Flying Blue (Air France & KLM) - Miles for cancelled flight

KL878 BKK - AMS on 11Oct was cancelled (technical problem with plane). I was re-booked on LH via FRA but believe I am entitled to 1) my FB miles as if I had flown KL; and 2) EUR 300 "EU" compensation as I arrived in AMS 3 1/2 hours later than scheduled.

Does anyone know where / how to apply for 1) and 2) above.

P.S. Anyone complaining about KL service levels should fly LH economy. BKK - FRA definitely the worst flight of my life: extremely uncomfortable seats, very poor food, grumpy FAs. Also, transfer at FRA was an absolute nightmare.

KL878 BKK - AMS on 11Oct was cancelled (technical problem with plane). I was re-booked on LH via FRA but believe I am entitled to 1) my FB miles as if I had flown KL; and 2) EUR 300 "EU" compensation as I arrived in AMS 3 1/2 hours later than scheduled.

Does anyone know where / how to apply for 1) and 2) above.

P.S. Anyone complaining about KL service levels should fly LH economy. BKK - FRA definitely the worst flight of my life: extremely uncomfortable seats, very poor food, grumpy FAs. Also, transfer at FRA was an absolute nightmare.

1. Yes, you will have to file a retro claim based on original route. Supply the usual ticket details and explain that the flight went tech.

2. Unfortunately, technical problems and associated flight safety issues will be used to invoke the exceptions. Unless you have indications that there may have been another reason, it's not worth the try.

As for 1), yes indeed, you're entitled to those miles. The best thing is to call FB and ask which is the procedure in force right now. When it happened to me (due to an AF strike), I just had to fax them the boarding pass of the flight I was rebooked on.

As for 2), I'd try first talking to KLM (check the links here (http://www.klm.com/travel/nl_en/travel_information/customer_support/compensation_refund/index.htm#1)). If it doesn't work at first, a good and effective solution is EUclaim (http://www.euclaim.co.uk/).

Yep - you can definately claim the miles. I did it when caught up in a strike at CDG for FIVE days a couple of years ago and eventually got re-routed on BA/SAA to JNB. It was pretty straightforward if i recall though that may have changed. What it did do was push my BMI account into Gold that year as well thanks to the SAA points and provided a realistation that SAA business was superior to AF or KL. Oh and that the A346 is a far quieter plane than a 777.

...2) EUR 300 "EU" compensation as I arrived in AMS 3 1/2 hours later than scheduled.

I believe you will only be compensated if the departure time is over whatever category the delay falls under and your destination (miles wise); not the actual delay on arrival, if that makes sense. :(

I have only been massively delayed on a few SK flights and was given the compensation straight away at the airport either as travel vouchers worth EUR 300 (or half if taken in cash).

I believe you will only be compensated if the departure time is over whatever category the delay falls under and your destination (miles wise); not the actual delay on arrival, if that makes sense. :(


I think you are wrong:

from http://http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62007C0402:EN:HTML

Quote
9. Article 7, entitled ‘Right to compensation’, provides:

‘1. Where reference is made to this Article, passengers shall receive compensation amounting to:

(a) EUR 250 for all flights of 1 500 kilometres or less;

(b) EUR 400 for all intra-Community flights of more than 1 500 kilometres, and for all other flights between 1 500 and 3 500 kilometres;

(c) EUR 600 for all flights not falling under (a) or (b).

In determining the distance, the basis shall be the last destination at which the denial of boarding or cancellation will delay the passenger’s arrival after the scheduled time.

2. When passengers are offered re-routing to their final destination on an alternative flight pursuant to Article 8, the arrival time of which does not exceed the scheduled arrival time of the flight originally booked

(a) by two hours, in respect of all flights of 1 500 kilometres or less; or;

(b) by three hours, in respect of all intra-Community flights of more than 1 500 kilometres and for all other flights between 1 500 and 3 500 kilometres; or

(c) by four hours, in respect of all flights not falling under (a) or (b),

the operating air carrier may reduce the compensation provided for in paragraph 1 by 50%.
Unquote

I wrote to KLM and already received a reply in which they deny the financial compensation claiming a technical problem is an "extraordinary circumstance".

