Small Claims Court Thread

limabromac

Galego wrote: »

Cool. Thanks.

I had not done that so wasnt aware I had to.

The other option is to not click on anything and you just wait... In my eyes it's better to let them know you want to be in a queue for something as they will forget about you...

When I spoke to the lady to say I was not accepting the voucher she said great, I will put you in the refund Queue...( After already bring in the refund Queue for a month)

irelandspurs

I just used this form to state I wasn't accepting the voucher and wanted to continue for the refund.https://contactform.ryanair.com/

limabromac

irelandspurs wrote: »

I just used this form to state I wasn't accepting the voucher and wanted to continue for the refund.https://contactform.ryanair.com/

I have contacted them that way too and I received a response with just a ticket number and a few weeks later a generic "We are very busy email.." I found out later that
at least when you chat you can get a transcript of your chat sent to email so at least you know that you definitely had a conversation with someone...

One day, no doubt we will receive our refund. ...

Caranica

irelandspurs wrote: »

I just used this form to state I wasn't accepting the voucher and wanted to continue for the refund.https://contactform.ryanair.com/

They told me on chat this week that that doesn't count. I filled in that form 5 weeks ago within minutes of getting the email.

Following up on a promise 7 weeks ago that I would get the balance refunded to PayPal within 28 days (and didn't) I got on to chat the other day. They had no record of me declining the voucher as it's not possible to do so via the form. I got an email confirming that I'd declined the voucher within minutes of ending the chat.

limabromac

OmegaGene wrote: »

if you paid with paypal why not open a dispute with them ?

I think Caranica did already if I remember : )

Caranica

limabromac wrote: »

I think Caranica did already if I remember : )

Oh yes. I did. Denied. Fought with them for 3 weeks, still denied. But I've gone back to them again this week.

My issue isn't standard, my flight was one of the first to be cancelled in early March. Got an instant refund for the outbound leg but long story short they still owe me for the return plus priority boarding, reserved seat etc (outbound refund was fare only). Systems error allegedly.

Because I got a partial refund PayPal say I have to take it up with Ryanair

Sheep Shagger

I wonder if Ryanair consider COVID-19 to be over (so they can start processing cash refunds) when they begin flying again from 1 July?

limabromac

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

I wonder if Ryanair consider COVID-19 to be over (so they can start processing cash refunds) when they begin flying again from 1 July?

Ryanair might have a crystal ball ; ) ... However if they start flying in July and the refunds only start then they will have to get through all of March, April, May and June before people start seeing their money back..

Drumpot

Can I ask anybody who has put in a claim what way they did it and information they provided.

I booked flights in January, contacted the airline about 3 days before they were due to go out and on the phone they confirmed the flight wasnt going and offered a refund. They also said as part of the refund they would automatically cancel the return flight.

But I actually havent heard anything from them and have nothing physical on record regarding it. Its been taken off my Login account (no details of flight) and literally the only thing I have now is confirmation of booking (email) and flight cost.

Did anybody call back the Aerline (aer Lingus) to get an update on their refund. I am probably at week 3 now where I havent heard anything and have no record of what they are going to do.

Muahahaha

Mad Benny wrote: »

I presume they don't want to make it easy for people. I'm sure I'll get the same. I'll happily go and Ryanair can pay their solicitors to attend the small claims court.

Im pretty amazed they are fighting this. There is cast iron EU law saying you are entitled to a refund and yesterday Margaret Vestager reiterated that and is sending a letter to every EU government to make it clear in case they weren't already sure. They are on a losing wicket full stop so sending solicitors down to the SCC is just throwing good money after bad, they'll be laughed out of it down there trying to go up against EU law.

They really are a bollox of a company sometimes. They are just trying to ride roughshod over long established consumer rights so they can get millions of short term loans from their passengers at no cost to them. Had they come out and offered people a voucher for the flight and then maybe another 20 euro voucher on top as a gesture of good will then people might go for that. But instead they just want everything their own way, including breaking EU law to get it.

Mad Benny

Muahahaha wrote: »

Had they come out and offered people a voucher for the flight and then maybe another 20 euro voucher on top as a gesture of good will then people might go for that.

If they had offered a voucher valid for 3 years I would have accepted. 12 months is unacceptable for me.

Given their response to date I wouldn't trust them to automatically refund in the future. I suspect they will impose more impediments to discourage customers from availing of it.

I live in Dublin, a visit to Swords isn't a big deal for me. If they want to waste my time I'll happily waste theirs too.

Pkiernan

Got the following from Ryanair - last week they said they would refund me.
Now asking for me to take a voucher:

"Dear Customer,

Over the past months the spread of the Covid-19 virus has caused many EU governments to impose flight and/or travel bans which grounded over 99% of Ryanair’s flights. We are doing everything we can to support our customers, our people and protect jobs. We are ready to return flying when Covid-19 is defeated, hopefully sooner rather than later.

We regret that these Government travel restrictions have forced the cancellation of your Ryanair flight(s) under booking reference:: xxxxxx.

We are experiencing an unprecedented volume of support requests due to Covid-19, so we kindly ask you to bear with us at this busy time. The processing time for cash refunds is taking far longer than normal as we are processing over 1,000 times the normal volume of cancellations. We also have 75% fewer staff available to process refunds due to social distancing restrictions.

Ryanair is offering vouchers and free moves as these are automated and give customers an immediate alternative. Customers who choose not to accept a free move or voucher will receive their refund in due course, once this crisis has passed. Over the coming weeks and months, we will be working hard to process refund requests as quickly as we can.

We sincerely apologise for these unavoidable refund delays which are due to the unprecedented volume of Govt. imposed flight cancellations and we sincerely thank customers for their patience.

