BELOW IS FIRSTLY THE COMPLAINT I MADE TO USAIR, FOLLOWED BY THE REG'S & THEN THIER REPLY, WHICH SEEMS TO BE ILLIEGAL ?

THE COMPLAINT
My flight, US733 was cancelled due to technical problems on June 26th from LGW/CLT. You kindly flew me via PHL on the same day. Unfortunately even the scheduled time (I actually arrived later) would have meant I arrived 5 hours 38 min's later than the direct route, LGW/CLT.
Under current legislation (see below) as my trip was over 3,500 km's & I was more than 4 hours late I require a compensation payment of 600 euro's (again see chart below).

Regards

THE LAW
Air Transport Users Council Printer Version

This page lists the rights of air passengers under Regulation (EC) 261/2004 when a flight is cancelled. It only applies to those passengers flying from an EU airport or from an airport outside the EU to an EU airport on an EU carrier

If your flight is cancelled you are entitled (under Regulation (EC) 261/2004) to the following;
1. Refund or re-routing
1. If you decide not to travel you are entitled to a refund, within seven days, of the parts of the tickets not used. If it is a connecting flight and you have already made part of the journey and do not want to continue with it, reimbursement of the total price of the ticket (including parts of the journey not made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to your original travel plan) within seven days and a free flight back to point of departure.

You are not entitled (under Regulation 261/2004) to reimbursement of any other components of your trip such as hotel and transfer costs

or

Re-routing to your final destination as soon as possible or, if you agree, at a later date. (If the airline flies you to another airport in your destination city then they must pay for the transfer to the airport you were booked for or to another close-by point of your choice)

2. Compensation
(The airline is not obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the cancellation was caused by "extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken". Such extraordinary circumstances might 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".)

Length of journey Delay to destination Compensation
Up to 1500km Up to 2 hours €125
Up to 1500km More than 2 hours €250
1500km to 3500km Up to 3 hours €200
1500km to 3500km more than 3 hours €400
More than 3500km Up to 4 hours €300
More than 3500km More than 4 hours €600

3. Assistance at the airport
Meals and refreshments in reasonable relation to waiting time
Two free telephone calls, emails, telexes or faxes
Overnight hotel accommodation and transfers

In addition to your entitlement under EU law, you may also be entitled under the Montreal Convention to any "damages" resulting from any delay to your journey. Please see our advice on the Montreal Convention.


USAIR REPLY
Thank you for contacting the Executive Office of US Airways. We appreciate hearing from our customers and having an opportunity to address their concerns.

I sincerely aplogize for the inconvenience and frustration you experienced as a result of our cancellation of flight 733 from London to Charlotte on June 26, 2007. It is not our intent to create difficulties for our customers and realize flight cancellations are very frustrating for everyone involved.

As the safety of our passengers and crew is our number one priority, we will not operate an aircraft that compromises this objective. A thorough investigation of this incident revealed the prevous flight was diverted to Shannon, Ireland, due to mechanical problems. There is no indication this malfunction existed prior to the previous flight. Moreover, the aircraft had undergone all regular and required maintenance.

For this reason, we will not be compensating you under EU Regulation 261/2004. As an international carrier, we are bound by the terms and provisions of EU Regulation 261/2004. Article 5(3) of the regulation specifically releases carriers from the obligation to pay compensation for delayed or cancelled flights caused by extraordinary events, which could not have been avoided, even if all measures had been taken. As the circumstances surrounding this flight cancellation were neither reasonably forseeable nor reasonably preventable, no compensation is due under the Regulation.

While I cannot offer compensation under Regulation 261/2004, I can offer an electronic Transportation Voucher for $200.00

COMMENTS PLEASE

As the circumstances surrounding this flight cancellation were neither reasonably forseeable nor reasonably preventable, no compensation is due under the Regulation.

COMMENTS PLEASE

Brilliant! Their attorney's, at least, appear well compensated.

It's certainly interesting that the airline is using the "extraordinary circumstances" clause of the regulations to get out of paying you. Although, I suppose they have a point in that the airplanes do undergo regular maintenance. I wonder if this is how all airlines will excuse themselves from the EU Regulations.

I would currently be writing a letter to the department of the EU responsible for transport and these regulations re: the use of this clause to excuse themselves from proper compensation. I assume that the only way the EU will change this practice is to hear how airlines are using the clause to get out of paying?

I bet the airline will use the same clause to weasel out of paying the poor schlubs in MUC last week, even though they were waiting for a part.

