Swiss International Airlines - Swiss ZRH-SFO delayed by 4:30 hours due to MX - any chance for compensation?

Just sitting in ZRH thanks to being delayed for 4 hours and 30 mins (mechanical issue) and wondering if I'm entitled to any compensation based on EU rules. Is Swiss required to follow EU regulations when it comes to passenger compensation?

Yes, this would apply to Swiss too. However, the delay is calculated upon arrival, not for departure time. They may be able to make up some time, if all goes well. Hope you'll take off as foreseen

Thanks. Yeah, I'm also wondering how fast they will go ... How are the jetstreams today?

4 hours 30 min delay at departure will, if LX is not very dumb, shrink to just about 3 hours 55 minutes on landing.. 4 hours is the threeshould for delay compensation.. so, probably, you won't get it.

And even IF the plane lands more than 4 hours late, good luck with getting the money..

I am on this flight, it is now scheduled for 17h45, so evenmore delay.

I have found this official page, very clear :
http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm

This site states that if flight is more than 3 hours late (it will unless there are VERY strong winds) compensation will be 600€. Not bad...

plegros: Since when is SFO under 3500km away from ZRH? ;)

It all depends on both if there were extraordinary circumstances, and the airline and regulators definition of extraordinary circumstances. Don't spend the money before you get it!!

plegros: Since when is SFO under 3500km away from ZRH? ;)

Somehow they can fly faster if they want to. It happened to our FRA-SFO flight, the pilot said that we could catch up by arriving 2 hours ahead of schedule (it was delayed by 2 hours). It was a full A380 and if they can make it, LX can too.

They have to do it because they have very little turn around time at SFO as far as I know. So if they don't try catching up and minizing time, they will have to comp. the pax SFO-ZRH plus airport parking fee etc.

What's the obsession with compensation on mechanical delays?
It's not like LX delayed the flight intentionally...
To be honest, I find it quite annoying that the first knee jerk reaction always seems to be to ask for compensation.
Guys, it's intercontinental travel we are talking about here. What's a 4 hour delay put into perspective? Nothing!

4 hours 30 min delay at departure will, if LX is not very dumb, shrink to just about 3 hours 55 minutes on landing.. 4 hours is the threeshould for delay compensation.. so, probably, you won't get it.

And even IF the plane lands more than 4 hours late, good luck with getting the money..

plegros: Since when is SFO under 3500km away from ZRH?

YuropFlyer

From your comments above, you seem to be of the belief that 4 hours is the trigger point for delay compensation to kick in. It is in fact a delay of 3 hours or more which triggers delay compensation according to the Sturgeon judgement:

1. Articles 2(l), 5 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, must be interpreted as meaning that a flight which is delayed, irrespective of the duration of the delay, even if it is long, cannot be regarded as cancelled where the flight is operated in accordance with the air carrier’s original planning.

2. Articles 5, 6 and 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that passengers whose flights are delayed may be treated, for the purposes of the application of the right to compensation, as passengers whose flights are cancelled and they may thus rely on the right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of the regulation where they suffer, on account of a flight delay, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is, where they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier. Such a delay does not, however, entitle passengers to compensation if the air carrier can prove that the long delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken, namely circumstances beyond the actual control of the air carrier.

3. Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that a technical problem in an aircraft which leads to the cancellation or delay 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.

Trust this clarifies this aspect for you.

To be honest, I find it quite annoying that the first knee jerk reaction always seems to be to ask for compensation.
^ ^ ^

Yes, this would apply to Swiss too. However, the delay is calculated upon arrival, not for departure time. They may be able to make up some time, if all goes well. Hope you'll take off as foreseen

Just curious as to why Swiss is required to play by EU rules on this route. As far as I remember, Switzerland is not an EU member, and the destination SFO is also outside of EU.

Just curious as to why Swiss is required to play by EU rules on this route. As far as I remember, Switzerland is not an EU member, and the destination SFO is also outside of EU.

From Wiki:

The European Economic Area (EEA) was established on 1 January 1994 following an agreement between the member states of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the European Community, later the European Union (EU).[2] Specifically, it allows Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway to participate in the EU's Internal Market without a conventional EU membership. In exchange, they are obliged to adopt all EU legislation related to the single market, except laws on agriculture and fisheries. One EFTA member, Switzerland, has not joined the EEA, but still has a similar agreement with the EU.

