Aer Lingus

Diego Murphy

Hi guys,

I'm new to this particular forum on Boards, but I'm looking for some advice.

Long story short, I was due to fly back from Barcelona with Aer Lingus a few weeks ago. The flight was meant to take off at 2:50pm on the Sunday but got delayed until the Monday at 3pm. They did give us the hotel etc, and that wasn't the issue, but I understand under EU law, that passengers are entitled to claim for a certain amount depending on the delay. In my case, the flight was delayed by more than 3 hours and was less than 1500km so I'm entitled to make a claim against Aer Lingus for €250, unless they can prove that there were "extraordinary circumstances" that delayed the flight.

Needless to say, Aer Lingus are digging in and are refusing to pay out. They are using the defence of technical difficulties as "extraordinary circumstances". However, they are dodging the detail of what the technical difficulty was. Under this legislation (Regulation (EC) 261/2004), the onus is on the airline to prove the "extraordinary circumstance".

The following is a sample of what Aer Lingus have said, even though I've asked specifically what exactly the technical difficulty was. It's starting to sound like they won't give me the information because they know I have a case. I'm actually not that bothered about the money, but I don't like being fobbed off in the hope that I'll just go away!

"I can confirm that flight EIxxx was delayed due to unscheduled aircraft maintenance as a result of technical difficulties"

"The decision to delay a flight is never taken lightly as the safety of our passengers and crew is of paramount importance to Aer Lingus and nothing we do will detract from this in any way. This particular flight, EIxxx on xx/xx/2013, was delayed on the grounds of an aircraft technical problem which was only apparent prior to operation of the flight and as a result had to undergo an unscheduled maintenance."

"Unfortunately, I am unable to provide further information. However, as you maybe aware flight EIxxx was cancelled just prior to operation due to a tech snag."

Zhane

The plane didn't fly because of safety reasons, and they put you up in a hotel aswell so you didn't have to wait in the airport...and you're looking to claim?

If the plane didnt fly due to safety reasons I would put it down to "extraordinary circumstances" because i personally wouldnt want to risk my life on a plane that was willingly fly knowing there was something wrong. Just let it go.

Thoie

Contact the commission for aviation regulation
http://www.aviationreg.ie/air-passenger-rights/complaint-procedure.508.html

http://www.aviationreg.ie/Delay/Default.210.html

You can also bring Aer Lingus to the small claims court

Diego Murphy

Zhane wrote: »

The plane didn't fly because of safety reasons, and they put you up in a hotel aswell so you didn't have to wait in the airport...and you're looking to claim?

If the plane didnt fly due to safety reasons I would put it down to "extraordinary circumstances" because i personally wouldnt want to risk my life on a plane that was willingly fly knowing there was something wrong. Just let it go.

Just because I got put up in a hotel for the night, doesn't mean I should just let it go. For all I know, the technical difficulty could well have been avoided. Just because the airline say that there is a technical difficulty doesn't mean I should just take their word for it, unless they are more specific. I lost a day of annual leave because of it so I am entitled to look for compensation. There is a reason that the legislation exists and it is widely stated that airlines will try to use the excuse of technical difficulties to get out of it, but that it isn't always a legitimate excuse.

Diego Murphy

Thoie wrote: »

Contact the commission for aviation regulation
http://www.aviationreg.ie/air-passenger-rights/complaint-procedure.508.html

http://www.aviationreg.ie/Delay/Default.210.html

You can also bring Aer Lingus to the small claims court

Thanks you for the advice Thoie.

Thoie

Zhane wrote: »

The plane didn't fly because of safety reasons, and they put you up in a hotel aswell so you didn't have to wait in the airport...and you're looking to claim?

If the plane didnt fly due to safety reasons I would put it down to "extraordinary circumstances" because i personally wouldnt want to risk my life on a plane that was willingly fly knowing there was something wrong. Just let it go.

Zhane, the regulation covers "things which could have been reasonably avoided". Not all tech problems constitute extraordinary circumstances, and by refusing to say what the problem was, Aer Lingus are dancing around the issue.

The line in the letter about "safety is paramount" is just one of those nebulous statements that doesn't mean much. If you notice, it doesn't actually say that the technical problem was a safety issue.

Zhane

But they didnt fly because they didnt feel like it. Everytime the plane isnt in the air, the airline loses money. If it could fly without risk, it would have.

Diego Murphy

Zhane wrote: »

But they didnt fly because they didnt feel like it. Everytime the plane isnt in the air, the airline loses money. If it could fly without risk, it would have.

But it may not have flown because of a mistake at their end that could have been avoided. Just because it couldn't fly, doesn't mean it was an extraordinary circumstance that couldn't have been avoided.

