Hi all,

Given everything that’s been going on, I thought it would be useful for me to share my own experience with a recent successful EU261 claim. I apologise if this is too much detail, but I hope that my experience below gives people hope and the drive to persevere with pursuing their claims through this tortuous process!

Summary:

17 April – BA66 from Philadelphia to Heathrow. We had already boarded the plane when the captain announced that there was some damage sustained to the aircraft, and that they are trying to source the part needed to repair the damage. After two hours on the plane, it turns out that the part is not available in Philadelphia or anywhere else on the US East Coast, so the flight is delayed overnight whilst the part is flown in from Heathrow. Passengers were put up in local hotels along with food vouchers and it was too late in the evening to get any other alternative flights out, even to New York or Boston

19 April – Delayed BA66 lands at Heathrow, approximately 30 hours after the scheduled arrival time

EU261 Claim Process:

19 April – Submitted a claim online for €600 under EU261 for a long haul flight delayed over 4 hours

26 April – First response from Customer Relations: “Your claim’s been refused because BA0066 on 17 April was delayed because of an aircraft damage which wasn’t caused by us, which prevented the aircraft operating as scheduled. Under EU legislation, I’m afraid we’re not liable for a compensation payment in this situation.”

26 April – I responded by saying that delays caused by technical failure such as aircraft damage do not constitute as "extraordinary circumstances" as per EU261/2004 regulation and referred to the binding case law on Huzar v. Jet2.com (that technical failures are inherent in an airline’s operations, and therefore within its control) and for them to reconsider my claim

27 April – Second response from Customer Relations: “I’ve reviewed your claim and I'd like to inform you that your flight was delayed because there was a fault with fixed electrical ground power unit leading to the damage to one of the aircraft's computer system. 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.”

27 April – I responded that technical failure cannot be considered as “extraordinary circumstances” under Article 5.3 of the EU Regulation 261/2004 and that none of the examples provided In Recital 14 and 15 of EU Regulation 261/2004 such as weather, strike and the impact of an air traffic management decision apply to this case. I also referred to van der Lans vs KLM (that technical problems are not extraordinary circumstances) and for them to reconsider my claim

29 April – Third response from Customer Relations: “I’m afraid our decision hasn’t changed and the responses you’ve received about the eligibility of your EU compensation claim are correct. As your flight was delayed because of an aircraft damage, which wasn’t caused by us, we’re unable to offer you any compensation. I know this isn’t the answer you were hoping for and I’m sorry to let you down.”

29 April – I read on this thread that using Twitter might help, so I sent out my first ever tweet asking them to review my case again. The response was: “I've checked your case and can see you've appealed your EU compensation claim, but the outcome hasn't changed. Your flight was delayed due to aircraft damage outside of our control. I'm sorry this isn't the answer you were hoping for”

29 April – I tweet back that I will pursue this claim via other methods. The response was “We understand that you're looking to take this further separately, but our response wouldn't change”

1 May – I email back to Customer Relations that I will pursue this claim via other methods, and to keep the case reference and previous correspondence open

2 May – I draft a detailed formal letter of my claim, quoting the previous 2 cases as well as a 3rd, Siewert v Condor (that damage from external operations such as a power unit should be considered as an event inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of air carriers and is not an extraordinary circumstance). I also added that it was also a weakness in BA’s processes that a critical plane part was not available in Philadelphia which could’ve allowed the plane to be repaired and possibly avoided the long delay. I set a deadline of 14 days for them to either settle my claim or to provide evidence how the “damage not caused by us” is extraordinary, and implied that I would be prepared to go to court (in a polite way!). The letter is sent to the PO Box in Uxbridge via recorded delivery

4 May – Royal Mail’s online tracker showed the letter was signed for

18 May – No response received after 14 days, so I wrote a follow up letter asking for their final response to my claim (in preparation for going to CEDR)

18 May – Right after I posted the follow up letter, I receive an email from Customer Relations: “I appreciate previously this claim was denied as the damage to the aircraft was caused by a third party company. However, I understand you have appealed this outcome. We have disputed this delay with our Flight Investigations team and it has now been ruled that this flight is payable for EU compensation.”

24 May - £ equivalent of €600 received into my bank account!

Final Comments:

This particular thread has been extremely useful, and without it, I certainly would’ve given up after the first response from BA, so thank you again to the FT community – especially to CWS for the comprehensive guide!

Having “come out the other side” of this painful process, I do feel an element of Stockholm syndrome for BA. At up to €600 per passenger, I completely understand why they would try to deny compensation claims four times before finally buckling when faced with a court claim. Every person who gives up the claim is €600 saved (so up to €165k for a fully loaded Super High-J 747), so I understand the business and commercial reasons of why they do it. Perhaps the law needs to be amended so that eligible flights need to be listed/reported but until then, be prepared for a long-winded process!

Some additional tips if you find yourself in the same situation:

• Make sure you take screen shots or photos of the delay, especially the final actual arrival time vs the scheduled arrival time, such as the BA app or websites such as flightradar24.com
  
• If it's technical failure, take copies of any correspondence from BA during the delay (which I think they are legally obliged to provide upon request). They had copies of a letter available at the reception of the hotel they put us up at, and also at the check in counters the next day. It was basically a letter stating that the aircraft was delayed overnight due to a technical failure and the non-availability of the part needed to fix it. It’s important to say that this letter is not readily handed out – I needed to look and ask for it!
  
• When you make your claim online, remember to save down the text before you send it, as the BA replies do not include the previous email trail
  
• Be specific in your claim and quote relevant cases. I used Huzar vs Jet2, van der Lans vs KLM and Siewert v Condor. Perhaps these and other relevant cases could be added to the Wiki at the beginning of this thread?

Good luck to everyone past, present and future with their claims!