Centipede100:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32004R0261:DE:HTML

Artikel 7 (article 7)

Ausgleichsanspruch (compensation)

(2) (delays)

b) bei allen innergemeinschaftlichen Flügen über eine Entfernung von mehr als 1500 km und bei allen anderen Flügen über eine Entfernung zwischen 1500 und 3500 km nicht später als drei Stunden oder

c) bei allen nicht unter Buchstabe a) oder b) fallenden Flügen nicht später als vier Stunden

German wording of the rules is 4 hours. Rough translation:

b) EU Domestic flights over 1500km, or Non-EU-Domestic flights between 1500 and 3500km non later than 3 hours (no compensation)

c) All other flights (under 1500km, or those in described under b) - no compensation if delay under 4 hours

So, as it's clearly over 3500km, only if the delay is over 4 hours, he's entitled to EU compensation.

And yes, Switzerland does belong to the EU in this sense, same rules apply for Swiss than for LH, AF etc.

What's the obsession with compensation on mechanical delays?
It's not like LX delayed the flight intentionally...
To be honest, I find it quite annoying that the first knee jerk reaction always seems to be to ask for compensation.
Guys, it's intercontinental travel we are talking about here. What's a 4 hour delay put into perspective? Nothing!

^

and i still prefer being delayed because a malfunction is detected and repaired appropriately over being on board an aircraft that has serious issues because a malfunction was detected and ignored/not repaired because the airline wants to avoid compensation.

^

and i still prefer being delayed because a malfunction is detected and repaired appropriately over being on board an aircraft that has serious issues because a malfunction was detected and ignored/not repaired because the airline wants to avoid compensation.

Definitely true, but I do not see a problem in asking for the appropriate compensation according to the EU regulations. One also need to take into account that passengers miss valuable working or free time. This may not be so severe if one considers a 3-4 h delay of a total travel time of probably 15-16 h (if one has a connecting flight). For me, I am still trying to get 600 EUR from LX for a cancelled flights (SFO-ZRH last Dec, also due to a mechanical problem). Had a feeder flight from SAN with ~3h lay-over in SFO, SFO-ZRH was first announced to be delayed (>1h), then boarding started, after 1h on board flight was cancelled, took almost 2h to unload luggage, my suitcase was lost, was in the hotel at 2 am after spending almost 8h at SFO airport. Flight finally landed in ZRH with a ~20h delay. I lost a half free weekend day and almost a complete working day and of course was very annoyed and super-tired after this tour de force. Of course I was happy that we did not start with an aircraft with a serious mechanical issue, but of course I think that I (and SnowmanX) should receive a compensation for my missed free time and the lost working day. Also in 9 out of 10 cases delays have the same consequences (loss of free or working time), but will not be compensated, as they are claimed to be caused by weather, airport regulations, strikes etc. So I think that nobody needs to get annoyed if one asks for a compensation. I believe (although I do not have proof) there will be not more than 10% (probably far less) of passengers asking for a compensation if if they are entitled to, because they are simply not aware of the procedure. Would be interesting to know how much money LX or LH has to pay for compensations according to EU regulation and/or hotel/food/drink costs for delayed/cancelled flights.

4 to 5 hours delay to make me cross the pond safe is not a problem for me.

I wouldn't waste my time in asking for compensation especially when flying with a professional airline like LX, which consider passengers safety as their top priority.

Just as that professional airline will be flexible with any changes you might require when it's not in their contract, right?

The compensation for any flight delays is part of that contract just like the conditions that are in LX favour. So I don't really get all the remarks about accepting those flight delays without asking for compensation.

The safety aspect of it has nothing really to do with getting any compensation for your lost time (and probably money you will lose by arriving late). A window of 3 hours before any compensation is due seems very fair....

Finally arrived home (24 hours door-to-door ...). Anyway it looks like its been over 4 hours, as according to flightstats, the numbers are:
departure scheduled: 1:05 PM actual: 5:50 PM
arrival scheduled: 4:10 PM actual: 8:53 PM
Landed 283 min late.

Now when it comes to the actual compensation - I also prefer safety (that's why I pick Swiss/LH in the first place), but the late arrival caused me to pay bloody money for a cab getting home. In the case we would be arriving on time, a friend was supposed to pick me up at the airport. I'd like to get compensation at least for that ...

What's the obsession with compensation on mechanical delays?
It's not like LX delayed the flight intentionally...
To be honest, I find it quite annoying that the first knee jerk reaction always seems to be to ask for compensation.
Guys, it's intercontinental travel we are talking about here. What's a 4 hour delay put into perspective? Nothing!

You must of spent some time in the UA forums :)

Compensation is either in the title or content of many threads...

