Yes.

 

Monarch had two opportunities in which they could make up the delay time. They dictated the turnaround times of their aircraft at the airport. First after the lightning strike, and again when the plane landed in Egypt but they failed to do so. Not because they are slow and lacklustre, nor because the airport let them down.

In the world where competition is good for customers. Service quality is going up with prices going down. Monarch is trying to compete, as do all airlines. As such they have imposed a ridiculous turn around time on themselves that they are just failing to meet.

 

What is the solution to this you may ask?

Some would argue we are heading down a compensation culture route. Airlines will hedge their bets and ticket prices will soar. Any logical person would probably agree. Reading through with a fine tooth comb the terms and conditions. Not something the average person typically does.

The Statute of Limitation in the UK states that individuals have a 6-year time frame in which to make claims for legal proceedings, like flight delay compensation claims.

 

What the likes of Ryanair are doing is asking you to sign a contract that completely contradicts your rights under The Limitations Act 1980.

Some airlines have even added a surcharge to what you pay! Airlines are enormous, making millions of pounds each and every year. They feel they need to add a surcharge to the price of tickets to cover the cost of flight delay compensation claims. They then don’t pay out all of the surcharges made, as they stack it in their favour and deny eligible claims pocketing the difference as pure profit.

Ryanair charges passengers €2.50/£2.50 per ticket and states on its website: “The EU261 rules are clearly discriminatory in the way they are applied to airlines. By making airlines responsible for delays, cancellations and right of care expenses during force majeure events. It is unfair that airlines are obliged to provide meals and accommodation for passengers. Because governments close their airspace, or air traffic controllers walk off the job, or airports fail to clear their runways of snow.”

Ryanair fails to mention that the force majeure-clause provides them with an excuse never to pay out compensation! If a volcanic eruption or strike causes delays, compensation is simply not due.

 

What this means for you:

Airlines are one step closer to real accountability. In a market, where 241 million passengers flew out of the UK in the last year. Having a limited number of options on who to fly with, this can only be a good thing for consumers.

If you pop down your major local supermarket this weekend, and they have a single cashier called Lucy sitting behind their checkout, and 467 shoppers (the capacity of a Boeing 747) waiting in a queue, progress is going to be slow!

Now imagine they have the facilities, 20 shiny new tills. They have 15 staff members stacking the various shelves from frozen to dry, an army of security guards patrolling, along with a whole team of experienced fishmongers and butchers, yet they still only have little lonely Lucy on the till.

Taking time off ill or exhausted is inevitable for Lucy. Without being mean, Lucy is an airplane!

This is exactly what airlines are doing, working their planes like donkeys with little or no downtime. With such tight turnarounds, they have little time for repairs or checks. Having no backup plan or plane doesn’t help. Resulting in your infuriating flight delays. How long would you wait for lonely Lucy to get through the waves of people to finally serve you?

These flight claims aren’t the math terrorist incident. A math professor’s equation caused a scare.

It’s the expected and every day. It’s the delays and dilemmas of running a business, short staffing and illness. Wear and tear of machines. And weather.

Here’s the deal:

• Flight delay compensation is like an insurance policy, and you’re already paying for it.
• So why wouldn’t you claim? Submit your complaint and get paid.
• This ruling makes airlines more accountable. The more they pay out, the more they are given a sharp incentive to give passengers a service they deserve.

Flight Delay Compensation – Court challenges (They help your claim)

Some airlines have been fighting tooth and nail in court to try to reduce the number of passengers that can claim. Even putting claims on hold while they went to court. There are two big issues – whether you can claim for technical faults and how far back you can claim.

Here’s the latest:

1. The “technical fault is an extraordinary circumstance” argument – highest EU court confirms you CAN claim

Mechanical failures have long been an area of dispute for both passengers and airlines. A landmark ruling by the European Court of Justice in September 2015 appears to have finally handed victory to passengers.