However, from the eur-lex website the following quote:

quote
98. The third question referred in Böck and Lepuschitz seeks clarification as to whether technical problems with an aircraft and the resulting changes to the flight schedule fall within the definition of extraordinary circumstances.

99. I dealt in detail with that question in my Opinion in Kramme, (53) but the reference was withdrawn before the Court gave judgment. A similar reference was subsequently made in Wallentin-Hermann. (54)

100. In its judgment, the Court held that Article 5(3) of the Regulation ‘must be interpreted as meaning that a technical problem in an aircraft which leads to the cancellation of a flight is not covered by the concept of “extraordinary circumstances” within the meaning of that provision, unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control’. (55)
Unquote

I will go the EUclaim way!

Well, in that case good luck!

I'd love to know how this turns out.

I wrote to KLM and already received a reply in which they deny the financial compensation claiming a technical problem is an "extraordinary circumstance".

However, from the eur-lex website the following quote:

quote
98. The third question referred in Böck and Lepuschitz seeks clarification as to whether technical problems with an aircraft and the resulting changes to the flight schedule fall within the definition of extraordinary circumstances.

99. I dealt in detail with that question in my Opinion in Kramme, (53) but the reference was withdrawn before the Court gave judgment. A similar reference was subsequently made in Wallentin-Hermann. (54)

100. In its judgment, the Court held that Article 5(3) of the Regulation ‘must be interpreted as meaning that a technical problem in an aircraft which leads to the cancellation of a flight is not covered by the concept of “extraordinary circumstances” within the meaning of that provision, unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control’. (55)
Unquote

I will go the EUclaim way!

If KLM have already replied, you may not have go to EUClaim yet. It might be helpful to again write to KLM informing them that they have to fully explain, based on the case law you quote, why they invoke the 'extraordinary circumstances'. If they haven't done so and will not do so again, then - you should inform KLM - you will file a complaint with the national authorities, which is generally the last thing they want (and the reason EUClaim are successful).

See http://ec.europa.eu/transport/passengers/air/doc/2009_10_02_national_enforcement_bodies.pdf for a list of these authorities.

The case law (Wallentin/ECJ Case C-549/07) you quote is very recent and, as you say, it says that airlines can't hide behind 'extraordinary circumstances' in many cases of technical issues. However, it does not lay down a rule that airlines can never claim 'extraordinary circumstances' when planes go tech. In your favour, however, is that -quoting the Wallentin judgement - the onus will be on KLM to:

establish that, even if it had deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would clearly not have been able – unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time – to prevent the extraordinary circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight.

EUClaim take a large cut of the money so why not do it yourself?

EUClaim take a large cut of the money so why not do it yourself?

Well, I am not a lawyer and am not looking forward to an endless fight with KLM. Also, I believe EUClaim's cut is reasonable and I hope and believe they can get me the money much quicker. I'll keep this forum updated on any news.

Well, I am not a lawyer and am not looking forward to an endless fight with KLM. Also, I believe EUClaim's cut is reasonable and I hope and believe they can get me the money much quicker. I'll keep this forum updated on any news.

Reasonable? Did you ask them what is their administrative fee per file? I doubt that you will see much of the 600€ that KL should pay you. But emotional satisfaction is a reward by itself.

Also try checking flightmole.com. They have a very helpful forum as well as a claim service that I believe is a little cheaper.

Reasonable? Did you ask them what is their administrative fee per file? I doubt that you will see much of the 600€ that KL should pay you.

They handled a claim for me earlier this year, and had to engage in a number of communications with the airline (at least 6), and I received over 70% of the money awarded.