housley

Hi,

I've claimed compensation under regulation 261/2004 for a flight that was delayed more than three hours.

The airline (Swiss) is now claiming that the delay was caused due to "enroute restrictions" (I'm thinking they meant to wrote "en-route"). I've never heard of this, and I can't google any information whatsoever on it, nor do I get even one hit when I search for the term here on Flyertalk.

Anyone have any idea what they're talking about, and more specifically, if it is covered by the concept of "extraordinary circumstances"?


Best regards!

/H

oliver2002

The only one I can think of was the recent French ATC strike that forced airline to either detour that airspace or wait for one of the limited slots. Whatever that may be, ask SWISS what exactly they mean by this term?

weero

And I am thinking that you meant to write 'write'.

So the plane sat there or got delayed in flight and no explanation was given???

housley

Right you are. I wasn't nitpicking their grammar though, I meant for purposes of establishing what the concept they were referring to is generally called.

Not really - I'm sure they did, but this was more than two years ago, and as the delay was rather small we didn't mind it at the time. It made us miss our connecting flight (or rather, they refused to let us board our connecting flight even though we just would have made it) and subsequently the delay became quite large though.

Often1

This could have been due to:

1. WX conditions (which change constantly)
2. ATC
3. Security (which would account for the vague language). Some people prefer to be delayed rather than brought down my a missile.

htb

Or it could have been something they don't want to mention because it would sound too ludicrous. So as long as they don't name the reason I wouldn't even start to consider it being valid.

And even if there were a valid reason, it still doesn't mean that they tried to find alternative ways for the OP to reach his final destination in time.

HTB.

housley

This is what I'm thinking. And you're referring to "all reasonable measures" that need to be taken by the airline?

housley

WX conditions - weather conditions or what is this?

ATC - no idea what this is.

I concur, a delay would be preferable to a missile-strike. It would definitely be covered by extraordinary circumstances though, so seeing how this was years ago and the airlines hardly is interested to compensate us, there shouldn't be much trouble stating that it was extraordinary security reasons that caused the delay.

NewbieRunner

Here's a useful page: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/glossary.php

WX = Weather
ATC = Air Traffic Control

YuropFlyer

Problem with the denial is, as (almost all, including LH group as a whole) airlines tend to deny EU261 requests extremely often in the first attempt with "vague reasoning", the very few times where actually a proper reason exists to not having to hand out compensation (Assuming that everyone here knows that they can't claim when it has been something obviously not in the hand of the airline, ie weather/strike actions, and won't try to claim if such thing happens) can easily be overlooked.

Maybe LH group should have another "Textbaustein" they use in case it was REALLY something being a valid exclusion reason, so the experienced traveller (vs. the not-so-experienced, who will still be giving up receiving the regular "we don't need to pay because we don't need to" reason) at least understands that in this very case, it might indeed not be possible to get the compensation funds

weero

I agree with you .. it sounds ways too high-priestish to be something sound and solid.
Fair enough, I'd push it harder, a lot harder - good luck!
Or aliens or the pilots going missing due to a mini-rapture ... I am sure Western Europe is riddled with high performance surface-to air-missiles owned by crazy private citizens, the kind that call in before they actually let it loose on an airliner.
I'd still ask LX for a translation or a less alternate universe explanation.

housley

Thank you!

8420PR

The ECJ ruled (against Iberia) that if you present yourself for boarding on your connecting flight (i.e. at the gate when boarding hasn't finished) but your seat has been given away, then you are due the full IDB compensation.

Maybe this is a easier way to get the compensation than contesting the 'enroute delays'.

housley

I don't remember whether we actually made it to the gate before boarding had finished, but I remember clearly that the plane had not left the gate yet. From what I remember we were met at our arrival gate by airline representatives who first urged us to hustle, then another representative who informed us that we were unable to board the plane and re-directed us to the airline desk. We thus never made any attempt to show up at the gate and board the orginal flight.

hugolover

OP can you tell us the flight you were on? If you don't want to state it publicly send me a PM.