The one and only refund thread [READ MOD NOTE BEFORE POSTING]!

Technocentral wrote: »

Thanks, 10 days after my ulsterbank chargeback they just emailed me to say that I hadn't provided them with all information even though I filled in every section they originally asked:

"Please check the following list of information for what we already have on file ✓ and what we still need from you ◯. We need to have your response within 14 calendar days, should any of the information requested not be available to you please tell us why.


◯ The full terms and conditions of the purchase

◯ Copy of the invoice, receipt or order confirmation

◯ Copies of any e-mail or letter correspondence between yourself and the retailer (if you have only spoken over the phone or in person, please tell us what was said)

Am I supposed to paste 200 pages of Ryanairs terms and conditions?!!

1. No Reasonable Cause of Action and/or Frivolous and/or Vexatious
1.1. It is the Respondent’s case that the only remedy to this claim is for the claim to be dismissed as unmeritorious and unsustainable in law.
1.2. The Respondent will set out below each of the grounds upon which it seeks to rely and asks the Court to dismiss this claim in advance of the Respondent incurring unnecessary and significant costs in having to mount a full defence to this claim.
1.3. The Respondent refers to District Court Rules, Order 47B (7) wherein the Claimant may discontinue a small claim proceeding “… at any time before the small claim proceeding has been referred to the Court without the permission of the Court or the consent of the other parties”.
1.4. The Respondent requests that the Claimant, on the grounds set out below, immediately withdraw the claim as filed and notwithstanding paragraph 1.3 above, avers its consent to any such application by the Claimant.
1.5. In circumstances where the Claimant refuses to withdraw the claim, the
Respondent will seek to reply upon The Rules of the Superior Court, and in particular Order 19, Rule 28 wherein it is stated that (emphasis added):
“28. The Court may order any pleading to be struck out, on the ground that it
discloses no reasonable cause of action or answer and in any such case or in case of the action or defence being shown by the pleadings to be frivolous or vexatious, the Court may order the action to be stayed or dismissed, or judgement to be entered accordingly, as may be just.”
It is the Respondent’s case, and as set out in full detail below, that the claim as pleaded is frivolous or vexatious, in their legal definition1 (emphasis added):
“… It is merely a question of saying that so far as the plaintiff is concerned if he has no reasonable chance of succeeding then the law says that it is frivolous to bring the case… Similarly, it is a hardship on the defendant to have to take steps to defend something which cannot succeed and the law calls that vexatious”.
1.6. It is the Respondent case that this extends beyond the drafting failures of the lay litigant and that the Claimant is bound to fail as the issues in composite, as set out below, extend beyond the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court.
1.7. Having regards to the seriousness of the request to dismiss the claim, the Respondent now sets out below the sufficient grounds upon which it makes this application for the claim to be dismissed.
2 Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 (Act 2 of 2020)


2. Claim application not properly pleaded
2.1. It is the Respondent’s case that while it has at times, pre- the COVID19 legislation2 and in cases where the claimant is a lay litigant, accepted claims filed and served wherein the claim was not properly particularised and/or pleaded, the Respondent is no longer
physically in a position to do so in the circumstances of this case and as set out below.
2.2. It appears to the Respondent that the Claimant’s claim, as pleaded, is not properly particularised thereby not allowing the Respondent to know the full claim made against it.
2.3. The Claimant failed to confirm and evidence his compliance with article 15.2 of the general terms and conditions of carriage (“GTCC”).
2.4. The Claimant failed to provide any statement of claim from which the Respondent can know the details of claim it has to meet.
2.5. The Claimant failed to evidence the value of the claim.
2.6. The Claimant failed to particular all claimants to the claim by failing to provide full and proper particulars of other passengers on whose behalf he appears to have filed the claim, being passengers on the same booking.
2.7. The Claimant failed to provide evidence of the alleged cancellation or failed to make any pleadings in relation to these pertinent details.
2.8. The claim application is completely devoid of pleadings and/or evidence. This failure on the part of the Claimant creates a server disadvantage against the Respondent and this situation cannot be accepted irrespective of the lay litigant status of the Claimant.


