NCEflyer

Hello everyone
As a long time reader of FT, I do now seek some advice related to a recent experience on DL.

My girlfriend and I (DM) were booked and confirmed on ZRH-JFK-ATL-LIR (Costa Rica) on July 28/29, with an overnight at Atlanta. We were in First/D1 using 2 GUCs.

Upon landing at JFK, the DL app displays that DL684 (JFK-ATL) was “cancelled”, and that we were rebooked on the next morning flight at 6am (DL424). After a call to reservations we found out that we were actually bumped from the flight, since it was oversold, and they “needed the space”. The agent tried for a long time to put us back; either F or C+/MC, but nothing worked. We ended up at the Garden Inn for the night.

The next morning, DL424 (6am flight JFK-ATL) was delayed by ~ 2h, which made us miss our connecting flight to LIR (1h30 connection at ATL, which is why we wanted to be in Atlanta the night before). We were rebooked on the following day’s flight, but First was sold out so we ended in MC. Delta put us at The Westin, which is a nice hotel tbh.

What are your thoughts? I sent in a complaint but not sure what to expect. It would be my guess that this is a case of Involuntary Denied Boarding, maybe EC261 could also apply since we departed from Europe.

Thanks all!
NCEflyer

Pianoman109876

Both apply, IMO.
raise hell. Don’t let them try and softball skypesos.

flyerCO

The fact flight showed as canceled means it wasn't an overbooked issue. They don't cancel a flight cause overbooked, they ask for volunteers to take another. Not surprising agent made something up, most are new and don't know much. What likely happened, flight was canceled (weather, ATC, crew, etc...) Whatever caused cancelation was in end resolved. As flight had been overbooked when uncanceled not everyone got back on. Lastly just to make sure, was your flight into JFK delayed at all?


EC261 applies since you departed the EU. However it only effects the other segments if you bought all flights with same marketing airline. If 1st flight was AF/KL/VS/etc marketed (even if operated by DL) and connection flights were DL marketed then delay on JFK onward don't matter. If that is the case your final arrival time only matters if flight to JFK was delayed.


If all were marketed by same airline, then delay on any of the flights matter.

Duke787

Not true anymore this changed earlier this year based on a court ruling in Europe -- as long as your US connecting flight is on the same ticket as your TATL flight you are eligible. Doesn't matter here anyway since DL would have to be the operating carrier for ZRH - JFK so as long as ZRH - JFK - ATL was on the same ticket you are definitely eligible for EU261.

I had a similar situation happen a few months ago on UA/LH and was unaware of this change until a number of folks in the UA forum pointed it out and encouraged me to file an EU261 claim.

I was on a single 016 ticket for VLC - MUC - IAD - RDU but the LH flights were all on LH metal and LH flight numbers but the IAD - RDU flight was on a UA flight number (aka marketing carrier was LH for the TATL flight but UA for the connecting flight in the US).

UA flight was canceled. Filed EU261, took a while to get through but got a call about 3 weeks ago and was given the option of either the 600Euro or a $1000 UA travel voucher. The person from UA asked me a few questions and acknowledged immediately it was a valid EU261 claim, he just had to validate the LH vs. UA flight numbers to determine who had to actually pay me. This was in addition to the $200 eCert they gave me on my initial complaint before I followed up to push EU261.

I would write a new complaint to DL and lead with the EU261 claim. That is the thing that will move the needle for them because there are legal ramifications on that. You should also be eligible for downgrade comp on ATL - LIR but I don't believe that portion is covered by EU261 so DL will probably just pay you some nominal amount, would focus on asking for covering your hotels/F&B and any other ask for some sort of apology comp (separate from the EU261 comp).

