Mouse trapping operation
Oct 23, 2015 | 1:01 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 7
Mouse trapping operation
hello, I was supposed to fly with Finnair from Finland to China, but my flight was cancelled and rerouted for technical reason and thus I was delayed by more than 8 hours on arrival, when I asked for compensation, the airline replied the cancellation was caused by "mouse trapping operation", an event supposedly beyond their control and therefore I am not entitled to any compensation. Is this rather ridiculous reason really valid and disqualifies me from getting any compensation? I was informed about the cancellation 7 hours prior departure, which I guess could be enough time to catch one mouse...thanks for any comments or possible advise for further action.
Oct 23, 2015 | 1:54 am
#2
Join Date: May 2014
Location: HEL
Programs: AY+Plat, ALL Gold
Posts: 3,640
7 hours may be enough to trap the mouse, but it is not enough to trap the mouse and then fly the plane from China back to Helsinki to pick you up. That' s most probably why the flight was cancelled.
Whether are eligible for compensation depends on whose responsibility it is. I would say this case is not clear cut. On the one hand, if a passenger claims to see a mouse and it turns out there were no mice, you could argue it is the passenger's fault for lying or for not seeing well, and the airline is just a victim. On the other hand, if there was a mouse introduced by the airline catering or ground handling contractors, then it is the airline's fault.
Whether are eligible for compensation depends on whose responsibility it is. I would say this case is not clear cut. On the one hand, if a passenger claims to see a mouse and it turns out there were no mice, you could argue it is the passenger's fault for lying or for not seeing well, and the airline is just a victim. On the other hand, if there was a mouse introduced by the airline catering or ground handling contractors, then it is the airline's fault.
Oct 23, 2015 | 2:46 am
#5
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 7
7 hours may be enough to trap the mouse, but it is not enough to trap the mouse and then fly the plane from China back to Helsinki to pick you up. That' s most probably why the flight was cancelled.
Whether are eligible for compensation depends on whose responsibility it is. I would say this case is not clear cut. On the one hand, if a passenger claims to see a mouse and it turns out there were no mice, you could argue it is the passenger's fault for lying or for not seeing well, and the airline is just a victim. On the other hand, if there was a mouse introduced by the airline catering or ground handling contractors, then it is the airline's fault.
Whether are eligible for compensation depends on whose responsibility it is. I would say this case is not clear cut. On the one hand, if a passenger claims to see a mouse and it turns out there were no mice, you could argue it is the passenger's fault for lying or for not seeing well, and the airline is just a victim. On the other hand, if there was a mouse introduced by the airline catering or ground handling contractors, then it is the airline's fault.
So I think there was an actual mouse and it was not just a false alarm.
Oct 23, 2015 | 2:54 am
#7
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: HEL
Programs: spg ltp, ihg, all, hilton. OWS, STE+, *G
Posts: 5,991
I hope it's the same flight http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/finna...at-flight.html
Oct 23, 2015 | 2:59 am
#8
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 7
[QUOTE
As far as whether they can't keep their planes clean? How in the world is that "out of their control?"[/QUOTE]
"Finnair ensures passengers' safe flight with all possible foreseeable measures that can reasonably be required. Our aircrafts condition is constantly monitored. However, there are defects and circumstances that are beyond our actual control since they cannot be foreseen or prevented due to their nature or origin.
We apologize for the inconvenience this cancellation caused to you. Unfortunately, no standard compensation will be paid as the cancellation was caused by circumstances that are out of Finnairs control."
Well, for Finnair it apparently is
As far as whether they can't keep their planes clean? How in the world is that "out of their control?"[/QUOTE]
"Finnair ensures passengers' safe flight with all possible foreseeable measures that can reasonably be required. Our aircrafts condition is constantly monitored. However, there are defects and circumstances that are beyond our actual control since they cannot be foreseen or prevented due to their nature or origin.
We apologize for the inconvenience this cancellation caused to you. Unfortunately, no standard compensation will be paid as the cancellation was caused by circumstances that are out of Finnairs control."
Well, for Finnair it apparently is
Oct 23, 2015 | 3:08 am
#9
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 7
I hope it's the same flight http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/finna...at-flight.html
The article was published on the 16th, they said it happened Thursday week before, which is the 10th, I flew on the 4th, so either the author got the date wrong or Chongqing`s rats are abnormally attracted to Finnair planes...
Oct 23, 2015 | 3:20 am
#10
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: HEL
Programs: spg ltp, ihg, all, hilton. OWS, STE+, *G
Posts: 5,991
Perhaps the more interesting point is which aircraft this was. OH-LGG, what's the inside story?
Oct 23, 2015 | 3:25 am
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Platinum, TK Elite, BT Executive, AA, BA, SK, DL, NT, WB + hotels
Posts: 10,238
If I understand the OP right, this was not an acute case. And AY themselves say: "In the case of your flight AY55, the cancellation was caused due to lack of aircrafts as no spare aircrafts were available. This was due to mouse trapping operation on one of our aircrafts previous flight."
This means the cxl was due to commercial reasons, ie they choose which flight to cancel in order to minimize their losses. In this case, they are obliged to pay the EU compensation. They won't, however, because there's no effective way to force them to.
This means the cxl was due to commercial reasons, ie they choose which flight to cancel in order to minimize their losses. In this case, they are obliged to pay the EU compensation. They won't, however, because there's no effective way to force them to.
Oct 23, 2015 | 4:13 am
#12
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Helsinki-Vantaa APT, Finland
Programs: AY Platinum
Posts: 6,314
I don't know about inside but I think Ecns.com has a wrong date for this.
This aircraft was LTM. The first contact with the mouse/rat was on flight to Delhi on 29AUG. 30AUG AY22 was delayed several hours due to chasing this animal.
After that OH-LTM left for PEK 30AUG, to CKG 31AUG, overnight maintenance in HEL 01SEP and 02SEP to CKG as AY55. 03SEP AY56 was cancelled, 03SEP AY61 (AY62 04SEP) got cancelled and 04SEP AY55 was cancelled. AY56 on 05SEP was operated as scheduled.
In July 2015 HEL-PVG passenger reported seen mouse on board and Finnish media reported that this 340-300 aircraft was under Chinese officials quarantine 24 hrs at PVG.
This aircraft was LTM. The first contact with the mouse/rat was on flight to Delhi on 29AUG. 30AUG AY22 was delayed several hours due to chasing this animal.
After that OH-LTM left for PEK 30AUG, to CKG 31AUG, overnight maintenance in HEL 01SEP and 02SEP to CKG as AY55. 03SEP AY56 was cancelled, 03SEP AY61 (AY62 04SEP) got cancelled and 04SEP AY55 was cancelled. AY56 on 05SEP was operated as scheduled.
In July 2015 HEL-PVG passenger reported seen mouse on board and Finnish media reported that this 340-300 aircraft was under Chinese officials quarantine 24 hrs at PVG.
Oct 23, 2015 | 5:34 am
#13
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: HEL
Programs: AY+ Gold (OWS)
Posts: 528
A mouse would probably not qualify as an exceptional circumstance thanks to the new ECJ ruling (van der Lans v KLM). You can file a dispute with the Finnish Consumer Disputes Board free of charge. In most cases, Finnair will follow the recommendation of the board whilst it has no legal obligation to do so.
Oct 23, 2015 | 9:15 am
#15
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 7
A mouse would probably not qualify as an exceptional circumstance thanks to the new ECJ ruling (van der Lans v KLM). You can file a dispute with the Finnish Consumer Disputes Board free of charge. In most cases, Finnair will follow the recommendation of the board whilst it has no legal obligation to do so.
