Originally Posted by
JackDann
Can I ask the experts among us - What would be the benefit of going through CEDR as opposed to MCOL? Considering i’ve read stories of the CEDR process taking such a long time.
There are some comments about this in the main thread for EC261 but in essence
- CEDR is free to use, reasonably consumer friendly in terms of dialogue, not quick, and outcomes are very strictly, too strictly precedent based. They are paid by BA so it's not truly independent. Some of their staff appear poorly trained in broader consumer rights. CEDR is able to cope with Avios better than MCOL. It's just less scary than MCOL.
- MCOL has costs, first to register the claim and then to force a court hearing, £100 isn't unusual. It's more difficult to access and to do your claim justice it requires some research and homework. However once in the system the judicial system, it's processed efficiently, and it recognises the bias that is explicitly in EC261's wording, which says that the Regulation is intended to give a high level of consumer protection. CEDR seems to take little interest in this