Old Jan 19, 17, 10:33 am
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: ffay005
Please note the FlyerTalk Terms of Use: 'We are not lawyers or a law firm and we do not provide legal, business or tax advice. The accuracy, completeness, adequacy or currency of the content is not warranted or guaranteed. Our sites and services are not substitutes for the advices or services of an attorney. We recommend you consult a lawyer or other appropriate professional if you want legal, business or tax advice.'

When seeking claims from AY, use this form: https://www.finnair.com/int/gb/infor...vices/feedbackAY will not accept claims by email, phone or in person.

Past decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) relating to Regulation 261/2004 (by judgment date in chronological order):
  • Sturgeon v Condor (Case C-402/07): Passengers who reach their final destination at least 3 hours late because their flight was delayed are entitled to the amount of compensation laid down in Article 7 of the Regulation.
  • Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia (Case C-549/07): Extraordinary circumstances (which release airlines from their obligation to compensate passengers) do not include aircraft technical problems (unless the problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control). See also van der Lans v KLM below.
  • Rehder v Air Baltic (Case C-204/08): Passengers can file a legal claim either in the jurisdiction of the place of departure or the jurisdiction of the place of arrival
  • Rodrguez v Air France (Case C-83/10): The term cancellation in the Regulation includes the situation where the aircraft took off but had to return to the departure airport and passengers were transferred to other flights.
  • Eglītis v Latvijas Republikas Ekonomikas ministrija (Case C-294/10): At the stage of organising the flight, the airline is required to provide for a certain reserve time to allow it, if possible, to operate the flight in its entirety once the extraordinary circumstances have come to an end.
  • Nelson v Lufthansa (Case C-581/10): The Court reaffirmed its previous decision (Sturgeon v Condor).
  • Folkerts v Air France (Case C-11/11): Passengers on directly connecting flights who arrive at their final destination at least 3 hours late are entitled to compensation.
  • McDonagh v Ryanair (Case C-12/11): Even where a flight delay/cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances, the airline continues to be under a duty to provide care (in the form of accommodation, meals, transfers between the airport/hotel, telephone calls)
  • Finnair v Lassooy (Case C22/11): The term denied boarding in the Regulation covers cases where boarding is denied because of overbooking, as well as other reasons.
  • Mor v KLM (Case C-139/11): The time limit for filing a legal claim is based on the rules governing limitation periods in the Member State where the claim is filed.
  • Rodrguez Cachafeiro v Iberia (Case C 321/11): The term denied boarding in the Regulation includes a situation where, in the context of a single contract of carriage (PNR) on immediately connecting flights and a single check-in, an airline denies boarding to some passengers because the first flight had been delayed and it mistakenly expected those passengers not to arrive in time to board the second flight.
  • Germanwings v Henning (Case C 452/13): The concept of arrival time, which is used to determine the length of the flight delay, refers to the time at which at least one of the doors of the aircraft was opened, as long as, at that moment, passengers were actually permitted to leave the aircraft.
  • van der Lans v KLM (Case C-257/14): Extraordinary circumstances (which release airlines from their obligation to compensate passengers) do not include aircraft technical problems which occur unexpectedly, which are not attributable to poor maintenance and which are also not detected during routine maintenance checks.
  • Mennens v Emirates (Case C 255/15): Where passengers are downgraded on a particular flight, the price of the ticket refers to the price of that particular flight, but if this information is not indicated on the ticket, the price of that particular flight out of the total fare is calculated by working out the distance of that flight divided by the total distance of the flight itinerary on the ticket. Taxes and charges are not included in the reimbursement of the ticket price/fare, unless the tax/charge is dependent on the class of travel.
  • Pekov v Travel Service (Case C‑315/15): A bird strike constitutes 'extraordinary circumstances'. However, even if a flight delay/cancellation is caused by an event constituting 'extraordinary circumstances', an airline is only released from its duty to pay compensation if it took all reasonable measures to avoid the delay/cancellation. To determine this, the court will consider what measures could actually be taken by the airline, directly or indirectly, without requiring it to make intolerable sacrifices. Further, even if all of these conditions are met, it is necessary to distinguish between the length of the delay caused by extraordinary circumstances (which could not have been avoided by all reasonable measures) and the length of the delay caused by other circumstances. For the purpose of calculating the length of the qualifying delay for compensation, the delay falling into the former category would be deducted from the total delay.
  • Krijgsman v SLM (C‑302/16): Where a passenger has booked a flight through a travel agent, and that flight has been cancelled, but notification of the cancellation was not communicated to the passenger by the travel agent or airline at least 14 days prior to departure, the passenger is entitled to compensation.
  • Bossen v Brussels Airlines (C‑559/16): On a flight itinerary involving connecting flights, the distance is calculated by using great circle method from the origin to the final destination, regardless of the distance actually flown.
  • Krsemann v TUIfly (C‑195/17): The spontaneous absence of a significant number of flight crew staff (wildcat strikes) does not constitute 'extraordinary circumstances'.
  • Wegener v Royal Air Maroc (C‑537/17): The Court reaffirmed its previous decision (Folkerts v Air France).
  • Wirth v Thomson Airways (C‑532/17): Where there is a 'wet lease' (with the lessor carrier providing an aircraft, including crew, to the lessee airline, but without the lessor bearing operational responsibility for the flight in question), the lessor carrier is not responsible under the Regulation.
  • Harms v Vueling (C‑601/17): For the purpose of calculating the ticket price, the difference between the amount paid by the passenger and the amount received by the air carrier (corresponding to the commission collected by a person acting as an intermediary between those two parties) is included in the ticket price, unless that commission was set without the knowledge of the air carrier.
  • CS v Česk aerolinie (C‑502/18): For a journey with 2 connecting flights (in a single reservation) departing from an EU member state and to a final destination outside the EU via an airport outside the EU, a passenger who is delayed by 3 hours or more in reaching the final destination because of a delay in the second flight which is operated as a codeshare flight by a non-EU carrier may bring an action for compensation against the EU air carrier that performed the first flight.