The key point:

You CAN claim for technical problems; if extraordinary circumstances haven’t caused them. Component failure or general wear and tear should be considered normal technical difficulties. Not “extraordinary”.

However, you CAN’T claim if a manufacturer discovers a hidden defect, as this is outside the airline’s control.

The major developments:

• Jun 2014:  In Huzar v Jet2 The UK Court of Appeal ruled that you can claim for a technical problem that hasn’t been caused by “extraordinary circumstances.”  It ruled if reasons of a technical problem were “inherent in the standard exercise of the activity of the airline”; then it was within the airline’s control, therefore, pay compensation.

• Oct 2014: The Supreme Court – the highest court in the UK – refused to hear the Huzar v Jet2  after Jet2 tried to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision.

• Feb 2015: Many airlines are known to put cases on hold pending the outcome of a similar case. Van der Lans v KLM was being heard at the European Court of Justice. Whether carriers could put claims on hold pending this was tested at Liverpool County Court where the court ruled the three carriers involved in the claims – Jet2, Ryanair, and Wizz Air – couldn’t put them on hold.

• Sept 2015: In van der Lans v KLM the European Court of Justice confirmed that technical problems are not classed as “extraordinary circumstances,”. Therefore, passengers are entitled to claim compensation. The judgement cannot be appealed.

• Also in Sept 2015: The CAA considered taking legal action against Ryanair. The CAA stated it was “not satisfied” the airline was paying compensation for claims prompted by routine technical failures. The CAA has since stated Ryanair has given legal undertakings it will pay compensation for disruption caused by routine mechanical failures.

2. The “You can only go back two years” excuse from airlines

The key point here is under UK law:

You can claim for delays going back at least six years. Don’t listen if an airline says you can only go back two years.

Here’s what’s happened to date:

• Aug 2015: The CAA states Jet2 has agreed not to impose a two-year limit for passengers to make compensation claims. For refusing to consider claims regarding flight delays over two years old. Wizz Air has been referred to the Hungarian regulator.Jun 2014:  In the Dawson v Thomson case The UK Court of Appeal ruled that you can claim for delayed flights going back at least six years in England and Wales. The Montreal Convention is what Thomson used to argue it should only be two years.

• Oct 2014: The Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal of Dawson v Thomson.

• Aug 2015: Ryanair has been arguing separately that under its terms and conditions, passengers only have two years to claim. Goel & Trivedi v Ryanair this was put to the test where the judge ruled against Ryanair.

• Sept 2015: The CAA announced it was taking legal action against Ryanair. The airline is attempting to impose a contractual two-year time limit for passengers to issue compensation claims at court. The CAA has said Ryanair has given legal undertakings that it will not impose a period of two years for claims.
  

  The ‘extraordinary circumstances/lightning strike’ issue

• Sept 2013: Jager v easyJet Airline Company Limited

  In the case of Jager, the Claimant was flying between Gatwick and Nice. Her flight was delayed by 4 hours due to the aftermath of a flight that was diverted and delayed earlier in the day due to bad weather in Milan, Italy.

  The claimant argued that the regulations quite clearly state that poor weather is only an extraordinary circumstance where it affects the operation of the flight in question.

  Bad weather occurred earlier in the day, in Milan and did not influence any part of the Claimant’s actual flight. The Judge maintained that it was not extraordinary. Compensation in full plus interest and costs were awarded to the Claimant.

It’s also worth noting a separate court challenge on what exactly constitutes an extraordinary circumstance – this relates to the disruption caused following a lightning strike. A ruling by Reading County Court in Jan 2016, though not binding, could be persuasive in other cases.

It was argued; disruption following a lightning strike should not count as an extraordinary circumstance. Evans v Monarch Airlines Ltd. Passengers Michael Evans and Julie Lee were awarded €600 (£450) each. After lightning hit a flight earlier in the day, resulting in a five-hour delay after the disruption caused. To see our full analysis of this case you can view it here; latest landmark flight delay compensation ruling

 

Flight Delay Compensation Testimonials

Claim Example