We contacted Flybe twice now to claim compensation under EU regulation 261/2004. Twice they have refused citing technical problems that they claim constitute the “extraordinary circumstances”.

You are indeed correct and case law has upheld complaints.

The regulation doesn't give a definition of exactly what extraordinary circumstances are, but does give some examples.

[code]Extraordinary Circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. Such circumstances may, in particular, occur in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier.'[/code]

Basically a technical problem can and should be a reasonably expected problem and the airline should have contingency plans in place to cover this event.

Write back to Flybe explaining why this is not the case and explain that you will take the matter up with the Civil Aviation Authority if it is not settled properly.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:046:0001:0007:EN:PDF

Why should a technical problem be "a reasonably expected problem". In my car I carry spare lamps, spare tyre etc but the day the camshaft belt gave up I had to wait for parts to get to my local garage so that repairs could be carried out. It is just the same with an aircraft: regularly required parts are reeadily available but less common parts may have to come from another base or even the manufacturer.

nvs17

There is little point continuing to correspond with the airline as they have made their position clear and will not suddenly change their minds by you writing again.

If you wish to pursue the airline for compensation you have the following choices:

1.You can hand your claim over to a claims handling company to deal with on your behalf. This will mean that you would forfeit between 25-30% of the value of your claim to the claim handling company but this method means you will not have to attend a court hearing or launch a legal claim as the claims handling company will do this for you if necessary.

2.You can check whether you have access to legal expenses cover via either your household contents insurance policy, or credit card provider or travel insurance. You would then hand over the claim to them but in this instance you would, if successful, retain the whole value of the claim.

3.You can pursue your claim on your own. Notwithstanding some successes by individual claimants without starting a legal claim, this is not a simple letter-writing exercise as airlines are in most cases vigorously defending all such claims and I fully expect that claimants will not just have to threaten court action but will have to go to small claims court and have the case heard in front of a District Judge. The airlines will employ legal counsel in such cases so this is not a straightforward route unless you are prepared to put in considerable time researching and preparing your claim. You will also have to pay the appropriate court fees in advance which are of course repaid to you by the airline in the event that you win the case. Cases will take between 5-9 months from start of a claim to a hearing or judgment being handed down so this method requires patience and tenacity in equal measure.

The following template letter can be adapted to your individual circumstances to send to the airline with your claim for compensation. This example was written for a Monarch passenger but it can be adapted for other airlines and circumstances:

Mr John Marray – Company Secretary
Monarch Airlines Ltd
Prospect House
Prospect Way
London Luton Airport
Luton
LU2 9NU

Dear Mr Marray

Delayed/Cancelled Flight Compensation - Notice before Action
Flight number: (insert here)
Date: (insert here)
Booking Ref: (insert here)
Passenger names: (insert here)
Amount claimed: 250 euros per passenger

I am writing to you to lodge my claim for delayed/cancelled flight compensation. Ourflight (detailed above) was delayed/cancelled leaving xxxx and we arrived in xxxx some xxhours after the scheduled arrival time.

[We were informed that the flight was delayed overnight due to 'technical difficulties with the aircraft.'] (you need to insert your own specific details here)

Since technical problems have been ruled by the ECJ to be unlikely to be held as a valid defence of extraordinary circumstances to a compensation claim, then should you be claiming any such defence I should be grateful if such details could be provided to me within 14 days of the date of this letter.

Should you neither settle my claim in full nor provide a full defence to my claim within the above timescale, I reserve the right to issue legal proceedings without giving you further notice in writing.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

xxxxx

Only send this letter, however, if you are going to take the last of the 3 routes above. If you have no intention of pursuing the claim, including the full intention of taking it to court if necessary, then you are wasting your time.

The airline may still be able to prove a valid defence of "extraordinary circumstances" in a number of cases so it is worth researching/checking whether there is a likelihood of this defence holding up "on the balance of probabilities" which is the legal test used in the County Court small claims track under which most claims will be heard.

You should also read and try to understand the strict legal test the airline faces in defending such claims in the Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia ECJ ruling: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/celex.jsf?celex=62007CJ0549&lang1=en&type=NOT&ancre=

busdriver wrote:

Why should a technical problem be "a reasonably expected problem".

You might care to read the ECJ case law in Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia for the court's view on such issues.

Why should a technical problem be "a reasonably expected problem".

Because busdriver that is the ruling of the European Court and their findings have become EU case law, the Judges understood that technical problems can occur however the crux of this is that airlines must have a backup plan and not just leave passengers in airports for hours and hours and think this is acceptable and expect passengers just to accept that.

We were delayed by 15 hours coming back from Turkey in June with Thomas Cook Airways and a quick call to them had it all sorted and £700 compensation back to us, one of my mates was delayed by almost 24 hours going to Mexico and they received £1100 just by a simple phone call to TC.

A pity some airlines are trying to avoid paying what is legally due.

In our case Thomas Cook gained because we just put the money back in to an £8000 family holiday as a treat for me retiring.

I think you've been very fortunate that TC paid out so easily. A quick visit to any of the bigger travel forums, and their own forum, will show very many people who can't even get a claim acknowledged, let alone settled! Getting them to even admit that one of their aircraft has operated a flight is a challenge.

As usual HT members have been quick to respond but then the whole thing has ground to a halt. The OP has not been back on since 14th July.so we are none the wiser if the advice given has been of help. If only people would respond it would help many other people who may havr a problem.

fwh

Hello - my husband and I were on this flight too, just received a letter from Flybe saying 'not their fault' and offering £100 off our next flight. Have you had any more luck?