I wondered whether any other FTer was aboard BA961 ex MUC on 1 June or have had a similar knock back from BA?

Mrs Yorkieflyer and I were sat in 23a and 23b awaiting doors closing when we observed pax at the front of the cabin exiting the aircraft most with hand luggage in an obvious hurry by the airbridge. The CC sat at our exit row phoned the front to find out what was up. A minute or so later an announcement was made asking all to leave the aircraft by the airbridge immediately without delay and not to take hand luggage, the latter ignored by many!

Apparently there was a strong smell of fumes at the front of the cabin. By the time we exited the aircraft there were already fire crew on the gangway ready to enter the aircraft.

We ere held at the top of the airbridge for 40 mins till it was announced that the flight was cancelled. During this time it was evident that the aircraft was being examined externally and we were told that no fault could be identified hence presumably the precautionary cancellation.
We were permitted to board the aircraft in groups of 10 to reclaim or hand luggage. There was a distinct burning smell.

On return to check in we we queued at the ticket desk and were re ticketed on BA957. We explained that we would now miss the last train home to York and were told by the 2 ticket desk staff after discussing with each other that we should keep our receipts for our additional overnight and onward travel expenses and reclaim them from BA who would "certainly" pay them.
We had an otherwise uneventful return home overnighting in London and catching a morning train home. G-EUXI also returned home that afternoon according to BASource operating BA9277. Incidentally BASource refers to the cancellation and subsequent returh as being due to a "technical issue".
I promptly submitted a EU 261/2004 claim and asked for reimbursement of our additional travel expenses which we kept down to circa £200.

BA sent a rejection of our claim within 2 days citing "damage to the aircraft not caused by BA". The circumstances at the time both aboard the aircraft and observing the aircraft on exiting it do not suggest this. I emailed back questioning the cause cited and received the following reply yesterday.

"Dear Mr Yorkieflyer

Thanks for coming back to us. I apologise for the delay in replying to you.

I’ve reviewed your claim and as previously advised your claim’s been refused because BA0961 on 01 June was cancelled because of aircraft damage which wasn’t caused by us. Under EU legislation, I’m afraid we’re not liable for a compensation payment in this situation.

Article 5.3 of the EU Regulation 261/2004 states that a carrier is not obliged to pay compensation if it can prove that the delay or cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances that couldn’t have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. In Recital 14 and 15 of EU Regulation 261/2004, extraordinary circumstances include weather, strike and the impact of an air traffic management decision which gives rise to a long delay. This means you’re not entitled to compensation under the EU Regulation for your delayed flight.

However, I'd like to inform you that we're not liable for any consequential loss a customer may have as a result of a cancellation. So, while I do appreciate your reasons for asking, I'm afraid we cannot reimburse your out of pocket expenses. We generally direct customers to their travel insurance company who may be able to help.

I realise this will be disappointing for you but I hope this information will help you to understand our decision."

Any thoughts on how to progress this? Any help really appreciated.