Diego Murphy

For example, if someone forgot to service a particular part of the plane, then yes this might cause a safety issue but it certainly wouldn't be an extraordinary event. It would be reasonable to expect that this issue could have been avoided.

dukedalton

Zhane wrote: »

But they didnt fly because they didnt feel like it. Everytime the plane isnt in the air, the airline loses money. If it could fly without risk, it would have.

The airline's good intentions mean nothing. You pay your money to get taken from one place to another place- it's up to the airline to work out how to do it. If you have made plans around the dates you have booked to fly, being put up in a hotel is little consolation if you've been messed around.

kona

Diego Murphy wrote: »

But it may not have flown because of a mistake at their end that could have been avoided. Just because it couldn't fly, doesn't mean it was an extraordinary circumstance that couldn't have been avoided.

Airlines wont tell the general public exactley what technical issues becasue

A) The public dont have a clue about aircraft. What does a HPTCC do?

Mass Hysteria about "dangerous aircraft"

The aircraft went tech, you got an extra night in spain for free whats the problem?

Zhane

Diego Murphy wrote: »

But it may not have flown because of a mistake at their end that could have been avoided. Just because it couldn't fly, doesn't mean it was an extraordinary circumstance that couldn't have been avoided.

But it also may have had safety issues too. The person you spoke to probably just didnt have the information to give you, or maybe it was policy not to give maintenance notes out to the general public. The only way you're going to find out if you drag this out, and really is it worth the €250?

Diego Murphy

dukedalton wrote: »

The airline's good intentions mean nothing. You pay your money to get taken from one place to another place- it's up to the airline to work out how to do it. If you have made plans around the dates you have booked to fly, being put up in a hotel is little consolation if you've been messed around.

Agreed. Just to clarify, being put up in a hotel in this situation isn't a barrel of laughs. Our flight was due to take off at 2:50pm, we spent about 3 hours on the actual plane. The next few hours were spent on a footpath outside the airport, waiting for buses to go to a hotel in the middle of nowhere. We didn't actually eat again until 10pm that night in the hotel. No food vouchers were provided in the intervening period and there was no opportunity to even buy food because of the lack of info, nobody could take a chance and run off to the shop. The next morning was spent trying to figure out when on earth we'd get a flight back.

So I do feel like I'm entitled to compensation.

Diego Murphy

kona wrote: »

Airlines wont tell the general public exactley what technical issues becasue

A) The public dont have a clue about aircraft. What does a HPTCC do?

Mass Hysteria about "dangerous aircraft"

The aircraft went tech, you got an extra night in spain for free whats the problem?

I got a night in a very basic hotel in an industrial estate outside of Barcelona. It's not exactly an extension of my holiday and I lost a day of annual leave as a result. The legislation is there to be used. Why shouldn't I make a claim?

sandin

I hate the compo culture that some people have.

The cost of not flying and putting guests up in hotels and looking after them is quite expensive - airlines will even try and short lease a plane to avoid it.

Maybe you prefer an airline to take risks? I and virtually all others would rather a delay than even a slight risk - get over your ridiculous conspiracy theory / compo attitude and move on with life.

Zhane

dukedalton wrote: »

The airline's good intentions mean nothing. You pay your money to get taken from one place to another place- it's up to the airline to work out how to do it. If you have made plans around the dates you have booked to fly, being put up in a hotel is little consolation if you've been messed around.

What you mean 'good intentions'? There was reasons it didnt fly. Airlines are there to make money while taking care of the safety of passengers. The airline did the work on the plane and it flew home. They dealt with the problem. If there was another plane to fly them home, it would have been done sooner but there wasnt. They got home safely a day late. I agree that is very inconvenient, but can you imagine the what the OP would be like if it flew knowing there was a problem? Probably put in a claim for putting his life in danger.

vicwatson

you got an extra night in spain for free whats the problem?

That's what the OP wants to know.

Maybe the OP didn't want an extra night in Spain

The Bishop Basher

I take it you don't fly often. This is just one of those thing that happen from time to time. Its a total pain in the ass when it happens but just suck it up and move on.

Diego Murphy

sandin wrote: »

I hate the compo culture that some people have.

The cost of not flying and putting guests up in hotels and looking after them is quite expensive - airlines will even try and short lease a plane to avoid it.

Maybe you prefer an airline to take risks? I and virtually all others would rather a delay than even a slight risk - get over your ridiculous conspiracy theory / compo attitude and move on with life.

I do not have a compo attitude. This is my first time claiming compensation for anything in my life. If you had been on that particular flight, you would have realised that there was zero communication from aer lingus between when we got off the plane that afternoon and about midday the next day. And that was only because I had to contact them on facebook to find out if I'd even get onto a flight that day. Just because they're an airline, doesn't give them an entitlement to mess people around.

Zhane

vicwatson wrote: »

That's what the OP wants to know.