Good luck.

"extraordinary events" - incredibly ambiguous. :confused:

So US flouts EU law and then gives you a $200 voucher? I suggest you file a complaint . . .

Sorry to hear of the trouble SWEFCO.

dcstudent had an excellent post (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=7915321#post7915321) in the UA forum regarding EU rules and compensation for delays. While it may not address you exact situation, it does offer a some insight into how the airlines must adhere to the EU standards.

euclaim.com

Where they will file your claim for a fee--

At least you can put some legal pressure on them.

I have 6 claims to file -- I have written US and it's clearly not a case where the maintenance problem was unexpected. I have given them 10 days to respond.

Don't let it go they must be punished

Very interesting post and question.

Reading into the EU legislation, I think the key text here is: Such extraordinary circumstances might 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".)

The only thing that's relevant to this situation is: "unexpected flight safety shortcomings." W/out knowing why the flight went mechanical let's look at what happened. The flight prior to yours diverted to SNN. That tells me they experienced some sort of unexpected flight safety shortcoming (unless it diverted due to a medical emergency - in which case I'm sure there's something in the law that gets them out of that too).

I really, really, really hate to say this - but I think the US legal team is accurate to the letter of the law. Are they providing good customer service? Absolutely not.

If you're looking to get something out of them, negotiate for a higher dollar voucher amount but I think your financial claim is dead in the water. And just be thankful you got to London only a few hours late and not, ohh... sent via MUC for a jaunt through one of US ops inner-circles of h*ll.

But lets all ask ourselves. Why are people flying US trans-atlantic*? Take a look at their on-time numbers. This airline is plagued with operational problems. Is saving a dollar or two worth the headaches and inconveniences?




*I'm about to do this myself next week, so feel free to call me a hypocritical a**. But at least I know what I'm getting into.

I'm sorry but I think a $200 flight voucher is more than adequate in this situation. Compared to what a lot of US passengers go through, a 5-6 hour delay is pretty trivial and I believe their reasoning is correct. This does fall under "unexpected flight safety shortcomings." The very LAST thing I want to see is an economic incentive for airlines to fly unsafe planes so they don't have to pay out a ton of 600 Euro compensation requests. I mean give me a break. The airlines shouldn't have to go bankrupt paying out compensation. Be glad you got home safely and the same day even.

. . . As the circumstances surrounding this flight cancellation were neither reasonably forseeable nor reasonably preventable, no compensation is due under the Regulation.

That excuse could be used for any mechanical problem, as the airlines obviously don't say, "Well, I think she'll probably make it over the pond, so let's send her on and hope for the best," making the situation "reasonably foreseeable and preventable."

I'm not personally familiar with these EU laws. Are mechanical problems generally exempt from the requirement to compensate passengers?

I'm sorry but I think a $200 flight voucher is more than adequate in this situation. Compared to what a lot of US passengers go through, a 5-6 hour delay is pretty trivial and I believe their reasoning is correct. This does fall under "unexpected flight safety shortcomings." The very LAST thing I want to see is an economic incentive for airlines to fly unsafe planes so they don't have to pay out a ton of 600 Euro compensation requests. I mean give me a break. The airlines shouldn't have to go bankrupt paying out compensation. Be glad you got home safely and the same day even.

The fact JetBlue left passengers on the tarmac at JFK for 12 hour and this passenger was only delayed five-and-a-half, isn't the basis of comparison.

The point is, laws exist in the EU that govern these situations, and US agrees to abide by them by choosing to fly to Europe. This delay either meets the requirements for compensation or it doesn't. This isn't a debate about the merit of those laws.

As for "an economic incentive for airlines to fly unsafe planes so they don't have to pay out a ton of 600 Euro compensation requests," that's a red herring the airlines would love us all to believe. The laws governing safety carry much sharper teeth. One such incident and an airline would be out of business.

The point is, laws exist in the EU that govern these situations, and US agrees to abide by them by choosing to fly to Europe. This delay either meets the requirements for compensation or it doesn't. This isn't a debate about the merit of those laws.

As for "an economic incentive for airlines to fly unsafe planes so they don't have to pay out a ton of 600 Euro compensation requests," that's a red herring the airlines would love us all to believe. The laws governing safety carry much sharper teeth. One such incident and an airline would be out of business.

And US was 100% correct in denying the ridiculous $820 (600 Euro) compensation claim due to the fact that this was most definitely an "unexpected flight safety shortcoming." Furthermore I'm sure the law is set up to protect airlines from having to pay out compensation because of mechanical delays, as they are almost always unexpected.