Please see below details of your travel voucher for xxxxEUR, the full value of your unused booking. This amount can be used for the purchase of Ryanair flights and other services at any time over the next 12 months. It is simple to use this voucher when making a booking on the Ryanair website or app. Please click here for a full set of T&C's.

Please click on the link below to accept your voucher "


They do go on to say:

"If you accept the voucher and do not use it before the expiry date you will receive a full cash refund, if you only use the voucher in part before the expiry date you can also receive the balance owing in a cash refund.

If you do not wish to accept this voucher option and wish to move your flight or request a refund, please contact us....link"

Caranica

You were warned. Do not believe anything Ryanair say until the money is in your account. This week I was told that what I was promised was aspirational and in keeping with the information they had at the time :rolleyes:

Make sure you use chat and not the form of the link as that's the only way your rejection of the voucher will be noted.

paddy19

Caranica wrote: »

You were warned. Do not believe anything Ryanair say until the money is in your account. This week I was told that what I was promised was aspirational and in keeping with the information they had at the time :rolleyes:

Make sure you use chat and not the form of the link as that's the only way your rejection of the voucher will be noted.

Ryanair are trying to confuse people with their voucher offer.

You don't need to reject the voucher.

You do need to show evidence that you have applied for a refund.

This could be a screen shot of the application.

You could also show a screenshot a rejection of your refund request because it's already on the system.

Pkiernan

paddy19 wrote: »

Ryanair are trying to confuse people with their voucher offer.

You don't need to reject the voucher.

You do need to show evidence that you have applied for a refund.

This could be a screen shot of the application.

You could also show a screenshot a rejection of your refund request because it's already on the system.

Yep.

I have email from them cancelling the flight and confirming that I will be refunded.

Also have acreenshots of my refund being approved and telling me it will be processed in 20 days.

More then enough for the SCC in the event they don't pay.

Caranica

paddy19 wrote: »

Ryanair are trying to confuse people with their voucher offer.

You don't need to reject the voucher.

They told me on Tuesday that I was not in the refund queue as they had no record of me declining the voucher.

paddy19

Caranica wrote: »

They told me on Tuesday that I was not in the refund queue as they had no record of me declining the voucher.

There is no requirement to reject the voucher.

Legally under EU261 you need to request a refund, that's all.

Ryanair cannot negate that refund request by offering you a voucher.

The simplest way of requesting the refund is on the web page.

https://refundclaims.ryanair.com/

If this is not working for you I'd suggest sending a ordinary mail to:

Refunds, Customer Service Department, Ryanair DAC, Airside Business Park, Swords Co. Dublin.

Guest Relations Department, Aer Lingus Head Office, Dublin Airport, Co Dublin K67 PW99

Take a photo of the stamped addressed envelope for your records.

Caranica

I'm simply repeating what I was told. As you know I first requested a refund on 11 March. It's not as if I haven't tried everything bar the SCC with zero success to date.

Muahahaha

Can anyone working in software development comment on how easy/hard it would be for Ryanair to set up an automated refund system that refunds back on your card once you request it on their website. Its hardly rocket science, they've automated how to take your money in the first place.

And if it did actually need human intervention they have 3,000 odd staff sitting at home twiddling their thumbs. It would be interesting to know how many hundreds of millions they have of passengers cash sloshing around in their accounts. All while a barrel of oil is at extremely low prices, you just know O'Leary is seeing this as an opportunity to hedge on aviation fuel while it is dirt cheap and the bonus is they can use other peoples money to do it.

ShatterProof

Flight on the 22nd May

Cancellation notified on 7th May and applied for refund. As per mail it is to be refunded within 20 day.

Voucher received yesterday, 14th May.

Today, 15th May, using chat rejected refund and told them I'll be expecting refund in the 20 days as they offered or the 7 days as per EU261

15th Jun , calendar set for opening SCC case. I'll give the extra week.

ShatterProof

Muahahaha wrote: »

Can anyone working in software development comment on how easy/hard it would be for Ryanair to set up an automated refund system that refunds back on your card once you request it on their website. Its hardly rocket science, they've automated how to take your money in the first place.

And if it did actually need human intervention they have 3,000 odd staff sitting at home twiddling their thumbs. It would be interesting to know how many hundreds of millions they have of passengers cash sloshing around in their accounts. All while a barrel of oil is at extremely low prices, you just know O'Leary is seeing this as an opportunity to hedge on aviation fuel while it is dirt cheap and the bonus is they can use other peoples money to do it.

from their chat,

Due to social distancing set up by the government, our refund teams must work from home, and because of this they have limited access to customers personal financial information.


I'm assuming they have VPNs and proper security measures in place. Their explanation doesn't hold water.

golfrules

ShatterProof wrote: »

Flight on the 22nd May

Cancellation notified on 7th May and applied for refund. As per mail it is to be refunded within 20 day.

Voucher received yesterday, 14th May.

Today, 15th May, using chat rejected refund and told them I'll be expecting refund in the 20 days as they offered or the 7 days as per EU261

15th Jun , calendar set for opening SCC case. I'll give the extra week.

Like everyone else here that opened a SCC case.
I received an email today (day 15 of submitting claim) from SCC as follows:

I am forwarding a Notice of Dispute that I have received from solicitors acting for Ryanair.
As they will not agree to pay your claim do you want to withdraw your claim or do you want it to proceed to a Court hearing ?
Please note the following points regarding a Court hearing ;
1. you must attend the hearing in person (go to WWW.COURTS.IE and refer to Small Claims Procedure and Failure to Resolve a Claim)
2. you will have to pay your own expenses associated with attending the Court hearing (go to WWW.COURTS.IE and refer to Small Claims Procedure then Introduction and Types of Claims Dealt with)
3. it is not possible to choose your own hearing date.
This is similar to response everyone has received from the Small claims court.
Unfortunately I’m not in. Position to go to the courts as like I the West.
I have now requested a Charge Bank from Bank of Ireland so ����that I’m successful with them. Will keep ye updated

paddy19

golfrules wrote: »

.
This is similar to response everyone has received from the Small claims court.
Unfortunately I’m not in. Position to go to the courts as like I the West.
I have now requested a Charge Bank from Bank of Ireland so ����that I’m successful with them. Will keep ye updated

This is really a game of who blinks first.
They will more than likely payup just before the case.