MSPeconomist

I suspect that you were forced to pay for a hotel reservation that you didn't use as planned in ATL. This should clearly be reimbursed, although EC261 compensation might be more generous. IDB would seem to apply and DL should have asked for volunteers. I'd complain to DOT as an airline shouldn't be able to cancel a segment and then reinstate it in order to avoid VDBs/IDBs, although I find it shocking that someone at DL would try to do this. Just to be sure, have you checked the "official" details regarding whether the flight was actually cancelled or not and whether it then really operated (and whether it then was on time, etc.).

exwannabe

Though Swiss has adapted 261 as law, that does not mean the EU court decisions apply. The flight never touched the EU.

Regardless, easiest is start with DL/AF and mention 261 as part of a demand for compensation. See what they pony up.

flyerCO

Do you know the case by chance? I've learned to read the case after some authors (well respected legal) misinterpreted couple EC261 rulings.(either what it says, or who if any it binds as precedent)

I always found it strange that the marketing is what determined. One ticket sold by DL/AF/KL/VS could easily have multiple marketed flights, even if one carry operated all said flights.

MSPeconomist

The people making these rulings don't fly much so they're not aware of the technical details involved, nor were the people who wrote the legislation experts. Some of the decisions/interpretations seem to defy logic.

flyerCO

Fully agree, especially your last sentence! EC261 has expanded way past its original intent via these rulings.

Duke787

Fair point on ZRH, I overlooked that -- they may choose not to enforce the ECJ ruling and DL could choose to fight it on those grounds (where if the flight left from the EU this would be a slam dunk)

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-cont...15(01)&from=EN

The key text is in section 2.2.3:2.2.3. Application to operating air carriers

In accordance with Article 3(5), the operating air carrier is always responsible for the obligations under the Regulation and not, for example, another air carrier which may have sold the ticket. The notion of operating air carrier is presented in recital 7.
And this is the reference made above (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-cont...LEX:32004R0261)5. This Regulation shall apply to any operating air carrier providing transport to passengers covered by paragraphs 1 and 2. Where an operating air carrier which has no contract with the passenger performs obligations under this Regulation, it shall be regarded as doing so on behalf of the person having a contract with that passenger.

In my LH/UA experience, because the final flight (which was canceled) was operated by UA that is who I filed the EU261 complaint with and because it was on UA flight numbers I think that is why the UA person concluded it was on UA to pay even though the TATL flight was on LH (ultimately irrelevant because I chose $1000 ETC over the 600Euro)

jordyn

Sounds like it wasn't actually cancelled, though. I think the DOT would take a dim view of airlines getting out of their IDB responsibilities by being able to cancel a flight, immediately uncancel it and then just rebook up to capacity instead of following IDB procedures. If the flight operated as scheduled, it wasn't cancelled. If Delta resists IDB compensation, a DOT complaint would be appropriate.

flyerCO

This has nothing to do with what I was pointing out. For the flights onward from JFK to be covered same as the ex-EU flight, the marketing carrier has needed be the same (unless this has changed by court ruling).

The carrier that processes/pays claim is of course the operating carrier. The fact they handle the claim has had no bearing on the "multiple flights considered one" issue.

This is why I like reading the ruling. It's too easy to get confused with EC261 case rulings and what is actually been effected.

flyerCO

IDB only applies if flight went out full in US. Also DL does everything possible to avoid IDB. They just paid $10k to multiple VDB volunteers.

jordyn

It did go out full. Per OP, agents tried to get them back on the flight and weren't able to because the flight was full.

NCEflyer

Thanks all for your replies, much appreciated!



It was only on the DL App that the message “your flight is cancelled, you have been rebooked on the next one” showed. I suspect this is just a standard wording for rebookings. On the airport screens the flight showed as operating, albeit with a delay closer to departure time.

I suspect the person at DL managing the flight thought it would not make a difference to us whether we left to ATL on the 8.15pm evening flight or on the next 6am morning flight, since both connect to the same final leg ATL-LIR (9.45am). But we specifically wanted to arrive the evening before in ATL since I didn’t trust the 6am flight to be on time, which it wasn’t. All the flights were under the same ticket/booking, so will definitely also try to push for EC261.



Let’s see what they come up with, and how long it takes them to respond.