European Commission's Interpretative Guidelines (note that this policy document is persuasive, but only the CJEU's interpretation of Regulation 261/2004 is authoritative and binding): http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conte...XC0615%2801%29. National courts do not have to follow the European Commission's Interpretative Guidelines (but are obliged to follow the CJEU's case-law). For example, although the European Commission takes the view that 'missed connecting flights due to significant delays at security checks or passengers failing to respect the boarding time of their flight at their airport of transfer do not give entitlement to compensation' (para 4.4.7 of the Interpretative Guidelines), the Edinburgh Sheriff Court took a different view in Caldwell v easyJet. Sheriff T Welsh QC held that 'the facts proved can properly be characterised as denied boarding because of the operational inadequacies of Easyjet ground staffs management of the Easyjet queues on 14 September 2014 and their failure to facilitate passage through security check, customs and passport control when asked, in circumstances, where it was obvious the passengers were in danger of missing their flight'.

When AY+ Flight Reason AY Offered AY explanation Won/Lost, How, Time

Summer13 no status (HKG-)HEL-LHR Prior to landing, LHR was closed as the fire services there were unavailable, so the flight was diverted and landed in LTN, where passengers were offloaded. However, the plane then flew from LTN to LHR with luggage in the hold, so passengers had to make their own way to LHR to retrieve their luggage (as AY provided no ground transport arrangements), eventually arriving at LHR and reclaiming baggage over 6 hours later than the scheduled arrival time. Requested 600 plus transport and phone call costs incurred, but AY only agreed to reimburse transport and phone call costs AY claimed that 'the delay of this flight happened in extraordinary circumstances' Filed claim through ESCP in the County Court in England. AY contested the claim. The Court ruled against AY. In its judgment, the Court cited CJEU's decision in Eglitis and Wallentin-Hermann and rejected AY's defence as the flight diversion only caused a small initial delay. AY failed to discharge its burden of proof that it took all reasonable measures, as evidenced by proper contingency plans and steps to assist passengers at LTN. The delay in arrival at LHR was significantly lengthened by this factor. AY eventually paid the damages and costs awarded by the Court.