Grace to irresponsible actions of one of the moderators with the long name I do not want to be here.


BELOW IS FIRSTLY THE COMPLAINT I MADE TO USAIR, FOLLOWED BY THE REG'S & THEN THIER REPLY, WHICH SEEMS TO BE ILLIEGAL ?

THE COMPLAINT
My flight, US733 was cancelled due to technical problems on June 26th from LGW/CLT. You kindly flew me via PHL on the same day. Unfortunately even the scheduled time (I actually arrived later) would have meant I arrived 5 hours 38 min's later than the direct route, LGW/CLT.
Under current legislation (see below) as my trip was over 3,500 km's & I was more than 4 hours late I require a compensation payment of 600 euro's (again see chart below).

Regards

THE LAW
Air Transport Users Council Printer Version

This page lists the rights of air passengers under Regulation (EC) 261/2004 when a flight is cancelled. It only applies to those passengers flying from an EU airport or from an airport outside the EU to an EU airport on an EU carrier

If your flight is cancelled you are entitled (under Regulation (EC) 261/2004) to the following;
1. Refund or re-routing
1. If you decide not to travel you are entitled to a refund, within seven days, of the parts of the tickets not used. If it is a connecting flight and you have already made part of the journey and do not want to continue with it, reimbursement of the total price of the ticket (including parts of the journey not made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to your original travel plan) within seven days and a free flight back to point of departure.

You are not entitled (under Regulation 261/2004) to reimbursement of any other components of your trip such as hotel and transfer costs

or

Re-routing to your final destination as soon as possible or, if you agree, at a later date. (If the airline flies you to another airport in your destination city then they must pay for the transfer to the airport you were booked for or to another close-by point of your choice)

2. Compensation
(The airline is not obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the cancellation was caused by "extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken". Such extraordinary circumstances might 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".)

Length of journey Delay to destination Compensation
Up to 1500km Up to 2 hours €125
Up to 1500km More than 2 hours €250
1500km to 3500km Up to 3 hours €200
1500km to 3500km more than 3 hours €400
More than 3500km Up to 4 hours €300
More than 3500km More than 4 hours €600

3. Assistance at the airport
Meals and refreshments in reasonable relation to waiting time
Two free telephone calls, emails, telexes or faxes
Overnight hotel accommodation and transfers

In addition to your entitlement under EU law, you may also be entitled under the Montreal Convention to any "damages" resulting from any delay to your journey. Please see our advice on the Montreal Convention.


USAIR REPLY
Thank you for contacting the Executive Office of US Airways. We appreciate hearing from our customers and having an opportunity to address their concerns.

I sincerely aplogize for the inconvenience and frustration you experienced as a result of our cancellation of flight 733 from London to Charlotte on June 26, 2007. It is not our intent to create difficulties for our customers and realize flight cancellations are very frustrating for everyone involved.

As the safety of our passengers and crew is our number one priority, we will not operate an aircraft that compromises this objective. A thorough investigation of this incident revealed the prevous flight was diverted to Shannon, Ireland, due to mechanical problems. There is no indication this malfunction existed prior to the previous flight. Moreover, the aircraft had undergone all regular and required maintenance.

For this reason, we will not be compensating you under EU Regulation 261/2004. As an international carrier, we are bound by the terms and provisions of EU Regulation 261/2004. Article 5(3) of the regulation specifically releases carriers from the obligation to pay compensation for delayed or cancelled flights caused by extraordinary events, which could not have been avoided, even if all measures had been taken. As the circumstances surrounding this flight cancellation were neither reasonably forseeable nor reasonably preventable, no compensation is due under the Regulation.

While I cannot offer compensation under Regulation 261/2004, I can offer an electronic Transportation Voucher for $200.00

COMMENTS PLEASE

The EU law absolutely applies to non-EU airlines departing from the EU

I agree. The problem is that no matter how well the aircraft are maintained, there will be unexpected mechanical problems that ground planes for safety reasons. Short of keeping spares at every overseas point of departure, it would be impossible for any airline to comply with the law. So the regulators included a safety clause. The law is meant to protect consumers from bad airline management, such as what has been happening with all the canceled NW flights of late.

Grace to irresponsible actions of one of the moderators with the long name I do not want to be here.
The EU law absolutely applies to non-EU airlines departing from the EU

Is USAirways or any USA registered carrier considered EU carrier?:confused:

The US rep's response in the OP's post acknowledged that US is "bound by the terms and provisions of EU Regulation 261/2004."

