Derek

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that no one has managed to get United to pay under this Reg. I tried a few years back but was working on hearsay and a poor understanding of the reg. Now I would not hesitate to follow through on a legal threat.

mduell

Why is the enforcement so toothless?

gcasflyer

Wow! I'm shocked by some of these comments.

When someone starts a sentence with "I think" it is a perspective--not a doctrine. Can't we allow everyone the freedom to "think" as they please?

This is the United States of America--where on Monday we will celebrate our freedom. Lets practice kindness--even to those you live across the "pond." It's our cultural heritage.

fastair

OK, so now lets read the approripate section:
"1. When an operating air carrier reasonably expects a flight
to be delayed beyond its scheduled time of departure:(a) for two hours or more in the case of flights of 1 500 kilometres
or less; or
(b) for three hours or more in the case of all intra-Community
flights of more than 1 500 kilometres and of all other
flights between 1 500 and 3 500 kilometres; or
(c) for four hours or more in the case of all flights not falling
under (a) or (b),passengers shall be offered by the operating air carrier:
(i) the assistance specified in Article 9(1)(a) and 9(2); and
(ii) when the reasonably expected time of departure is at least
the day after the time of departure previously announced,
the assistance specified in Article 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(c); and
(iii) when the delay is at least five hours, the assistance specified
in Article 8(1)(a)."

At what point they they "reasonable expect it to be delayed more than (4) hours from scheduled dptr? The application of the rule may not be in question here, as clearly after (4) hours, it could be reasonably assumed that the delay would exceed (4) hours. It cncld 4:15 after original schedule. Since it isn't a flight under 1500k, or even within "the community" of 1500-3000km (as it was not between community countries but to a 3rd, non-community country).

So that part seems to bhave been done in good faith based on the OP's story. They were working on a quick fix, up until it couldn't be fixed, then it cncld.

Now this part "3. An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken"

Tough call here...judgement beyond what I can give, but it appears they a) thought all was good, that all measures to go on time, and even arrive early were met, b) an indicator light came on, that they thought they could fix (they used reasonable measures to resolve the issue) and c) they couldn't get the thing to work, so they cncld it AROUND (15 min late) the time the regulation specifies.

The OP's course of redress is:
"1. Each Member State shall designate a body responsible for the enforcement of this Regulation as regards flights from airports situated on its territory and flights from a third country to such airports. Where appropriate, this body shall take the measures necessary to ensure that the rights of passengers are respected. The Member States shall inform the Commission of the body that has been designated in accordance with this paragraph.
2. Without prejudice to Article 12, each passenger may complain to any body designated under paragraph 1, or to any other competent body designated by a Member State, about an alleged infringement of this Regulation at any airport situated on the territory of a Member State or concerning any flight from a third country to an airport situated on that territory."

I.E, one must complain to a member state's designated "body" (The US is NOT a member state)


So I am not in knowledge of what was right, what was wrong. This is not my field of expertese, nor is the law. Reading and comprehending long things is. Far too few read the actual legislation. They read a summary, or they read a certain passage. This post isn't a pro/con, but merely to say "read the whole thing, and determine if your situation falls under this/these rules, and what part(s), and what is the course of action required by you to get enforcement done. I'm not hear to debate if every single mechanical can be reasonably expected to happen at any time, and that it can be fixed in a certain time either.

Michilander

OK, now that all the side banter has died down, let's take another crack at the original question.

I was booked on UA961 BRU-EWR last Saturday. After a 6 hour delay (and horrible communications from the BRU staff) the flight was cancelled for mechanical reasons. Now, I was rebooked for the next day and UA did pop for hotel, dinner, breakfast. But, as I understand it, I am entitled to the 600 Euros under EC 261/2004. When I asked about it at the UA desks in BRU I was consistantly told that the "information was available on-line".

Well, I have not been able to find any specific information on how to apply for the compensation, except that it is supposed to be done within a week. I have emailed Customer Service, but not gotten a reply, as yet.

So, back to the original question. Has anyone succeeded in getting compensated in cash under 261/2004? If so, how did you go about applying for it?

Thanks.

jameskgriffin

If you mean "succeeded in getting compensated..." from UA, I haven't, but if you mean from any U.S. registered airline, yes, I and my travelling companion received €1200 compensation from Delta.

And here's how I did it!

How to obtain compensation under European Union Regulation 261 2004

Most important is to remember that your object is to obtain compensation for a delayed or cancelled flight, and not to give vent to your anger. Publicizing your problem, your frustrations, vowing “never to fly on XYZ airline again” are not ways to convince the airline to make the payment you believe is due you. Threatening to vent your rage publicly is a
tool you have in your arsenal, but once you do go public you’ve used the tool. Like a bullet, going public can be used only once.

Your first step is to submit the airline request for compensation form. This can be found on the airline’s own website and all airlines’ forms require essentially the same information: flight data, delay time, what services were provided, if any; alternate flight arrangements offered, if any; etc. There are no time limits for claims given in the Regulation itself, but the enabling legislations of European Union countries usually give some time limits within which the parties – passengers and airline – must respect. For example, in Italy, the claim must be made within two years of the cancelled or delayed
flight. But the sooner you make the claim the more serious you are thought to be. No letter need accompany the claim form. Often it can be e-mailed, which affords proof-of- delivery.

