Originally Posted by
Crastonts
[Possibly final update] I wrote a polite, but very firmly-worded letter to all the executive contacts on the Elliot Advocacy webpage. I explained why the original refund offered was wrong and cited the UK261 regulation plus the precedent of the Steef Mennens case. Then, I told AA they were in breach of their obligations according to the UK261 regulation and explained that, without a response before the 10/11, I would be forced to take actions to obtain redress.
Today I received an e-mail from a more senior CS rep, who said they'd contact the Refunds Dept to adjust the amount according to the Steef Mennens precedent. A further refund followed shortly afterwards, which, in addition to the first one, roughly corresponds to 45% of 75% (if that makes sense) of the fare + carrier surcharges paid.
All in all, my wife and I are satisfied and consider that the clear articulation of the rights and judicial precedents ensured we received what was duly owed.
I'm glad to hear this. It's likely that some CS rep was directed to calculate the pro-rated refund for the one segment, and just figured "hey, 4 segments...I'll divide the price by 4" without even thinking about how fares on a ticket like that are built/structured.
Good you stuck to your guns and continued to follow up and advocate, citing legal precedents as necessary. It shouldn't take that, but sometimes it does.