warakorn

??????

warakorn

Hi rafi2k6,

in February and March this board has given quite valuable feedback on your fight against LOT.
I believe it is only fair if you continue to keep us in the loop. So could you please expand on my questions.
It is not good behaviour to tell us you were a fighter etc. etc., and then this thread is dying down because you decided not to continue the conversation

rafi2k6

hey, chill out man. I've been busy. there this thing that takes up a lot ofbmy time, its called gainful employment.....

anyways, here's an update:

My counsel is well aware of the EU regulations pertaining to the matter and I have complete trust in him dealing with this.

as far as the insurance stuff goes, yes, I did get the cheques from Amex and very quickly too! I arrived home and put together my claim, boom, 7 days later a cheque in the mail.
LOT is trying to wiggle out of paying me because I'm suing for EU 261 + damages.
As of now it looks like I can win my case.

warakorn

Any updates, yet. Another month has passed.
At which court have you sued LOT?

rafi2k6

Ontario small claims court, we have a proforma date in 2 weeks

warakorn

Ok, thanks for letting us know.
How was that proforma date in Ontario small claims court last week?

rafi2k6

Productive.
The YYZ station manager attended, He's a good guy. There is a good possibility we'll settle out of court.

aster

That would be a bit crazy. What other reasons are there for a flight to be cancelled? Technical, crazy weather, traffic control outage, strike? Couldn't all reasons then be considered "extraordinary?"

aster

So they have written back and stated that they would have paid had you not decided to take this to court?

Lack

Why crazy? The EU courts have already handled various "extraordinary" cases, and with various effect, some considered legit, other not so.
If your plane goes tech (or something else) the previous day for example, you can't claim that as extraordinary two days in a row etc. Tech because of scheduled maintenance isn't extraordinary either.
Crew shortage or timeout can cause a cancellation too, and can't be considered extraordinary.

warakorn

Any news on the settlement offer?

rafi2k6

I'll give an update in the coming weeks.

warakorn

Hi rafi2k6!
Do you have any update available to us?

Germanfflyer

Hi,
so far NO EU court has considered a tech reason to be extraordinary exept for bird-strike!

All other technical failures are not considered extraordinary - reason being going tech is not surprising - and not having a spare aircraft to jump in is negligence - according to the EU rules - and THAT is the reason why all cases are lost so far - non of the airlines chooses to be prepared to solve a "sudden" tech failure - tech failures are known to happen and therefore NOT extraordinary!

Only thing not regularly tech - is birdstrikes as these have become very rare....so the courts.

Just al little while ago the EU high court ruled that even a wind-shield crack is not extraordinary - the airline could solve such a thing by having an extra aircraft on standby - because these things happen regularly too....^

8420PR

If by EU court you mean the European Court of Justice, then you are correct. All rulings so far have been that technical issues are not extraordinary, but reading the rulings I feel they relate only to the specific cases, not a generic statement.

If by EU court, you mean any court in the EU (i.e. the local courts that resolve most of these cases), then I don't think it is so clear cut. A ongoing case in the UK (Hasan vs Jet2) relates to a Jet2 flight delayed by 24 hours due to technical reasons - 4 people on the flight sued the airline, and all lost. It was only when one person appealed to the county court (after hiring a specialist legal firm) that they won and the case made the news.