Summer13 no status (LHR-)HEL-HKG Technical fault Requested 600 plus phone call costs incurred, but AY only agreed to reimburse phone call costs AY initially claimed that the technical fault was not foreseeable Filed claim through ESCP in the County Court in England. AY conceded the claim and eventually paid 600 + phone call costs + court costs.

Fall15 AYG HEL-LHR-US HEL-LHR late, miss connect 200 voucher, reroute 3,5 hours requested 600, re-offered 400 due to <4 hours -> accepted.

Nov15 AYS HEL-AMS Equip swap -> rerouting 3+ hours 400 cash (as per EC261) or 550 voucher offered in 2 days accepted

Jan16 AYP KUO-HEL ATR crew shortage, cancelled 50 voucher Claimed EU 261 + taxi + hotel. NO -> paid taxi+hotel -> escalated to KRIL -> NoRRA offered 250 voucher. Accepted

Jan16 AYS WAW-HEL "extraordinary crew shortage" 50 voucher raised to "kuluttajaoikeusneuvoja". They state that crew shortage can usually not be declared an extraordinary -> escalated to KRIL -> AY offered 150 -> declined -> AY offers 200 voucher -> Accepted. 8 months to resolve the matter!

Jan16 AA Platinum = OWS BKK-HEL delay, no equip combined 300 voucher (for 2 pers) extraordinary manufacturing fault of A350 declined offer -> escalated to KRIL -> AY offered 680 voucher / 400 cash (for 2 pers) -> declined -> KRIL decision Feb18 = AY should compensate 300 / pax

Q1/16 ?? JFK-HEL diverted back to JFK ?? technical fail, new equip escalated to KRIL -> 600 offered, accepted

Feb16 ?? (LHR-)HEL-PEK cancelled, re-routed, arrived at PEK with 20 hr delay and, because of this, missed seeing dying grandfather by a few hours ?? 'extraordinary circumstances' due to pilot sickness, AY refused compensation -> filed small claim in England and won (see Guardian article)

Feb16 ?? HEL-PEK 6h delay 150 voucher manufacture fail of A350 ??

Q1/16 AYG LHR-HEL A350 broke up 50 voucher ??

?? OWE HKG-HEL 6h delay (A350) 600*2pers ?? 2 weeks wait only for compensation

?? ?? BKK-HEL 13h delay 600 cash / 800 voucher ?? Just 2 days to get compensation, accepted 800 voucher

Q1/16 ?? BKK-HEL misconnect, 6h delay 400/550 misconnect raised the discance to apply 600 -> offered 600 cash / 800 voucher

Mar16 AYP PVG-HEL cancel, reroute, 12h delay 600/800 cancel&reroute 800 voucher accepted

?? ?? ?? cancelled, long delay 600/800 technical fault accepted

Mar16 ?? HEL-HKG 8h delay 200 voucher extraordinary fail A350 escalated to KRIL -> no info

Nov16 OWE (LHR-)HEL-TLL overnight delay nothing NoRRA pilot shortage Claim for EUR 400 filed in the England and Wales small claims track (not ESCP), AY admitted the whole of the claim a few days before the hearing (details)

???16 AYS PEK-HEL cancelled 100/200 sick pilot, no overtime declined -> escalated to KRIL. No info yet.

Feb17 OWE BKK-HEL-LHR 2h delay in BKK, misconnect in HEL 600 cash / 800 voucher ?? Submitted compensation request, AY responded around one week later, accepted 800 voucher (details)

Feb 2017 AYP KUO-HEL 06:00 cancelled ATR shortage HEL-LHR was missed, at LHR 6 h late 400 in cash or 550 AY voucher. Returning HEL-KUO 23:40 cancelled ATR shortage rerouted to JOE, bus to KUO, at KUO 2h 40min late 250 in cash or 350 AY voucher.

