To be fair to U2 - they paid for hotel and taxis and also they are reimbursing the BA flight I took on Monday morning £1,075 for 3 of us, vs the £107 that we spent on the original flight from BFS that got cancelled. So I am not out of pocket at least. But it would still be interesting to know how they can determine and prove that ATC was the cause of the cancellation. Otherwise virtually every delay or cancellation could be excused by exceptional circumstances......and then what is the point of EU261?

From 11:40 - 20:00 Gatwick had a flow rate in of 27ph. This was changed at 18:27 to cancel all slots into Gatwick. This followed on from a flow rate of 22ph from 07:30 - 10:00 which increased to 26ph between 1000 and 11:40

Also on Sunday, BES*, BOD*, MAS*, Greece and Cyprus all had slots in. As the day went on slots became worse in Europe due to capacity and in some destinations (Greek Islands) due to the Weather playing a part.

* Likely to be en route ATC slots rather than arrival destination slots.

Sorry to come back again for some clarification from any expert out there....

So it is clear that on 30th July the regular rotation LGW-BFS-LGW-BFS-LGW was interrupted after the first two sectors as easyJet commandeered the aircraft for a late running CPH flight, and did not find one to put onto the BFS service. My view is that this was clearly an operational issue (any arguments there?), but easyJet customer services has not responded to my counter claim for 3 weeks now. Do I go to MCOL or the CAA now? How can I escalate within easyJet (assuming I have a clear case to answer)?

easyJet have signed up to the Alternative Dispute Resolution body CEDR, and they should have told you that in their correspondence.

If you've been arguing with easyJet for 8 weeks without a result you can go to them for adjudication.

Got a further email from easyJet. It merely repeated that the claim did not qualify because of ATC restrictions. But they did not offer any evidence or proof (again). They then said that in their view the matter was closed. Can they do that? I am clear that it was an operational switch if aircraft that let to ours being cancelled. OK, maybe they switched it because they didn't want CPH passengers to claim (more expensive for them?) but in my view the aircraft switch was clearly in their control. Thoughts anyone or am I flogging a dead horse?

Even if it's not quite the 8 week point, it sounds like your latest correspondence is easyJet's final decision so you can go to CEDR with your claim.

For what it's worth, some of the NWNF companies have a checking system to determine whether passengers on a specific flight are likely to be due compensation. The one that I use says yes, you are due 250 Euro per passenger.

Which one do you use? There seem to be quite a few, some of which look dubious!!

The "checking system" merely looks up the arrival delay and determines whether it is actually late enough to qualify.

The "checking system" does not consider the merits of the case or the likelihood of obtaining compensation. It's just a mere sanity check to weed out cases where the delay simply doesn't qualify in the first place.

Thanks for clarifying. As my issue was a cancellation, there is no debate (except that EasyJet is suggesting it was an ATC issue, where I cant find one!)

PM sent. I'm not sure if naming them here is permitted.


Are you sure? Their website blurb indicates they also reference weather, ECs and tech. issues (although admittedly not ATC ones).

They are not obliged to provide you with proof, if you don't believe them, take them to court!

Until you show me a screenshot showing a recent* flight with a compensable delay which they advise as not being eligible for compensation, then yes, I am sure!

(*must be recent, i.e. they cannot have already been through the process of interacting with the airline in question and therefore having had it proved to them that extraordinary circumstances arose, or that they lost the case in court. In these circumstances, they are unlikely to wish to solicit further claims for the same flights, and would adapt the "checker" accordingly).

Well 6 months on from the original cancelled flight and, through CEDR, I have actually got a ruling in my favour. EasyJet even fought it through CEDR, still saying it was down to ATC restrictions. But in their 'evidence' they shared a document that showed that afternoon they made a last minute switch of aircraft on the LGW-BFS-LGW-BFS-LGW rotation. I guess easyJet's view is that most people will give up, maybe when they say 'no' to the passenger, or then saying 'no' to the CEDR adjudicator in the first round of 'evidence'. Persistence eventually paid off......and that would be my recommendation to anyone caught up in a dubious denial of an EU261 claim

It just goes to show how many airlines do this, I had a BMI flight cancelled last month because of operational reasons (they got the plane due to operate my flight stuck somewhere the night before) I put in a EU261 claim and they said it was a manufacturing issue so I wasn’t due it. I replied saying by manufacturing do you mean a technical issue with the aircraft and referenced previous legal rulings before threatening my own. They then replied saying they’d re-considered and awarded me the compensation.
Just goes to show in both cases have some background knowledge and don’t give up when they try and fob you off.

Interesting taht Easyjet fought it right up until the end. I'm in a similar scenario and have just got a response from Easyjet, but some of their claims are rubbish. In addition to a crew time out claim (from gatwick!) they also claimed that the arrival airport had a curfew but in the airports documents we would have had 4 hours within which to land a 1.5 hour flight! So I have responded to their email and am tempted to take it to CEDR...