There is absolutely no point in Ryanair going to court for a case they will definitely loose.

You can always write a nice email to the Registrar a day before the court date saying that you have decided not to travel.

One thought, there is a possibility that the courts will allow video link in the future.

You really have nothing to loose by opting for a court hearing.
It also keeps the pressure on Ryanair.

Hopefully Bank of Ireland who are doing a really good job on chargeback will come through for you.

limabromac

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/frustrated-airline-passengers-left-with-little-option-but-to-go-to-court-for-refunds-999827.html

ratracer

I reckon the SCC is going to get an awful lot busier over the next couple of months. But if you’re not prepared to turn up in court, why waste their time??

My AL flights are booked for July 2nd, I’ll be over €1k in the hole so I will be going down SCC route after this date, and even though I live in Galway, if I’m summoned to court in Swords, I will travel in the day! I think I’d get great satisfaction out of turning up, which is something the airlines obviously reckon most claimants won’t do, and being awarded MY money by the courts!

paddy19

ratracer wrote: »

I reckon the SCC is going to get an awful lot busier over the next couple of months. But if you’re not prepared to turn up in court, why waste their time??

My AL flights are booked for July 2nd, I’ll be over €1k in the hole so I will be going down SCC route after this date, and even though I live in Galway, if I’m summoned to court in Swords, I will travel in the day! I think I’d get great satisfaction out of turning up, which is something the airlines obviously reckon most claimants won’t do, and being awarded MY money by the courts!

Go on ya if you can get to Swords, but other folk may not have that flexibility.
It's the one area I think needs changing with SCC.
Why should the customer have to go to the court where the company is registered.
An obvious alternative would be video evidence.

Agreeing claims on the steps of the court is standard practice for legal eagles!
So the courts are well used to it.

Once you have invested your €25 you might as well sweat the Airline out.
At least you have forced the airline to engage in expensive legal support.

Muahahaha

ShatterProof wrote: »

from their chat,

Due to social distancing set up by the government, our refund teams must work from home, and because of this they have limited access to customers personal financial information.


I'm assuming they have VPNs and proper security measures in place. Their explanation doesn't hold water.

And then to cap it all off yesterday they announced that they are making 250 office staff redundant

Ryanair said it is cutting more than 250 jobs at its offices in Dublin, Stansted, Madrid and Wroclaw. It said the job cuts will be made through a combination of contracts ending, resignations and redundancies.

"These people will not be required to return to work on 1 June, when the Ryanair offices reopen, due to the substantial decline in traffic the Ryanair Group Airlines is facing in 2020," the airline said in a statement.

Ryanair has operated less than 1% of its normal flight schedules during April, May and June and this week said that only 40% of its normal schedules would operate in July.
.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2020/0515/1138597-ryanair-job-cuts/

Then there is this tidbit

For the full year, Ryanair said it now expects to carry less than 100 million passengers, over 35% lower than the more than 155 million target for the year ended March 2021

So thats 55 million less passengers for the year. If you assumed 30% were already booked in advance and assigned an averge of 120 euro per return ticket that would be 16 million people who collectively have 1.9 billion euro currently sitting in Ryanairs bank account. No wonder they don't want to issue the refunds that are due.

SweetCaliber

ShatterProof wrote: »

from their chat,

Due to social distancing set up by the government, our refund teams must work from home, and because of this they have limited access to customers personal financial information.


I'm assuming they have VPNs and proper security measures in place. Their explanation doesn't hold water.

From a software point of view, very easily, in fact all they need to do is automate refunds of any flights that are cancelled.

But it is Ryanair, they do it manually on purpose, just another excuse to throw around.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Guys my flights are with Air France, who have a public statement issued, where they state that they won’t give cash refunds for non refundable tickets, even where it’s been cancelled by the airline. I booked those tickets through Expedia.

Who should I initiate my SCC case against?

Muahahaha

As both Air France and Expedia are based outside of the Irish state what you need to do is take the case to the European Small Claims Court. You do that through your local District Court and the form to do so is here, its costs 25 euro.
https://e-justice.europa.eu/dynform_intro_form_action.do?plang=en&idTaxonomy=177

The good news is that the process is all postal so you wont need to show up to any court here or in France. Theres a small chance that Air France could ask for your submission to be translated into French but Id say thats probably unlikely.

Have you asked Expedia for a refund and what did they say? Ultimately both companies have your money, AF obviously more than Expedia.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Thanks for that. No, as it stands I’ve just filled in the AF refund form. I received an email yesterday from Expedia, bulldozing a voucher through to me, “you don’t need to take any action” etc but it’s no use to me, I want the refund. With AF publicly saying they won’t refund, I just want to have my next move lined up ahead of the inevitable row.

I did take out the cancellation plan when booking, so that may bear fruit. If not then I’ll try a chargeback from MasterCard. And lastly, I’ll use your European court link.

Edit: reply from AF, already ignoring the possibility of a refund

Thank you for your e-mail, and apologies for the late reply. Due to the high amount of e-mails we received, related to the COVID-19 virus, we have been unable to answer your e-mail earlier.

Upon checking your booking I can see it is booked via a travel agent. Please contact your travel agent to inform about the possibilities of rebooking or a voucher.

Please stay safe and healthy.

irelandspurs

Has anyone informed the scc they want to have a court date after Ryanair disputed the claim?

