The outcome of test case unlocks to 2.66 million Ryanair travelers making flight hold-up compensation claims returning as much as 6 years. Depending on the cover degree and levels you have on this you may have had the ability to claim although you generally have to do this within one month of return back to the UK. You likewise need proof of the hold-up in writing from the airline company as well as the lost and delayed baggage reports. From the links that you have actually supplied, I am uncertain whether I can assert payment for the delay on my return leg of our vacation which is outside the EU261 guideline.
When it comes to the baggage you would generally send invoices for products you have to buy as a result of the bag being postponed as compensation per se is not accountable. Fortunately is that as long as you had actually purchased your ticket as a through ticket and the hold-up was not casued due to weather or other such 'extraordinary circumstances' then you ought to have the ability to make a claim as you arrived delayed at your last destination on your trip. Recent cases around technical hold-ups in the UK courts affect all flights operating from the UK, so I would go back to them and point out the recent Jet2 vs Huzar case as being affordable for them to now pay the EU261 compensation.
The level of payment depends on the length of your flight and the timings of the alternative air travel you are provided: You can just assert hold-up compensation if the ticket was a through ticket i.e. London to Philippines via Kuwait where you were connecting AND if the reaon for the hold-up was within the airline company's control. A hold-up on the onward flight if it was a stopever would just be elgigible for payment if the carrier had actually been an EU one, as in this case you were not flying from an EU airport. The factor for the hold-up can be established then your claim either paid or rejected.
This flight was cancelled and real time of rescheduled departure was 18.05 hrs (local Indian time - 12.35 hrs GMT 04/02/2013) getting to approx 23.59 hrs GMT 04/02/2013 showing up 17hrs 15 mins later on after original scheduled time. We were informed the flight was delayed due to the landing lights not working and the back up system likewise failing'. After several hours of tannoy statements mentioning the flight was delayed we were then informed at approx 06.30 (local time) that the flight was cancelled. Unless you desire these make it clear in your letter to them that you want money according to EU261 guidelines and NOT vouchers.
On our go back to the airport we were informed that the parts for the flight had actually been at the airport prior to we had actually even left for the hotels and had actually been changed. On our arrival we were provided with a letter from TC claiming an unforeseen operationally significant defect which required rectification prior to more travel". Our original claim was declined as being because of hidden" technical troubles - would we now be entitled to payment given the most current rulings. Emirates are not covered by any of the EU261 laws on payment unless the flights is departing from an EU country, which in this case it woulnd't be.
Under EC Regulation 261/2004, we got in touch with Emirates directly to send a claim for a postponed air travel on the 6th August 2012. Air travel EK0018 was postponed leaving Manchester, meaninged that we missed our connection in Dubai and were booked on flight EK707 departing Dubai on the 8th of August showing up into Mahe at 13.05 instead of 06.45 on the 7th of August. ( The delay to your air travel was reactionary to a technical concern taking place prior to a previous flight.
But Emirates suggest that the EC261/2004 regs only use to the first leg of my journey, which would not be a payment event as the hold-up was below 3 hrs. However, my interpretation from reading your view on other cases is that compensation is payable for the delay compensation for cancelled flights at the final destination, in my case Brisbane, which was 24 hrs. They reference the rulings from court cases Emirates Airlines - Diretion fuer Deutschland v Dieter Schenkel (C-173/ 07) and Sanghvi v Cathay Pacific Airways to underpin their argument that the policy only applies to individual flights.
When it comes to the baggage you would generally send invoices for products you have to buy as a result of the bag being postponed as compensation per se is not accountable. Fortunately is that as long as you had actually purchased your ticket as a through ticket and the hold-up was not casued due to weather or other such 'extraordinary circumstances' then you ought to have the ability to make a claim as you arrived delayed at your last destination on your trip. Recent cases around technical hold-ups in the UK courts affect all flights operating from the UK, so I would go back to them and point out the recent Jet2 vs Huzar case as being affordable for them to now pay the EU261 compensation.
The level of payment depends on the length of your flight and the timings of the alternative air travel you are provided: You can just assert hold-up compensation if the ticket was a through ticket i.e. London to Philippines via Kuwait where you were connecting AND if the reaon for the hold-up was within the airline company's control. A hold-up on the onward flight if it was a stopever would just be elgigible for payment if the carrier had actually been an EU one, as in this case you were not flying from an EU airport. The factor for the hold-up can be established then your claim either paid or rejected.
This flight was cancelled and real time of rescheduled departure was 18.05 hrs (local Indian time - 12.35 hrs GMT 04/02/2013) getting to approx 23.59 hrs GMT 04/02/2013 showing up 17hrs 15 mins later on after original scheduled time. We were informed the flight was delayed due to the landing lights not working and the back up system likewise failing'. After several hours of tannoy statements mentioning the flight was delayed we were then informed at approx 06.30 (local time) that the flight was cancelled. Unless you desire these make it clear in your letter to them that you want money according to EU261 guidelines and NOT vouchers.
On our go back to the airport we were informed that the parts for the flight had actually been at the airport prior to we had actually even left for the hotels and had actually been changed. On our arrival we were provided with a letter from TC claiming an unforeseen operationally significant defect which required rectification prior to more travel". Our original claim was declined as being because of hidden" technical troubles - would we now be entitled to payment given the most current rulings. Emirates are not covered by any of the EU261 laws on payment unless the flights is departing from an EU country, which in this case it woulnd't be.
Under EC Regulation 261/2004, we got in touch with Emirates directly to send a claim for a postponed air travel on the 6th August 2012. Air travel EK0018 was postponed leaving Manchester, meaninged that we missed our connection in Dubai and were booked on flight EK707 departing Dubai on the 8th of August showing up into Mahe at 13.05 instead of 06.45 on the 7th of August. ( The delay to your air travel was reactionary to a technical concern taking place prior to a previous flight.
But Emirates suggest that the EC261/2004 regs only use to the first leg of my journey, which would not be a payment event as the hold-up was below 3 hrs. However, my interpretation from reading your view on other cases is that compensation is payable for the delay compensation for cancelled flights at the final destination, in my case Brisbane, which was 24 hrs. They reference the rulings from court cases Emirates Airlines - Diretion fuer Deutschland v Dieter Schenkel (C-173/ 07) and Sanghvi v Cathay Pacific Airways to underpin their argument that the policy only applies to individual flights.