Centipede100:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32004R0261:DE:HTML

Artikel 7 (article 7)

Ausgleichsanspruch (compensation)

(2) (delays)

b) bei allen innergemeinschaftlichen Flügen über eine Entfernung von mehr als 1500 km und bei allen anderen Flügen über eine Entfernung zwischen 1500 und 3500 km nicht später als drei Stunden oder

c) bei allen nicht unter Buchstabe a) oder b) fallenden Flügen nicht später als vier Stunden

German wording of the rules is 4 hours. Rough translation:

b) EU Domestic flights over 1500km, or Non-EU-Domestic flights between 1500 and 3500km non later than 3 hours (no compensation)

c) All other flights (under 1500km, or those in described under b) - no compensation if delay under 4 hours

So, as it's clearly over 3500km, only if the delay is over 4 hours, he's entitled to EU compensation.

The Sturgeon judgement has effectively amended the original wording of the Regulation so delay compensation entitlement arises once the delay is 3 hours or more as stated in the quote from the judgement I provided above.

Sturgeon judgement in German: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=261%252F2004&docid=73703&pageIndex=0&doclang=DE&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=523439#ctx1

plegros: Since when is SFO under 3500km away from ZRH? ;)

I don't remember writing that anywhere :p !

Flights between an EU airport and a non-EU airport:

1 500 km or less: 250 euros
1 500 - 3 500 km: 400 euros
More than 3 500 km: 600 euros

Also I am not really blaming Swiss for the delay. I think the delay happened for a good reason; and they informed me 20hr before departure which is very decent.

However I am really surprised that captain/crew did not apologize for the delay when we arrived in SFO.

What was the reason for the delay? This will be key to if you can actually get the compensation.

If it was a clear commercial decision (e.g. co,bine 2 half empty flights), then compensation is obviously due. If it was another reason then your (that Swiss may say is out of their control) then it could be much tougher.

What was the reason for the delay? This will be key to if you can actually get the compensation.

If it was a clear commercial decision (e.g. co,bine 2 half empty flights), then compensation is obviously due. If it was another reason then your (that Swiss may say is out of their control) then it could be much tougher.

OP has stated above it was due to a mechanical issue. It will be tough to claim whatever the reason given by the airline...!

Claiming will probably be a difficult process since airlines hate paying according to the EU rules.... a mechanical defect that they know of 20 hours before departure starting from their main hub doesn't really sound like something that has to result in a delay for their passengers.

Sure, they are right that planes with mechanical problems shouldn't fly. But they should also pay the compensation without objections. That's just the cost of doing business.

Sure, they are right that planes with mechanical problems shouldn't fly. But they should also pay the compensation without objections. That's just the cost of doing business.

Of course they should pay: in the same you are likely to pay if you miss the plane because you fall ill/car breaks down etc

In that case LX say you should have insurance. Good advice they should follow: build the risk into their business plan.

I think the reluctance to pay comes from the fact that the original legislation was intended to provide compensation where airlines had taken a commercial decision to cancel a flight or deny boarding. This is entirely sensible, and I never had a problem getting compensation from LH due to VDB/IDB/downgrade (never had the opportunity with LX).

The ECJ then changed everything by applying compensation to delays, and also to excludung all mechanical delays from force majeur. I can see the reason for these individual decisions (airlines delaying a flight 24 hours and combining with next days), but the current application doesn't work commercially if applied for every single delay and it just doesn't reflect the realities of flying half way around the world.

Passengers are now confused - the OP has an expectation of compensation now, and will likely get a rejection from Swiss and then from the avaiation regulator (who appear to be more sensible than the ECJ based on some of the posts here). His only realistic option is to take legal action, but still with high risk of losing.

Just sitting in ZRH thanks to being delayed for 4 hours and 30 mins (mechanical issue) and wondering if I'm entitled to any compensation based on EU rules. Is Swiss required to follow EU regulations when it comes to passenger compensation?

In Switzerland, this type of compensatiion is due by law just as in the EU, as Switzerland is a signatory to the EU regulation. That Swiss will give you the go-around is likely, and contrary to a dispute over fares, no US Small Claims Court will hear you favourably on this.