Muahahaha

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy wrote: »

Thanks for that. No, as it stands I’ve just filled in the AF refund form. I received an email yesterday from Expedia, bulldozing a voucher through to me, “you don’t need to take any action” etc but it’s no use to me, I want the refund. With AF publicly saying they won’t refund, I just want to have my next move lined up ahead of the inevitable row.

I did take out the cancellation plan when booking, so that may bear fruit. If not then I’ll try a chargeback from MasterCard. And lastly, I’ll use your European court link.

Edit: reply from AF, already ignoring the possibility of a refund

Thank you for your e-mail, and apologies for the late reply. Due to the high amount of e-mails we received, related to the COVID-19 virus, we have been unable to answer your e-mail earlier.

Upon checking your booking I can see it is booked via a travel agent. Please contact your travel agent to inform about the possibilities of rebooking or a voucher.

Please stay safe and healthy.

Sounds like Mastercard is your best bet and then the European SCC if that doesnt work. Id would hope Mastercard should work because at the end of the day youve paid for something that you're no longer going to get. Thats exactly what the chargeback system operates for.

Your contract seems to be with Expedia though ask the court clerk about adding Air France to any claim as a notice party so your bases are covered. You dont want Expedia showing up and saying AF have your money and they're responsible and the court allowing it so its back to square one with 25 euro wasted. The clerk cant give legal advice but should be able to direct you towards making sure you capture the claim properly.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

Yea, I initiated that chargeback today after both AF and Expedia told me to get lost. Expedia were apologetic and suggested the chargeback route, but AF have the money and are determined to hang onto it.

The only slight issue I can see is that the chargeback is for a partial amount. The hotel booking was refunded no hassle, but the flights are obviously still outstanding.

paddy19

Muahahaha wrote: »

Sounds like Mastercard is your best bet and then the European SCC if that doesnt work. Id would hope Mastercard should work because at the end of the day youve paid for something that you're no longer going to get. Thats exactly what the chargeback system operates for.

Your contract seems to be with Expedia though ask the court clerk about adding Air France to any claim as a notice party so your bases are covered. You dont want Expedia showing up and saying AF have your money and they're responsible and the court allowing it so its back to square one with 25 euro wasted. The clerk cant give legal advice but should be able to direct you towards making sure you capture the claim properly.

I agree that a chargeback to Mastercard is probably your best option.

Getting into French law might be considered brave!

DeKing

irelandspurs wrote:

Has anyone informed the scc they want to have a court date after Ryanair disputed the claim?

I did. Only got notification last week that Ryanair disputed the claim 🙄

Muahahaha

Yeah even though your money could be divided up 80-20 between AF and Expedia I would think you can still get a chargeback for the full amount and then its up to Expedia to chase AF for their end. Hopefully works out for you as a chargeback it is the least troublesome way to resolve this rather than going down the Small Claims route.

Its a real mess of a situation. You've cast iron EU law supporting refunds yet airlines are just sticking their fingers in their ears pretending they dont have to refund you.

gzoladz

Muahahaha wrote: »

Yeah even though your money could be divided up 80-20 between AF and Expedia I would think you can still get a chargeback for the full amount and then its up to Expedia to chase AF for their end. Hopefully works out for you as a chargeback it is the least troublesome way to resolve this rather than going down the Small Claims route.

Its a real mess of a situation. You've cast iron EU law supporting refunds yet airlines are just sticking their fingers in their ears pretending they dont have to refund you.

Same situation for me, KLM and Expedia Ireland...they are promising a voucher, I tried a cashback and PTSB didn't want to help. It is circa EUR 3k as they are long haul flights for all my family so scc is not an option. I have logged a complaint with the regulator and will see what happens.

Muahahaha

gzoladz wrote: »

Same situation for me, KLM and Expedia Ireland...they are promising a voucher, I tried a cashback and PTSB didn't want to help. It is circa EUR 3k as they are long haul flights for all my family so scc is not an option. I have logged a complaint with the regulator and will see what happens.

Bad form of PTSB not to oblige, surely the chargeback system is for exactly situations where a company cannot deliver what you have paid for.

What regulator did you contact, travel agents or the airlines? The Commission for Aviation regulates airlines here but for KLM you would have to talk to the Dutch regulator found here https://www.ilent.nl/ French aviation regulator is here https://www.ecologique-solidaire.gouv.fr/ Neither site is available in english so use Google Translate. A full list of each EU members Aviation Regulator is found here
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/2004_261_national_enforcement_bodies.pdf

3,000 euro is a lot of money but the European Small Claims Court is still open to you as the limit of a claim there is 5,000. The local Irish Small Claims Court has a limit of 2,000 per claim.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

I initiated my chargeback online, I haven’t heard anything about it yet. I’m Mastercard/Ulster Bank so I’ll update when I’ve news.

pc7

deleted as per below. sorry.

paddy19

Folks can we move chargebacks questions to

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058069347&page=3

Trying to keep this this thread focused on SCC.

Thanks

golfrules

paddy19 wrote: »

This is really a game of who blinks first.
They will more than likely payup just before the case.

There is absolutely no point in Ryanair going to court for a case they will definitely loose.

You can always write a nice email to the Registrar a day before the court date saying that you have decided not to travel.

One thought, there is a possibility that the courts will allow video link in the future.

You really have nothing to loose by opting for a court hearing.
It also keeps the pressure on Ryanair.

Hopefully Bank of Ireland who are doing a really good job on chargeback will come through for you.

Hi Just to let you know I received my Chargeback Ryan Air flights from Bank of Ireland this morning.
I'm looking at my Credit Card and can't believe it but am one happy girl!! When I submitted Claim I send in all my paper work and a screen shot of 'MY Chat' with Ryanair. In this instance I have to give BOI Full marks

dory

paddy19 wrote: »

Folks can we move chargebacks questions to

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058069347&page=3

Trying to keep this this thread focused on SCC.

