Originally Posted by
IAN-UK
Fair enough. But if there is a positive ruling from DOT it would be unthinkable not to include an element of compensation for those whose travel dates had passed unfulfilled.
EC261 generally doesn't allow accumulation of compensation, reducing it £ for £ against sums awarded elsewhere (Article 12). So, whether or not the regulation could be applied, that course of action becomes redundant.
It only becomes redundant if United completely fulfil their obligations under EU261, if tickets are reinstated I can't see United both rerouting passengers who they denied boarding and also giving them €600 for the inconvenience, but I suppose you never know.
Originally Posted by
IAN-UK
If DOT intervention goes against us you return to the uphill struggle to get a ruling against UA's receding from its contracts. Again, success would bring reinstated transport or compensation, and EC261 becomes redundant.
Agreed, I've never suggested otherwise.