The thing to do is to ask, providing the circumstances and facts and quoting EU resolution 261/2004. No need at this point for the supporting evidence, they will know the facts when they research the date and flight. If and when they give you the go-around or offer 5000 miles, you then let them know that you are contacting the Federal Office for Civil Aviation in Bern. The address is

Federal Office for Civil Aviation
CH-3003 Bern, Switzerland

You can write a letter in English, they will reply by sending you a form to fill, which you return to them with the supporting evidence (copy of ticket and boarding passes). THEY will not only force Swiss to pay but also fine them heavily. Swiss knows that. Therefore they more likely than not will pay as soon as you let them know what you are doing. Paying the compensation is cheaper than the compensation AND the fine.

Good luck !

The BAZL form in English can also be downloaded from their website: http://www.bazl.admin.ch/dienstleistungen/passagierrechte/01019/index.html?lang=de

However you have to engage the airline first, the BAZL will enquire what LX offered.

the OP ...will likely get a rejection from Swiss and then from the avaiation regulator..... His only realistic option is to take legal action, but still with high risk of losing.

The OP will certainly get a rejection from SWISS, together with a letter full of platitudes.

But I see no reason to assume BAZL will not assess the case on its merits, and act accordingly.

Firmness on the part of the aggreived passenger tends to galvanize SWISS into its own reassessment of the case. An offer to settle could result.

So I wrote to Swiss customer service and got this response:

Monetary compensation may be offered under certain circumstances; however, in the case of extraordinary circumstances over which the carrier has no control, there is no compensation offered. Extraordinary circumstances would include meteorological conditions, political instability, third-party strikes, air traffic control, etc. Extraordinary circumstances would include events such as runway closures, airport security measures, airport infrastructure-related problems, and technical malfunctions of the aircraft not foreseeable or preventable with regular and proper aircraft maintenance, as was the case in this situation. Therefore, we must respectfully decline you request for compensation under EU261.

What do you think?

So I wrote to Swiss customer service and got this response:

Monetary compensation may be offered under certain circumstances; however, in the case of extraordinary circumstances over which the carrier has no control, there is no compensation offered. Extraordinary circumstances would include meteorological conditions, political instability, third-party strikes, air traffic control, etc. Extraordinary circumstances would include events such as runway closures, airport security measures, airport infrastructure-related problems, and technical malfunctions of the aircraft not foreseeable or preventable with regular and proper aircraft maintenance, as was the case in this situation. Therefore, we must respectfully decline you request for compensation under EU261.

What do you think?

Do large airlines have an obligation to keep a couple spare aircraft at their hubs so that when technical malfunctions occur to one aircraft or another, as they inevitably do, the airline can keep flying without major delays?

What do you think?

I think Swiss would like to cover just about every cause of delay as "extraordinary". :D

I would point out that there's nothing extraordinary about "technical malfunctions".

The EU Regulation is not in place to punish airlines who do not follow "regular and proper" maintenance procedures. There are far stricter regulatory mechanisms covering this aspect of air transport.

If a technical fault is considered extraordinary depends on the judge....

http://www.businessandfinance.ie/news/cat_news_detail.jsp?itemID=1605

Good luck.

Extraordinary circumstances would include meteorological conditions, political instability, third-party strikes, air traffic control, etc. Extraordinary circumstances would include events such as runway closures, airport security measures, airport infrastructure-related problems, and technical malfunctions of the aircraft not foreseeable or preventable with regular and proper aircraft maintenance, as was the case in this situation. Therefore, we must respectfully decline you request for compensation under EU261.


I would love to hear from Swiss under which circumstances they would actually provide compensation....

I would love to hear from Swiss under which circumstances they would actually provide compensation....

If they're forced by a judge to pay ;)

I would love to hear from Swiss under which circumstances they would actually provide compensation....

One needs to argue that technical malfunctions are not in the least bit extraordinary and occur all the time even with proper maintenance (plenty of examples all around even with Swiss).

I would love to hear from Swiss under which circumstances they would actually provide compensation....
There are two threads in as many weeks on here where the OP came back and confirmed compensation was paid (easily) for cancelled flights.

What's the obsession with compensation on mechanical delays?
It's not like LX delayed the flight intentionally...
To be honest, I find it quite annoying that the first knee jerk reaction always seems to be to ask for compensation.
Guys, it's intercontinental travel we are talking about here. What's a 4 hour delay put into perspective? Nothing!

+1

In my opinion it is not an obsession it's a right. A flight ticket is a contract between airline and passenger.
If the passenger has more luggage than allowed, he has to pay.
If the passenger shows up 10 minutes late at check in, he has to rebook (and if he baught an unchangeable fare, he has to buy a new ticket). These are the terms of contract. And that's what it is.
So also airlines are "obsessed" in enforcing the law, and so should do passengers.