Thanks

Agree with Paddy. Lets keep things organised here folks.

paddy19

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Just got the same Ryanair dispute document back from the SCC - clearly a copy and paste and mostly irrelevant. Notice throughout and in all public pronouncements they always say that they are processing refunds (as they must do so legally) but never admit the actuality that no refunds are being issued.

Just got the same Ryanair dispute document back from the SCC - clearly a copy and paste and mostly irrelevant. Notice throughout and in all public pronouncements they always say that they are processing refunds (as they must do so legally) but never admit the actuality that no refunds are being issued.

Quote:
1. No Reasonable Cause of Action and/or Frivolous and/or Vexatious
1.1. It is the Respondent’s case that the only remedy to this claim is for the claim to be dismissed as unmeritorious and unsustainable in law.
1.2. The Respondent will set out below each of the grounds upon which it seeks to rely and asks the Court to dismiss this claim in advance of the Respondent incurring unnecessary and significant costs in having to mount a full defence to this claim.
1.3. The Respondent refers to District Court Rules, Order 47B (7) wherein the Claimant may discontinue a small claim proceeding “… at any time before the small claim proceeding has been referred to the Court without the permission of the Court or the consent of the other parties”.
1.4. The Respondent requests that the Claimant, on the grounds set out below, immediately withdraw the claim as filed and notwithstanding paragraph 1.3 above, avers its consent to any such application by the Claimant.
1.5. In circumstances where the Claimant refuses to withdraw the claim, the
Respondent will seek to reply upon The Rules of the Superior Court, and in particular Order 19, Rule 28 wherein it is stated that (emphasis added):
“28. The Court may order any pleading to be struck out, on the ground that it
discloses no reasonable cause of action or answer and in any such case or in case of the action or defence being shown by the pleadings to be frivolous or vexatious, the Court may order the action to be stayed or dismissed, or judgement to be entered accordingly, as may be just.”
It is the Respondent’s case, and as set out in full detail below, that the claim as pleaded is frivolous or vexatious, in their legal definition1 (emphasis added):
“… It is merely a question of saying that so far as the plaintiff is concerned if he has no reasonable chance of succeeding then the law says that it is frivolous to bring the case… Similarly, it is a hardship on the defendant to have to take steps to defend something which cannot succeed and the law calls that vexatious”.
1.6. It is the Respondent case that this extends beyond the drafting failures of the lay litigant and that the Claimant is bound to fail as the issues in composite, as set out below, extend beyond the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court.
1.7. Having regards to the seriousness of the request to dismiss the claim, the Respondent now sets out below the sufficient grounds upon which it makes this application for the claim to be dismissed.
2 Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 (Act 2 of 2020)


2. Claim application not properly pleaded
2.1. It is the Respondent’s case that while it has at times, pre- the COVID19 legislation2 and in cases where the claimant is a lay litigant, accepted claims filed and served wherein the claim was not properly particularised and/or pleaded, the Respondent is no longer
physically in a position to do so in the circumstances of this case and as set out below.
2.2. It appears to the Respondent that the Claimant’s claim, as pleaded, is not properly particularised thereby not allowing the Respondent to know the full claim made against it.
2.3. The Claimant failed to confirm and evidence his compliance with article 15.2 of the general terms and conditions of carriage (“GTCC”).
2.4. The Claimant failed to provide any statement of claim from which the Respondent can know the details of claim it has to meet.
2.5. The Claimant failed to evidence the value of the claim.
2.6. The Claimant failed to particular all claimants to the claim by failing to provide full and proper particulars of other passengers on whose behalf he appears to have filed the claim, being passengers on the same booking.
2.7. The Claimant failed to provide evidence of the alleged cancellation or failed to make any pleadings in relation to these pertinent details.
2.8. The claim application is completely devoid of pleadings and/or evidence. This failure on the part of the Claimant creates a server disadvantage against the Respondent and this situation cannot be accepted irrespective of the lay litigant status of the Claimant.


3. Abuse of Process
3.1. Without prejudice to the above, the Respondent further replies that the Claimant in bringing these proceedings and in the form they have been brought is acting in a manner that the Respondent can consider in no other way but as being an abuse of the Court’s process.
3.2. It is the Respondent’s case that the Claimant has not evidenced that he applied for a refund nor has he pleaded the details of any alleged refund application made to the Respondent.
3.3. The Respondent is operating in an environment of Government mandated and enforced “stay at home” quarantining in place throughout its main centres for customer services operations and therefore the Respondent has reduced capabilities due to the mandated working conditions under the Covid19 legislation. The Claimant is, by failing to properly plead and evidence the claim, causing an unnecessary and improper burden for the Respondent in circumstances where the Respondent would be forced to carry out a full investigation on its end in order to interpret and/or “guess” the
case being made against it.
3.4. It is the Respondent’s case that the claim as filed is frivolous and vexations for this reason as it must fail where there is no evidence or pleading whatsoever of any claim against the Respondent.
3.5. In addition to this, the Respondent will further elucidate below the grounds upon which allowing the Claimant to amend the claim will not save the claim.