3. Abuse of Process
3.1. Without prejudice to the above, the Respondent further replies that the Claimant in bringing these proceedings and in the form they have been brought is acting in a manner that the Respondent can consider in no other way but as being an abuse of the Court’s process.
3.2. It is the Respondent’s case that the Claimant has not evidenced that he applied for a refund nor has he pleaded the details of any alleged refund application made to the Respondent.
3.3. The Respondent is operating in an environment of Government mandated and enforced “stay at home” quarantining in place throughout its main centres for customer services operations and therefore the Respondent has reduced capabilities due to the mandated working conditions under the Covid19 legislation. The Claimant is, by failing to properly plead and evidence the claim, causing an unnecessary and improper burden for the Respondent in circumstances where the Respondent would be forced to carry out a full investigation on its end in order to interpret and/or “guess” the
case being made against it.
3.4. It is the Respondent’s case that the claim as filed is frivolous and vexations for this reason as it must fail where there is no evidence or pleading whatsoever of any claim against the Respondent.
3.5. In addition to this, the Respondent will further elucidate below the grounds upon which allowing the Claimant to amend the claim will not save the claim.


4. Claim not maintainable in law
4.1. It is the Respondent’s case that the Claimant claim is not maintainable in law in circumstances where the only claim that could, and it is denied that this claim has been made for the reasons set out above, be made against the Respondent is that:
4.1.1. The Respondent breached article 8 of Regulation EU261/2004 by failing to offer a rerouting or a refund for the cancelled flight; and/or
4.1.2. The Respondent failed to refund the Claimant within 7 days.
4.2. Again, no pleading and/or evidence have been provided however the Respondent notes as below.
4.3. It appears to the Respondent that the only reason the Claimant would not have been offered a refund is if it provided incorrect and/or invalid contact details when making the flight booking thereby the communications sent by the Respondent were not received; or
4.4. The Claimant has received the communication however he has not applied for a refund or reroute, which is clearly set out in the automatic email that is sent out on every booking wherein the flight has been cancelled.
4.5. It is the Respondent’s case that it has a very specialised procedure in place, to the best of its abilities and resources and in compliance with all applicable laws, and therefore the Claimant’s apparent failure to comply with article 15.2 is a breach of the agreed GTCCs by the Claimant and the claim is therefore not actionable against the Respondent.
4.6. The Respondents asks the Claimant to withdraw the claim made against it and to comply with the agreed GTCCs. In the absence of evidence from the Claimant that he did comply, the Respondent asks the Court to dismiss the claim.
4.7. For reasons set out below, the Respondent will address part two of any potential claim, namely the 7 days payment.