Maybe the OP didn't want an extra night in Spain

But Vic, these things happen. Its been sniffed at on this thread already, but I believe that safety is paramount in flying. If the airline says its not flying due to tech issues, then the plane isnt flying. End Of.

dukedalton

Zhane wrote: »

What you mean 'good intentions'? There was reasons it didnt fly. Airlines are there to make money while taking care of the safety of passengers. The airline did the work on the plane and it flew home. They dealt with the problem. If there was another plane to fly them home, it would have been done sooner but there wasnt. They got home safely a day late. I agree that is very inconvenient, but can you imagine the what the OP would be like if it flew knowing there was a problem? Probably put in a claim for putting his life in danger.

This safety angle is irrelevant. You're paying the airline to take care of that- either by providing the original plane, a replacement plane or beg Mickey O'Leary for the lend of a plane- but ultimately, and in this case, it caused huge inconvenience to the OP, so he's entitled to look for whatever he can get.

Zhane

Diego Murphy wrote: »

I do not have a compo attitude. This is my first time claiming compensation for anything in my life. If you had been on that particular flight, you would have realised that there was zero communication from aer lingus between when we got off the plane that afternoon and about midday the next day. And that was only because I had to contact them on facebook to find out if I'd even get onto a flight that day. Just because they're an airline, doesn't give them an entitlement to mess people around.

Your original post was made in a very "entitled" way.

Diego Murphy

Zhane wrote: »

But Vic, these things happen. Its been sniffed at on this thread already, but I believe that safety is paramount in flying. If the airline says its not flying due to tech issues, then the plane isnt flying. End Of.

I never said that safety isn't important. For all I know, the airline could have messed up on their take off slots or something and are blaming it on technical difficulties.

Diego Murphy

Zhane wrote: »

Your original post was made in a very "entitled" way.

Well I didn't mean it to come across in an "entitled" way. I lost a day at work. I missed a number of important meetings. To be honest, if aer lingus had said we're sorry but here's €50 towards your next flight, I'd have been happy with the gesture. It's the fact that they're giving me such a vague response that I'm unsatisfied with and is the reason I won't let it go.

Zhane

Diego Murphy wrote: »

I never said that safety isn't important. For all I know, the airline could have messed up on their take off slots or something and are blaming it on technical difficulties.

We arent going to agree on this at all. Personally I think its just comp culture, but thats just me. Just be glad you flew home in the end.

kona

Diego Murphy wrote: »

I never said that safety isn't important. For all I know, the airline could have messed up on their take off slots or something and are blaming it on technical difficulties.

In that case, pursue it. But they are not ever going to tell you more than technical issue, if it was.

You are wasting your time IMO.

BuffyBot

Worth reading:

http://www.whichlegalservice.co.uk/members-area/holiday-and-flights/flight-rights/

This was then backed up by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia C549/07 11th February 2009, in which the ECJ said that only events as extreme as terrorism or sabotage would give rise to the defence, and not technical faults.

This very important case went some way to making the law clearer by ruling that technical faults, unless they stem from 'events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the air carrier', DO NOT count as examples of extraordinary circumstances.

In the past, airlines have routinely cited them as such to excuse themselves from paying out, so always bear this in mind, if the airline pleads that the cancellation was due to a "technical defect".

Diego Murphy

BuffyBot wrote: »

Worth reading:

http://www.whichlegalservice.co.uk/members-area/holiday-and-flights/flight-rights/

Thanks BuffyBot. I had actually come across that article and I quoted that case to Aer Lingus. That's why I'm inclined to think that there wasn't a valid technical reason.

The Bishop Basher

I was delayed in Glasgow a couple of weeks ago waiting on a BA flight to London. The flight eventually left 13 hours late. I got to my hotel room in London at 2:30am the following morning, very tired and with a long day ahead. I too had lost a full days work.

About a month previous I was delayed for 6 hours at Heathrow trying to get back to Dublin. I missed an important appointment as a result.

These things happen and the more you fly the more they happen. It's just a part of air travel. You are about to expend an incredible amount of time and energy just for the sake of a couple of hundred quid or whatever it is you hope to gain.

There's an old saying, "Pick your battles". This is one best walked away from. You'd be far better putting that time and effort into your job, family whatever it is that puts a smile on your face.

rovoagho

Don't let the Typicals get you down OP, you're 100% entitled to the compensation and you're probably 100% right that AL are just trying to save themselves a few quid after a screw up. Even if it was a safety issue, and not their fault, you're entitled to know. The Typicals may be happy with mommy knows best, but you don't have to settle for that if you don't want to.

Drive on, and best of luck with it. And let us know how you get on.

P. Breathnach

rovoagho wrote: »

... you're 100% entitled to the compensation ...

It would probably be helpful to OP if you said how you happen to know that.