4. Claim not maintainable in law
4.1. It is the Respondent’s case that the Claimant claim is not maintainable in law in circumstances where the only claim that could, and it is denied that this claim has been made for the reasons set out above, be made against the Respondent is that:
4.1.1. The Respondent breached article 8 of Regulation EU261/2004 by failing to offer a rerouting or a refund for the cancelled flight; and/or
4.1.2. The Respondent failed to refund the Claimant within 7 days.
4.2. Again, no pleading and/or evidence have been provided however the Respondent notes as below.
4.3. It appears to the Respondent that the only reason the Claimant would not have been offered a refund is if it provided incorrect and/or invalid contact details when making the flight booking thereby the communications sent by the Respondent were not received; or
4.4. The Claimant has received the communication however he has not applied for a refund or reroute, which is clearly set out in the automatic email that is sent out on every booking wherein the flight has been cancelled.
4.5. It is the Respondent’s case that it has a very specialised procedure in place, to the best of its abilities and resources and in compliance with all applicable laws, and therefore the Claimant’s apparent failure to comply with article 15.2 is a breach of the agreed GTCCs by the Claimant and the claim is therefore not actionable against the Respondent.
4.6. The Respondents asks the Claimant to withdraw the claim made against it and to comply with the agreed GTCCs. In the absence of evidence from the Claimant that he did comply, the Respondent asks the Court to dismiss the claim.
4.7. For reasons set out below, the Respondent will address part two of any potential claim, namely the 7 days payment.


5. Offers made in compliance with all applicable law
5.1. It is the Respondent’s case that each passenger, including the Claimant, who has a valid booking on an impacted flight at the time of the event causing the cancellation receives a notification from the Respondent to the email address registered on the booking, informing each passenger of their rights and offering them a travel credit voucher, a flight move or a refund. [Tab 13]
5.2. The document at Tab 1, clearly sets out that refunds are an option and if selected the claim for a refund will be queued.
5.3. The Respondent offers travel credit vouchers and free moves as these are automated processes that can be done through the online systems by the passengers themselves and thereby leaving capacity in the Respondent’s customer services staff to deal with the refund applications.
5.4. The Respondent has kept refunds in the fore of its mind in compliance with the Regulation whereby it is the Respondent’s case that:
5.4.1. Travel credit vouchers can be declined, and a refund requested; and
5.4.2. Where travel credit vouchers are accepted however ultimately, they are not used within twelve months, the refund option remains available as a special
consideration in these circumstances and the booking will be queued for a refund on the expiry of the twelve month time limit for use of the travel credit voucher.
5.5. It is public knowledge that refunds are being processed by the Respondent. The event of extraordinary circumstances that caused the cancellations is still ongoing and constantly evolving. In response to this, the Respondent is:
5.5.1. continuously issuing press releases to the media;
5.5.2. conducting interviews with news outlets;
5.5.3. issuing updates to passengers directly;
5.5.4. working with the Government and other member states; and
5.5.5. has a page on its website dedicated to the Covid-19 event, which is constantly updated and is available in multiple language4.
3 Redacted for privacy and emphasis added.
4 https://www.ryanair.com/ie/en/useful...virus-covid-19
5.6. The Respondent is processing over 1,000 times the normal volume of cancellations and is doing so in an environment where the Respondent has 75% fewer staff available to process refunds.
5.7. The Respondent provides full transparency at all time that the refund option, if availed of by the passengers, will be honoured however the timeframe within which they can comply is not within its control as they are subject to and affected by the Government mandated restrictions namely that the Respondent’s customer care agents, as with all other non-essential works nationally, are required to work from home in order to limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus. This has caused a currently insurmountable obstacle in the form of payment security restrictions which prevent the Respondent from processing refunds in the timely manner that it does under normal circumstances due to the undeniable change in working facilities such as data
security, sensitive data transmission, at home facilities and resources of the financial customer services teams. The in-office conditions and structures cannot realistically be replicated in at-home environments and therefore creating a fully disclosed delay in process refund claims. This situation was not envisaged when the EU261 Regulation was being drafted.
5.8. Furthermore, the Respondent has implemented forward thinking strategies to protect the rights of its customers in circumstances where if a passenger, including the Claimant, opts for and receives a travel credit voucher and they do not or cannot use the travel credit voucher within its twelve-month life the Respondent will automatically refund the monies to the passenger at the expiry of the 12 months. The end date of the travel chaos and uncertainty is not known and the Respondent has put this additional security in place for the passengers comfort and to protect their rights as best as the current situation allows.
5.9. The Respondent is taking and has made every consideration open to it at this time and in the circumstances under which it must safely and in compliance with national and international laws carry out this work.
5.10. It is the Respondent’s case that this is not an Irish but a European and International situation and the harmony of the application of the relevant laws, including Regulation EU261, is a paramount consideration and one that falls outside of the remit of the District Court Small Claims Procedure, in these circumstances.
6. The Respondent is operating in compliance with all laws and while the EU261 Regulation is directly applicable in this jurisdiction and cannot be contravened by national legislation equally the Respondent must consider the enactment of emergency legislation in this Jurisdictions, namely, Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 (Act 2 of 2020), and the follow on obstacles that have been created such as the aforementioned data security limitations on foot of the “stay at home” orders requiring employee to work
from home. These issues are varied and complex and require satisfaction at State and Member State level and are therefore wholly unsuitable at this juncture for adjudication by the District Court Small Claims Court.


7. Conclusion
7.1. The Respondent seeks to have the claim dismissed on the grounds set out above.

ted1

So basically all the advice you gave people about going through the SCC just cost them 25 euro ?

Time

paddy19 wrote: »

Just got the same Ryanair dispute document back from the SCC - clearly a copy and paste and mostly irrelevant. Notice throughout and in all public pronouncements they always say that they are processing refunds (as they must do so legally) but never admit the actuality that no refunds are being issued.