And, please lay off the personal attacks.

Grace to irresponsible actions of one of the moderators with the long name I do not want to be here.

Please provide some source for your info I could use it.
So fat I am only finding the following :

"It only applies to those passengers flying from an EU airport or from an airport outside the EU to an EU airport on an EU carrier"

Is USAirways or any USA registered carrier considered EU carrier?:confused:

Read more carefully.

it applies "To those passengers flying from an EU airport" (that's all PAX from EU airports, not just some)

OR

from an airport outside the EU to the EU on an EU carrier. (This means the Eu carriers are responsible to pay this for US departures, for instance)

It's and OR statement, not AND--

One or the other must be true.

you incorrectly applied "EU carrier" as a modifier to the entire sentence, when it actually only applies to the portion after the OR

Anyway, if you search around you will find my description to be accurate.





People are saying that this is protectionism, and with their broader networks US airlines are more likely to be punished, because when a flight cancels the passengers are more likely to be stuck. I think that's bunk, because EU airlines are held to the same standard for, say, departures to the EU from Africa.

In any case, if it was known that the flight was diverted, the OP has a right to be notified, and since it happened well in advance (at least 6 hours, it would seem) he had a right to be rebooked to his destination to arrive no later than 4 hours after the fact. That's not what I think is right, I think it's a little excessive, but that's what the law says.

Please provide some source for your info I could use it.
So fat I am only finding the following :........

Directly from the treaty (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&numdoc=304R0261&lg=en):

Scope

1. This Regulation shall apply:

(a) to passengers departing from an airport located in the territory of a Member State to which the Treaty applies;

(b) to passengers departing from an airport located in a third country to an airport situated in the territory of a Member State to which the Treaty applies, unless they received benefits or compensation and were given assistance in that third country, if the operating air carrier of the flight concerned is a Community carrier.

2. Paragraph 1 shall apply on the condition that passengers:

(a) have a confirmed reservation on the flight concerned and, except in the case of cancellation referred to in Article 5, present themselves for check-in,

- as stipulated and at the time indicated in advance and in writing (including by electronic means) by the air carrier, the tour operator or an authorised travel agent,

or, if no time is indicated,

- not later than 45 minutes before the published departure time; or

(b) have been transferred by an air carrier or tour operator from the flight for which they held a reservation to another flight, irrespective of the reason.

3. This Regulation shall not apply to passengers travelling free of charge or at a reduced fare not available directly or indirectly to the public. However, it shall apply to passengers having tickets issued under a frequent flyer programme or other commercial programme by an air carrier or tour operator.

4. This Regulation shall only apply to passengers transported by motorised fixed wing aircraft.

5. This Regulation shall apply to any operating air carrier providing transport to passengers covered by paragraphs 1 and 2. Where an operating air carrier which has no contract with the passenger performs obligations under this Regulation, it shall be regarded as doing so on behalf of the person having a contract with that passenger.

6. This Regulation shall not affect the rights of passengers under Directive 90/314/EEC. This Regulation shall not apply in cases where a package tour is cancelled for reasons other than cancellation of the flight.

Jim

My flight was from LGW to CLT therefore the EU law applies & mechanical breakdown is specifically mentioned as not extra-ordinary !

My flight was from LGW to CLT therefore the EU law applies & mechanical breakdown is specifically mentioned as not extra-ordinary !

I had a similar problem for a flight FCO-LUG (Lugano, Switzerland) late last May. Flight was cancelled, we were redirected and arrived at destination 5 hours late (original flight duration 1h 25 mins...). Filed a claim and the airline dismissed it using the same kind of argumentation: "mechanical failures are beyond our responsibility, therefore we give you nothing" & "it's in the passengers' interest that an airline does not operate under circumstances that might compromise its passengers' safety".

I was told by a person working at the Swiss Federal Aviation Office that this argumentation is NOT applicable. Mechanical failures are not enough to dismiss a claim based on EC 261/2004. The airline must demonstrate that it did everything possible to ensure normal operations; if they can't, they have to pay (how this happens, I really don't know).

I suggest you to file a claim with the UK Aviation authorities (following EC 261/2004, you need to file in the country where the flight originates IIRC).

Greetings,

My US Air flight (7/10/2008) from LHR-PHL was canceled due to some hydraulic fluid system leak - after a frustrating 5 hour wait with inconsistent information they said it was canceled. No food or water was served for at least 6 hours and there was no responsible US Air agent at LHR to take control of the situation. Booked on for the next day on AA and they paid for AA and the hotel stay before flight. Got back home about 24 hours later than originally scheduled arrival time.