The usual strategy of the airline is to draw out the process as long as possible, presumably to discourage the claimant, hoping that he will drop his claim. This means the response to the initial request for compensation could take as long as a month. (Sometimes they don’t even respond unless you follow up with an e-mail.) During this month you should become an expert on the regulation itself and read up on the previous claims and court cases. All this can be done via web search. Armed with this knowledge you can start drafting your next letter to the airline on the assumption that they will refuse your initial claim.

Very often their refusal to pay compensation will be based on “a technical problem (or “technical reason”) outside of our control”. If so, you are most likely on your way to being compensated…if you persist!

The airlines’ customer care personnel and the text stored in their computers to prepare their letters refusing your claim for compensation are extremely polite and seemingly accommodating. They may even offer a credit voucher to be used on their airline for a limited time or air miles. Offering such vouchers or air miles costs the airlines virtually nothing, especially since a good part of them will go unutilized. Acting this way, however, should not mask the fact that they are rejecting your claim.

Having read up on previous court cases involving European Union Regulation 261 2004, you know that most technical reasons are not considered in the regulation as constituting ‘extraordinary circumstances’, and are not grounds for the airline to refuse compensation. And so, your response to the airline’s initial refusal to pay compensation should reveal
your deep understanding of the regulation and should cite previous cases involving it. They will write that their refusal to pay is in accordance with the regulation, but you should not point out this discrepancy in what they write. You may state that you understand the provisions differently, but don’t say that they are wrong. They know the regulation, even though what they write seems to indicate otherwise. And keep your letter short; stick to facts and don’t express opinions, and don’t make any threats!

Your response should be written as politely and accommodatingly as theirs was to you. If some form of credit for a future flight was offered you, symbolic and meager as it may be, this should be acknowledged appreciatively and you should state that it is your intention to fly again with the airline. The “bottom line” of your letter, however, should be that you expect the airline to make payment of the amount due you within two weeks.

Don’t expect the airline to reply as quickly as you did. They may reply within the 14 days you mentioned or wait another month before replying. When they do reply they will probably refer specifically to something you have written, however, they will take polite exception and finish with another refusal to pay the compensation.

At this point you should advise the airline the steps you intend to take next. Again, this second letter should be polite, but very firm.

Each European Union country has an authority, usually governmental, usually called the “National Enforcement Board” or “NEB”, which is responsible for civil aviation. This is usually the authority responsible for the implementation of European Union Regulation 261 2004 and any controversies related to it. You can search and find a country’s “Civil Aviation Authority” on the Internet. Advise the airline that you are going to submit the documents relevant to the case to this Authority.

In addition, advise them that you intend to begin judicial proceedings with an appropriate national court or Justice of the Peace.

You have the right to select from several countries where you might continue the claim process. The appropriate NEB is in the country where the flight was to originate, or your claim can be made in the country of destination, in your country, or in the airline’s headquarters country. I would recommend the country of flight departure. It is the one nearest to the infraction, and the people there probably know the airline’s personnel who are aware of the real reason for the cancellation or delay. I would suspect that initiating judicial intervention in the location of the airline’s headquarters would be least promising, due its being a major economic force there.

The NEB’s normally have forms relating to the regulation. You might have to compile them in the language of the country; however I suspect that most Authorities will also accept the compilation in English. The data required is essentially the same as in the form you originally submitted to the airline. Accompanying this form should be copies of the first claim to the airline, the ticket showing the cancelled/delayed flight(s), the replacement ticket if it was a cancelled flight, copies of your relevant correspondence with the airline (your letters, their rejections, etc.), and a polite letter stating that you intend to follow through with judicial proceedings if payment is not made by the airline.

If you attach a copy of this completed form with your second letter to the airline this is a further indication of your seriousness.

The Authority will acknowledge receipt of your solicitation, and if they concur with your claim, they will notify the airline of it, and request an explanation of why payment has not been made. You may receive a copy of the letter or e-mail they send to the airline.

The personnel at the national Authority usually deal with the airlines’ personnel on a daily basis for many reasons, not only regarding the Regulation 261 2004. They know each other. As such, they can often convince the local airline people to pay your claim, if your communications have been professional, and especially if they believe you are seriously intending court action.

The airline will probably stall again, and reply to the Authority only after several weeks. If you have spoken to the Authority official who is handling your case, a polite follow-up email to him could be helpful.

When the Authority concurs with you and has advised the airline of its concurrence, the matter should almost be resolved. However, even after advising you that you will receive compensation, it will be several weeks before you see the money. If it’s longer, tell the Authority, and ask if they will push the airline to make good on their word.

Unfortunately, very few of the national Authorities will apply a penalty on the airline for delaying payment. And so there is no incentive for the airline to move quickly. These Authorities are overworked and would prefer that either you give up or the airline give in. Typically, if you have a strong case and the national Authority agrees with you, the airline
will agree to compensation. But, again, expect to wait a long time before receiving it. You may even have to go back to the national Authority citing the airlines refusal to pay promptly.

Summarizing, there is nothing automatic about compensation under European Union Regulation 261 2004. To be successful you must be persistent and firm, even when your case is clear-cut. During the process you may even get to know your “personal” customer service representative at the airline and, perhaps, an individual at the national Authority.
This never hurts! Remember, the airline people you communicate with are only doing what they are paid to do; they might even agree with your point of view! Be gracious and polite with them! But at the end, when you finally receive your compensation you will feel that justice has prevailed!