Quote:
1. No Reasonable Cause of Action and/or Frivolous and/or Vexatious
1.1. It is the Respondent’s case that the only remedy to this claim is for the claim to be dismissed as unmeritorious and unsustainable in law.
1.2. The Respondent will set out below each of the grounds upon which it seeks to rely and asks the Court to dismiss this claim in advance of the Respondent incurring unnecessary and significant costs in having to mount a full defence to this claim.
1.3. The Respondent refers to District Court Rules, Order 47B (7) wherein the Claimant may discontinue a small claim proceeding “… at any time before the small claim proceeding has been referred to the Court without the permission of the Court or the consent of the other parties”.
1.4. The Respondent requests that the Claimant, on the grounds set out below, immediately withdraw the claim as filed and notwithstanding paragraph 1.3 above, avers its consent to any such application by the Claimant.
1.5. In circumstances where the Claimant refuses to withdraw the claim, the
Respondent will seek to reply upon The Rules of the Superior Court, and in particular Order 19, Rule 28 wherein it is stated that (emphasis added):
“28. The Court may order any pleading to be struck out, on the ground that it
discloses no reasonable cause of action or answer and in any such case or in case of the action or defence being shown by the pleadings to be frivolous or vexatious, the Court may order the action to be stayed or dismissed, or judgement to be entered accordingly, as may be just.”
It is the Respondent’s case, and as set out in full detail below, that the claim as pleaded is frivolous or vexatious, in their legal definition1 (emphasis added):
“… It is merely a question of saying that so far as the plaintiff is concerned if he has no reasonable chance of succeeding then the law says that it is frivolous to bring the case… Similarly, it is a hardship on the defendant to have to take steps to defend something which cannot succeed and the law calls that vexatious”.
1.6. It is the Respondent case that this extends beyond the drafting failures of the lay litigant and that the Claimant is bound to fail as the issues in composite, as set out below, extend beyond the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court.
1.7. Having regards to the seriousness of the request to dismiss the claim, the Respondent now sets out below the sufficient grounds upon which it makes this application for the claim to be dismissed.
2 Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 (Act 2 of 2020)


2. Claim application not properly pleaded
2.1. It is the Respondent’s case that while it has at times, pre- the COVID19 legislation2 and in cases where the claimant is a lay litigant, accepted claims filed and served wherein the claim was not properly particularised and/or pleaded, the Respondent is no longer
physically in a position to do so in the circumstances of this case and as set out below.
2.2. It appears to the Respondent that the Claimant’s claim, as pleaded, is not properly particularised thereby not allowing the Respondent to know the full claim made against it.
2.3. The Claimant failed to confirm and evidence his compliance with article 15.2 of the general terms and conditions of carriage (“GTCC”).
2.4. The Claimant failed to provide any statement of claim from which the Respondent can know the details of claim it has to meet.
2.5. The Claimant failed to evidence the value of the claim.
2.6. The Claimant failed to particular all claimants to the claim by failing to provide full and proper particulars of other passengers on whose behalf he appears to have filed the claim, being passengers on the same booking.
2.7. The Claimant failed to provide evidence of the alleged cancellation or failed to make any pleadings in relation to these pertinent details.
2.8. The claim application is completely devoid of pleadings and/or evidence. This failure on the part of the Claimant creates a server disadvantage against the Respondent and this situation cannot be accepted irrespective of the lay litigant status of the Claimant.


3. Abuse of Process
3.1. Without prejudice to the above, the Respondent further replies that the Claimant in bringing these proceedings and in the form they have been brought is acting in a manner that the Respondent can consider in no other way but as being an abuse of the Court’s process.
3.2. It is the Respondent’s case that the Claimant has not evidenced that he applied for a refund nor has he pleaded the details of any alleged refund application made to the Respondent.
3.3. The Respondent is operating in an environment of Government mandated and enforced “stay at home” quarantining in place throughout its main centres for customer services operations and therefore the Respondent has reduced capabilities due to the mandated working conditions under the Covid19 legislation. The Claimant is, by failing to properly plead and evidence the claim, causing an unnecessary and improper burden for the Respondent in circumstances where the Respondent would be forced to carry out a full investigation on its end in order to interpret and/or “guess” the
case being made against it.
3.4. It is the Respondent’s case that the claim as filed is frivolous and vexations for this reason as it must fail where there is no evidence or pleading whatsoever of any claim against the Respondent.
3.5. In addition to this, the Respondent will further elucidate below the grounds upon which allowing the Claimant to amend the claim will not save the claim.


4. Claim not maintainable in law
4.1. It is the Respondent’s case that the Claimant claim is not maintainable in law in circumstances where the only claim that could, and it is denied that this claim has been made for the reasons set out above, be made against the Respondent is that:
4.1.1. The Respondent breached article 8 of Regulation EU261/2004 by failing to offer a rerouting or a refund for the cancelled flight; and/or
4.1.2. The Respondent failed to refund the Claimant within 7 days.
4.2. Again, no pleading and/or evidence have been provided however the Respondent notes as below.
4.3. It appears to the Respondent that the only reason the Claimant would not have been offered a refund is if it provided incorrect and/or invalid contact details when making the flight booking thereby the communications sent by the Respondent were not received; or
4.4. The Claimant has received the communication however he has not applied for a refund or reroute, which is clearly set out in the automatic email that is sent out on every booking wherein the flight has been cancelled.
4.5. It is the Respondent’s case that it has a very specialised procedure in place, to the best of its abilities and resources and in compliance with all applicable laws, and therefore the Claimant’s apparent failure to comply with article 15.2 is a breach of the agreed GTCCs by the Claimant and the claim is therefore not actionable against the Respondent.
4.6. The Respondents asks the Claimant to withdraw the claim made against it and to comply with the agreed GTCCs. In the absence of evidence from the Claimant that he did comply, the Respondent asks the Court to dismiss the claim.
4.7. For reasons set out below, the Respondent will address part two of any potential claim, namely the 7 days payment.