Apr 2017 OWE TLL-HEL-LHR AY118 delayed from TLL-HEL "crew rest" then later, "Try Norra, not us" 400 claimed. Rejected. MCOL in UK. Disputed by AY. County Court civil case, Oxford (10/11/17) Judgement : AY was the operating carrier under EC2111/2005, compensation and costs and expenses awarded.

Apr 2017 OWE TLL-HEL-LHR AY118 delayed from TLL-HEL "crew rest" then later, "Try Norra, not us", then "Delayed due to weather" 400 claimed. Rejected. 2 seperate agencies tried but gave up on the case. European Small Claims Procedure started at Den Haag sub-district court, AY didn't defend. Judgement (11/6/2019): compensation, costs and interest awarded.

Dec 2017 AY Gold AY HEL-KOK operated by Norra canceled due to crew shortage, delay due to reroute >3 hours EUR 250 claimed. Accepted by AY and an alternative of a EUR 350 voucher offered.

May 28 2017 AYP, AY 380 KUO-HEL was cancelled due to lack of planes (admitted by Finnair - Flightradar 24 gold is an invaluable tool for this sherlockholmesing: one KUO flight was cancelled in the previous evening as OH-LKM had broken in HAM and it should have taken care of the next morning KUO-HEL flight 7:30, OH-LKP arrived late from GVA 23:40 and took off to KUO well after midnight being there 01:33, OH-LKP should have flown KUO-HEL flight 6:15 but crew rest prevented this, OH-LKP flew KUO-HEL 7:30 flight instead). Missed LHR connection. Arrived at LHR 5 h 54 min later than planned. EUR 400 or voucher of EUR 600 was offered without any resent.

Dec 2018. HEL-LPA delayed 4 hours because routine maintenance took longer than expected. Pax AY Plat. Compensation paid within 24 hours (offered 400 cash or 550 voucher).

Some more cases from earlier history can be read HERE (unfortunately only in Finnish)

List of National Enforcement Bodies (NEBs) in EU/EEA Member States and Switzerland published by the European Commission (updated: April 2018): https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites...ent_bodies.pdf

European Commission's guidelines with criteria for determining which NEB is competent for handling complaints (updated: April 2017): https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites...procedures.pdf

If you decide to engage a claim agency/lawyer to pursue your claim, please first read the Information Notice published by the European Commission (updated: March 2017): http://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/...gencies_en.pdf

To file a court claim, the CJEU stated in Rehder (see above) the criteria for determining which Member State's court has jurisdiction. If you booked a package combining flight(s) and accommodation, Advocate General Sharpston stated in her Opinion in Flight Refund v Lufthansa (Case C‑94/14) at paras 9 and 59-60 that a consumer claiming compensation under Regulation 261/2004 can file a court claim in the jurisdiction where he/she habitually resides, as an alternative to filing a court claim in the jurisdiction of the airport of departure or arrival.

You can file a claim at a court with jurisdiction to rule on your case either through the national procedure or through the European Small Claims Procedure (ESCP). The ESCP is a primarily written procedure and is available where the claimant and defendant are domiciled in different EU Member States (with the exception of Denmark) for claims up to EUR 2,000 (increasing to EUR 5,000 with effect from 14 July 2017).
Print Wikipost

Finnair and EC 261 compensation

Old Feb 16, 16, 6:45 am
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Platinum Lumo, TK Elite, AA, BA, SK, DL, NT, WB + hotels
Posts: 7,919
Jmmi, this is really interesting. As far as I can see, you were not entitled to EC261 in your case. You volunteered, for which AY should have offered you something beforehand (something that's usually below the EC261 sum, but could be basically anything: money, gift cards, upgrades etc), and since you volunteered, the EC261 compensation does not apply.

