EU261 compensation discussion

darlett wrote: »

Wow. I read that several times, each time imagining you said does 'not' apply! Er, its been a long day or two Thanks again for your help and the link.

I can imagine! Not a problem.

grogi wrote: »

I don't know the particular circumstances of this ruling, but it makes no sense to me.

Asong as the strike is legal, it is perfectly valid reason. It is Ryanair staff that makes the decision not to fly, there cannot be more 'internal' reason. Ryanair management had control of the strikes, they simply could have agreed with the demands beforehand.

The decision of the court might be to the fact that the people in strike are not employed by Ryanair.

https://corporate.ryanair.com/news/ryanair-welcomes-barcelona-court-ruling-confirming-no-eu-261-compensation-is-due-during-internal-strikes/

http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%207615%202013%20INIT

these proposed changes to the existing EU261 regulations will clarify things greatly if/when they are implemented.

They should also dramatically cut down on the amount of strikes because the Airlines will be able to counter-sue the Unions.

Proposal two is the one most favoured.

Option 2: balancing stronger enforcement policy with economic incentives:
enforcement policy is reinforced through stronger coordination of NEBs. NEBs would be required to
improve the information they provide to the Commission about their activities and the Commission
may request investigations, especially in cases involving several Member States. Additional costs flowing from enhanced care and assistance are compensated by adjustments in the global amount of financial compensation. This can be achieved by reducing the frequency of compensation payments via two variants:
•
Variant 2a : increasing the time threshold after which the passenger has a right to compensation in case of delays from the current three hours to at least five;
•
Variant 2b : extending the scope of "extraordinary circumstances" to include most technical defaults.
For both variants 2a and 2b, the impact assessment report analyses whether an additional adjustment of the lump-sum compensation amounts would be useful. Under option 2, there would be a limit of 3 or 4 days on the obligation of accommodation in situations of extraordinary events of long duration. To mitigate the impact on passengers, contingency planning and a quicker rerouting are introduced.

All policy options have some common features such as:
•the clarification of a number of issues (e.g. extraordinary circumstances as mentioned above, rerouting obligations, care during tarmac delays, rights in case of missed connections, etc.);
•a functional separation of general enforcement and of individual complaint handling where the latter may be taken charge of by alternative dispute resolution bodies (ADR). Both, the air carriers and the bodies in charge of individual complaints would be submitted to clear complaint handling procedures (including maximum response times);
•involvement of other market players: enhanced possibility for recourse of airlines against third parties responsible for disruptions; setting up of contingency plans among airport users. The impact assessment concludes that option 2 is preferable over the others

how this will affect passengers in practice:
3 hours for 260 euro compensation will move nearer to 5.
airlines will in future not make decisons as to which flight to sacrifice based on cost; the flight with the technical problem will be the one sacrificed as there is less worry over compensation and they'll just fly in a spare plane from a base within 5 hours to serve it rather than taking the plane from another flight.
less strikes as the airlines can bankrupt the unions and their members if they decide to go on strike. It might not have an effect on airport or ATC staff but it should keep their own staff off the picket line.

The Germans now want ATC sorted out and they are addressing their own internal ATC problems outside of EU261 and as they exert considerable influence over the EU so have a good chance of knocking strike-happy ATC in to shape or else taking control of their commercial aviation airspace away from them.
There are grounds to be optimistic that delays will become less common in the medium term future.

Yup, next step is a claim to the Irish CAR, after that you can still make a complaint to the UK CAA

https://www.caa.co.uk/Passengers/Resolving-travel-problems/Delays-cancellations/Making-a-claim/What-to-do-if-your-claim-is-rejected/

The 261 revisions are stuck in EU Council

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0092


http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-deeper-and-fairer-internal-market-with-a-strengthened-industrial-base-services-including-transport/file-common-rules-on-compensation-to-passengers

Spain is holding it up while arguing over Gibraltar airport status

If a flight is cancelled on the day and the airline provide a refund, are you still entitled to compensation?

Parents flight was cancelled, they were rebooked for next day. When I contacted Aer Lingus they said it was operational reasons, so I submitted claim for eu261 compensation for them. Have received email stating no comp because it was medical (crew member was ill apparently, flight from Dub didn't even take off so no return from New York).

Is there a way to find out the real reason for the flight cancellation?

Perfect guys I've appealed anyway citing that I'd take it to CAR or further if required.

got the eu261 400 euro each from ryanair pretty quickly (27 hour delay) in august ryanair just said they give us our hotel bill and dinners for the night after chasing them yet again. so all good finally - apart form loss of 1 days holiday )

I'm trying to help an Asian friend who got delayed to see if they are entitled to EU261 compensation. I had a look at the claim form and it seems to be more aimed at single journeys, and the laws are clear as mud to me, so looking for any long-haul experiences with claims please.

Basically, without giving exact details of the airline or routing, he booked a consolidated ticket back home recently. Web booking made with an Asian airline directly.

3 flights each way DUB - EU hub - Asian hub - Asian regional airport and the same route in reverse on the way back. The outward journey was fine, boarding passes issued and luggage checked straight through from DUB to regional airport.

48 hours before his return, the airline emailed to say that the first return flight - regional to Asian hub - was rescheduled, meaning that his 4 hour stopover became a 1.5 hr stopover. Tight but doable in most airports.

However, checking in for the first flight, he was informed that they couldn't issue boarding cards or check bags through further than the Asian hub and would have to check in again there.

This was never mentioned before in any communication. He obviously missed his connection, got put up in a hotel and sent on the same flight to Europe 24 hours later, missed a day in work and got in trouble with his boss.

So, does he have grounds for a claim even though the delay originated outside the EU and with a flight that was only feeding a flight to the EU? Or should he just pick another airline next time? Thanks.

Just to update that this has been resolved. Aer Lingus are paying my parents their €600 each compensation.