5. Offers made in compliance with all applicable law
5.1. It is the Respondent’s case that each passenger, including the Claimant, who has a valid booking on an impacted flight at the time of the event causing the cancellation receives a notification from the Respondent to the email address registered on the booking, informing each passenger of their rights and offering them a travel credit voucher, a flight move or a refund. [Tab 13]
5.2. The document at Tab 1, clearly sets out that refunds are an option and if selected the claim for a refund will be queued.
5.3. The Respondent offers travel credit vouchers and free moves as these are automated processes that can be done through the online systems by the passengers themselves and thereby leaving capacity in the Respondent’s customer services staff to deal with the refund applications.
5.4. The Respondent has kept refunds in the fore of its mind in compliance with the Regulation whereby it is the Respondent’s case that:
5.4.1. Travel credit vouchers can be declined, and a refund requested; and
5.4.2. Where travel credit vouchers are accepted however ultimately, they are not used within twelve months, the refund option remains available as a special
consideration in these circumstances and the booking will be queued for a refund on the expiry of the twelve month time limit for use of the travel credit voucher.
5.5. It is public knowledge that refunds are being processed by the Respondent. The event of extraordinary circumstances that caused the cancellations is still ongoing and constantly evolving. In response to this, the Respondent is:
5.5.1. continuously issuing press releases to the media;
5.5.2. conducting interviews with news outlets;
5.5.3. issuing updates to passengers directly;
5.5.4. working with the Government and other member states; and
5.5.5. has a page on its website dedicated to the Covid-19 event, which is constantly updated and is available in multiple language4.
3 Redacted for privacy and emphasis added.
4 https://www.ryanair.com/ie/en/useful-info/disruptions-and-refunds/coronavirus-covid-19
5.6. The Respondent is processing over 1,000 times the normal volume of cancellations and is doing so in an environment where the Respondent has 75% fewer staff available to process refunds.
5.7. The Respondent provides full transparency at all time that the refund option, if availed of by the passengers, will be honoured however the timeframe within which they can comply is not within its control as they are subject to and affected by the Government mandated restrictions namely that the Respondent’s customer care agents, as with all other non-essential works nationally, are required to work from home in order to limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus. This has caused a currently insurmountable obstacle in the form of payment security restrictions which prevent the Respondent from processing refunds in the timely manner that it does under normal circumstances due to the undeniable change in working facilities such as data
security, sensitive data transmission, at home facilities and resources of the financial customer services teams. The in-office conditions and structures cannot realistically be replicated in at-home environments and therefore creating a fully disclosed delay in process refund claims. This situation was not envisaged when the EU261 Regulation was being drafted.
5.8. Furthermore, the Respondent has implemented forward thinking strategies to protect the rights of its customers in circumstances where if a passenger, including the Claimant, opts for and receives a travel credit voucher and they do not or cannot use the travel credit voucher within its twelve-month life the Respondent will automatically refund the monies to the passenger at the expiry of the 12 months. The end date of the travel chaos and uncertainty is not known and the Respondent has put this additional security in place for the passengers comfort and to protect their rights as best as the current situation allows.
5.9. The Respondent is taking and has made every consideration open to it at this time and in the circumstances under which it must safely and in compliance with national and international laws carry out this work.
5.10. It is the Respondent’s case that this is not an Irish but a European and International situation and the harmony of the application of the relevant laws, including Regulation EU261, is a paramount consideration and one that falls outside of the remit of the District Court Small Claims Procedure, in these circumstances.
6. The Respondent is operating in compliance with all laws and while the EU261 Regulation is directly applicable in this jurisdiction and cannot be contravened by national legislation equally the Respondent must consider the enactment of emergency legislation in this Jurisdictions, namely, Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 (Act 2 of 2020), and the follow on obstacles that have been created such as the aforementioned data security limitations on foot of the “stay at home” orders requiring employee to work
from home. These issues are varied and complex and require satisfaction at State and Member State level and are therefore wholly unsuitable at this juncture for adjudication by the District Court Small Claims Court.


7. Conclusion
7.1. The Respondent seeks to have the claim dismissed on the grounds set out above.

jonnny68 wrote: »

i'll take my chances in court anyway, id be pretty confident ryanair would back down, if the unthinkable happen and the courts sided with ryanair would i incur any costs, that's one issue im concerned about , it would e bad enough losing but also having to pay costs too would be a nightmare, cant see it happenning though but have to ask the question if anyone might have any info on this?

firemansam4 wrote: »

OK I'm wondering now did I make the correct decision bringing this claim.

I now have several questions....

There is a section on the claim and as mentioned on the citizens advice page posted above, for where the respondent can put in a counter claim.
Is there anything stopping Ryanair from doing this claiming it is costing them huge fees in legal expenses?

Short answer is yes. Ryanair can't counter claim.
This would only apply if respondent claim they were injured/loss money in some way. It specifically does not apply to legal fees.

Secondly if the claim does go to court, do I have to attend in person? I live in Co. Donegal so not an easy task for me.

Yes, Afraid you would have to.

How are we able to submit this evidence? I have all the emails ready to submit, may e we should contact the small claims court about this?

Third question is in relation to Ryanair responding about not being any proof in form of emails ect?

You can ref the emails in your claim. Email from:xxx dated yy yy yyyy states zzzzz
...

paddy19 wrote: »

Ah limabromac, do you not rememberer the old teachers line
You can, but you may not...

It's a "Can" not a "have to"....

So you don't have to decline the lousy voucher.

But you have to request a refund and keep the evidence.