Apparently the gate check-in folks (LHR) were secondary or some such category who work with US air only indirectly and are not "USA Air" agents; the check in counter was also closed by the time the flight was canceled. While there were still some US bound flights that day they never made any attempts to accommodate. They also did not give a copy of the EU regulation nor did I see any posting around the check in desk.

My email complaint (made no reference to (EC) 261/2004) to US Air Customer Relations came back with a response of a $200 E-TUV, as a gesture of goodwill. I responded to their offer, declining the voucher and asking for compensation, quoting EU Regulation (EC) 261/2004. Will wait to see what they say. I sure would like some cash compensation and not the junk E-TUV.


--Ray

BELOW IS FIRSTLY THE COMPLAINT I MADE TO USAIR, FOLLOWED BY THE REG'S & THEN THIER REPLY, WHICH SEEMS TO BE ILLIEGAL ?

THE COMPLAINT
My flight, US733 was cancelled due to technical problems on June 26th from LGW/CLT. You kindly flew me via PHL on the same day. Unfortunately even the scheduled time (I actually arrived later) would have meant I arrived 5 hours 38 min's later than the direct route, LGW/CLT.
Under current legislation (see below) as my trip was over 3,500 km's & I was more than 4 hours late I require a compensation payment of 600 euro's (again see chart below).

Regards

THE LAW
Air Transport Users Council Printer Version

This page lists the rights of air passengers under Regulation (EC) 261/2004 when a flight is cancelled. It only applies to those passengers flying from an EU airport or from an airport outside the EU to an EU airport on an EU carrier

If your flight is cancelled you are entitled (under Regulation (EC) 261/2004) to the following;
1. Refund or re-routing
1. If you decide not to travel you are entitled to a refund, within seven days, of the parts of the tickets not used. If it is a connecting flight and you have already made part of the journey and do not want to continue with it, reimbursement of the total price of the ticket (including parts of the journey not made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to your original travel plan) within seven days and a free flight back to point of departure.

You are not entitled (under Regulation 261/2004) to reimbursement of any other components of your trip such as hotel and transfer costs

or

Re-routing to your final destination as soon as possible or, if you agree, at a later date. (If the airline flies you to another airport in your destination city then they must pay for the transfer to the airport you were booked for or to another close-by point of your choice)

2. Compensation
(The airline is not obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the cancellation was caused by "extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken". Such extraordinary circumstances might 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".)

Length of journey Delay to destination Compensation
Up to 1500km Up to 2 hours €125
Up to 1500km More than 2 hours €250
1500km to 3500km Up to 3 hours €200
1500km to 3500km more than 3 hours €400
More than 3500km Up to 4 hours €300
More than 3500km More than 4 hours €600

3. Assistance at the airport
Meals and refreshments in reasonable relation to waiting time
Two free telephone calls, emails, telexes or faxes
Overnight hotel accommodation and transfers

In addition to your entitlement under EU law, you may also be entitled under the Montreal Convention to any "damages" resulting from any delay to your journey. Please see our advice on the Montreal Convention.


USAIR REPLY
Thank you for contacting the Executive Office of US Airways. We appreciate hearing from our customers and having an opportunity to address their concerns.

I sincerely aplogize for the inconvenience and frustration you experienced as a result of our cancellation of flight 733 from London to Charlotte on June 26, 2007. It is not our intent to create difficulties for our customers and realize flight cancellations are very frustrating for everyone involved.

As the safety of our passengers and crew is our number one priority, we will not operate an aircraft that compromises this objective. A thorough investigation of this incident revealed the prevous flight was diverted to Shannon, Ireland, due to mechanical problems. There is no indication this malfunction existed prior to the previous flight. Moreover, the aircraft had undergone all regular and required maintenance.

For this reason, we will not be compensating you under EU Regulation 261/2004. As an international carrier, we are bound by the terms and provisions of EU Regulation 261/2004. Article 5(3) of the regulation specifically releases carriers from the obligation to pay compensation for delayed or cancelled flights caused by extraordinary events, which could not have been avoided, even if all measures had been taken. As the circumstances surrounding this flight cancellation were neither reasonably forseeable nor reasonably preventable, no compensation is due under the Regulation.

While I cannot offer compensation under Regulation 261/2004, I can offer an electronic Transportation Voucher for $200.00

COMMENTS PLEASE