Excellent news Spike

We were lucky last year they just paid us out right away with no hassle.

Hi Phil
Glad you got a good result
Danny

Had a response from CAA, only 2 months late as all is now settled but may be of use to others.

Response to complainant (ref: xxxxxxxxx)

Jun 6 at 4:07 PM

Dear xxxxxxx xxxxxxx
Case 2741866

Thank you for your patience with us while we investigated your complaint about the disruption of flight TCX138 on 16th March 2014.

We have reviewed the information available to us in accordance with new guidelines clarifying the “extraordinary circumstances” exception of EC Regulation 261/2004.

The airline has reassessed your flight against these guidelines and have informed us that the disruption of your flight is of a type which means that compensation is payable. It appears from the documentation provided, that the disruption was within the control of the airline and could have been avoided. Therefore this disruption does not fall under the extraordinary circumstances’ exception of the Regulation. As such, the airline has agreed you are entitled to compensation.

The airline has confirmed they will be contacting you to arrange payment. We have therefore closed your file as the complaint has been resolved.

Please allow time for the payment to be processed. If you do not hear from the airline within 4 weeks, please contact them directly with a copy of this letter.

Yours sincerely,

Nicolaus O'Hara
Consumer Affairs Officer
Markets and Consumers Group
Civil Aviation Authority
CAA House, 45-59 Kingsway, London WC2B 6TE
Telephone: 0207 453 6888
http://www.caa.co.uk

An update to the EU ruling.

Today (11/06/14) a Court of Appeal Judge has upheld the earlier ruling that airlines can no longer use technical faults as a blanket excuse to avoid compensating passengers for flight delays.

In his ruling, the judge said that technical faults could only be considered as "out of the ordinary" if they "stem from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned".

He added: "In the context of technical problems one must crucially ask what caused the technical problem. If the cause of the technical problem is one which is 'inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned' then it necessarily follows that it is also within the control of the carrier and therefore not extraordinary.

"In this case the cause of the technical problem was simply wear and tear and the Court quite rightly took a common sense approach to this and held that wear and tear is entirely ordinary and therefore not extraordinary."