5. Offers made in compliance with all applicable law
5.1. It is the Respondent’s case that each passenger, including the Claimant, who has a valid booking on an impacted flight at the time of the event causing the cancellation receives a notification from the Respondent to the email address registered on the booking, informing each passenger of their rights and offering them a travel credit voucher, a flight move or a refund. [Tab 13]
5.2. The document at Tab 1, clearly sets out that refunds are an option and if selected the claim for a refund will be queued.
5.3. The Respondent offers travel credit vouchers and free moves as these are automated processes that can be done through the online systems by the passengers themselves and thereby leaving capacity in the Respondent’s customer services staff to deal with the refund applications.
5.4. The Respondent has kept refunds in the fore of its mind in compliance with the Regulation whereby it is the Respondent’s case that:
5.4.1. Travel credit vouchers can be declined, and a refund requested; and
5.4.2. Where travel credit vouchers are accepted however ultimately, they are not used within twelve months, the refund option remains available as a special
consideration in these circumstances and the booking will be queued for a refund on the expiry of the twelve month time limit for use of the travel credit voucher.
5.5. It is public knowledge that refunds are being processed by the Respondent. The event of extraordinary circumstances that caused the cancellations is still ongoing and constantly evolving. In response to this, the Respondent is:
5.5.1. continuously issuing press releases to the media;
5.5.2. conducting interviews with news outlets;
5.5.3. issuing updates to passengers directly;
5.5.4. working with the Government and other member states; and
5.5.5. has a page on its website dedicated to the Covid-19 event, which is constantly updated and is available in multiple language4.
3 Redacted for privacy and emphasis added.
4 https://www.ryanair.com/ie/en/useful...virus-covid-19
5.6. The Respondent is processing over 1,000 times the normal volume of cancellations and is doing so in an environment where the Respondent has 75% fewer staff available to process refunds.
5.7. The Respondent provides full transparency at all time that the refund option, if availed of by the passengers, will be honoured however the timeframe within which they can comply is not within its control as they are subject to and affected by the Government mandated restrictions namely that the Respondent’s customer care agents, as with all other non-essential works nationally, are required to work from home in order to limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus. This has caused a currently insurmountable obstacle in the form of payment security restrictions which prevent the Respondent from processing refunds in the timely manner that it does under normal circumstances due to the undeniable change in working facilities such as data
security, sensitive data transmission, at home facilities and resources of the financial customer services teams. The in-office conditions and structures cannot realistically be replicated in at-home environments and therefore creating a fully disclosed delay in process refund claims. This situation was not envisaged when the EU261 Regulation was being drafted.
5.8. Furthermore, the Respondent has implemented forward thinking strategies to protect the rights of its customers in circumstances where if a passenger, including the Claimant, opts for and receives a travel credit voucher and they do not or cannot use the travel credit voucher within its twelve-month life the Respondent will automatically refund the monies to the passenger at the expiry of the 12 months. The end date of the travel chaos and uncertainty is not known and the Respondent has put this additional security in place for the passengers comfort and to protect their rights as best as the current situation allows.
5.9. The Respondent is taking and has made every consideration open to it at this time and in the circumstances under which it must safely and in compliance with national and international laws carry out this work.
5.10. It is the Respondent’s case that this is not an Irish but a European and International situation and the harmony of the application of the relevant laws, including Regulation EU261, is a paramount consideration and one that falls outside of the remit of the District Court Small Claims Procedure, in these circumstances.
6. The Respondent is operating in compliance with all laws and while the EU261 Regulation is directly applicable in this jurisdiction and cannot be contravened by national legislation equally the Respondent must consider the enactment of emergency legislation in this Jurisdictions, namely, Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 (Act 2 of 2020), and the follow on obstacles that have been created such as the aforementioned data security limitations on foot of the “stay at home” orders requiring employee to work
from home. These issues are varied and complex and require satisfaction at State and Member State level and are therefore wholly unsuitable at this juncture for adjudication by the District Court Small Claims Court.


7. Conclusion
7.1. The Respondent seeks to have the claim dismissed on the grounds set out above.

Standard practice of offering any and all defences. The SCC is designed for lay litigants too, so their submissions on incorrect pleadings and abuse of process are a joke.

pc7

Time wrote: »

Standard practice of offering any and all defences. The SCC is designed for lay litigants too, so their submissions on incorrect pleadings and abuse of process are a joke.

Does that mean the SCC won't hear the case?

Time

pc7 wrote: »

Does that mean the SCC won't hear the case?

No the case has already been accepted, this is their submission to the court pre-hearing, they're basically clutching at straws for reasons to have it dismissed. Saying there should be a statement of claim etc.. is rubbish because the SCC is filed via an online form, you aren't required to submit stuff like that.

Edit: they probably paid RDJ more than the cost of the refund to issue the above response.

paddy19

Usual disclaimer: I'm not lawyer so none of this is legal advise.

The most interesting piece is:

"3.5. In addition to this, the Respondent will further elucidate below the grounds upon which
allowing the Claimant to amend the claim will not save the claim."

So you can amend the claim by sending the information they say they didn't get to the Registrar .


2.5. The Claimant failed to evidence the value of the claim.

So that's just the total amount as in the original booking.
Best to include the original invoice.

2.6. The Claimant failed to particular all claimants to the claim by failing
to provide full and proper particulars of other passengers on whose behalf
he appears to have filed the claim, being passengers on the same booking.

List of passengers should be on the invoice.

2.7. The Claimant failed to provide evidence of the alleged cancellation
or failed to make any pleadings in relation to these pertinent details.

Hard neck!

You'd almost feel like leaving that in and let Ryanair claim they don't know what flights they cancelled.

Voucher Email from Ryanair or screenshot from your booking page.


3. Abuse of Process:

3.2. It is the Respondents case that the Claimant has not evidenced that he applied
for a refund nor has he pleaded the details of any alleged refund application made to the Respondent.

So if you haven't got it you can get by entering the data into the refund
page and copy the pop-up which says that the refund is already in the queue.


4.4. The Claimant has received the communication however he has not applied for a refund
or reroute, which is clearly set out in the automatic email that is sent out on every booking
wherein the flight has been cancelled.

Proof of refund yet again.

Jurisdiction and all that stuff is way beyond my limited knowledge.