Looks like AY has the EC261 all wrong, both ways!
ffay005 is offline  
Old Feb 16, 16, 7:06 am
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 280
I guess you're right. In this case offering something beforehand wasn't possible, though, as the equipment change leading to the overbooking was announced at the gate.

AY has these compensations for volunteers, and I expected to be compensated according to them. I got the EC261 compensation for an involuntary reroute (and a 8 meal voucher!), however maybe they treat all reroutings given at the gate as involuntary? A policy or a mistake, either way, I didn't mind :-)
jmmi is offline  
Old Feb 17, 16, 10:36 am
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Helsinki
Programs: AY Platinum
Posts: 303
Originally Posted by ffay005
It's great to have a new topic about this matter. And it would be even grater to hear experiences from someone who has actually managed to get EC261 compensation from AY!
Last autumn, I had a booking HEL-LHR-U.S. When I was already on my way to the airport AY gave me a call, telling me that my HEL-LHR flight would depart approx 1 hour late due to the plane's late arrival from its scheduled maintenance and that I'd miss my connecting flight and that they had booked me to another BA operated flight to the same destination.

As a consequence, I arrived to my destination 3.5 hours late than originally scheduled. Afterwards, I asked for a compensation from AY. (Literally, actually for "THE compensation".)

Three weeks later, I reveived a reply, saying that as an apology and due to the fact that I'm a status customer (silver at that time), they wanted to offer me a EUR 200 voucher "as a definite settlement of the event". I replied that a voucher is fine for me but in accordance with EU legislation I expect a compensation of EUR 600. Soon afterwards I received a reply from them -also referring to the EU regulation- saying that they will give me a voucher of EUR 400 due to the fact that the delay of the flight was less than 4 hours. This was more or less correct to my understanding so I was happy with the outcome. And indeed, it was a good compensation for making me spend 4 extra hours of my holiday in HEL/LHR lounges.
loimu is offline  
Old Feb 17, 16, 12:31 pm
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,268
It seems as though the availability of a court to enforce a judgment is what makes the wheels turn at AY. In the AMS example, it's the Netherlands and in the immediately preceding example, it's the UK (while the compensation offered is not exactly correct, it's not far off and it was accepted).

However, in the OP's example, he's stuck in Finland and the NEB itself won't do anything, so AY can get away with ignoring OP.

Let's see if anything comes of this.
Often1 is offline  
Old Feb 17, 16, 1:27 pm
Moderator, Finnair
Join Date: May 2011
Location: MMX (CPH)
Programs: Eurobonus Diamond, QR Platinum, AY+ Platinum, A3*G, Nordic Choice Lifetime Platinum, SJ Prio Black
Posts: 13,456
Let's not forget FT member tnurminen beat Finnair in court of appeals.
Post #16 f.f.

What we are seeing now, if we indeed are seeing a shift in policy, may be a slient adjustment to that court order.
intuition is online now  
Old Feb 22, 16, 6:34 am
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Platinum Lumo, TK Elite, AA, BA, SK, DL, NT, WB + hotels
Posts: 7,919
AY came back to me, still claiming that their crew shortage is extraordinary and offer nothing more than a 50 voucher. I wonder if I should try Peruutetutlennot.fi or the kuluttajaoikeusneuvoja that Wkndtraveler contacted in another matter (see http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/26223038-post23.html).

Does anyone here have experience about Peruutetutlennot.fi? How efficient are they and would they really be interested in taking a case like this to court? The Norra cancellations do, after all, concern thousands of people.
ffay005 is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 7:32 am
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: KUO
Programs: HH Diam, AY/AX/IHG/VISA Plat, Bonvoy/Melia Gold, Radisson Prem, PP Prest, BT Exec
Posts: 2,137
Just received the compensation for the extra hotel night and taxi charge. Sent on last Friday my case to Kuluttajariitalautakunta. On their pages there are interesting cases listed on what is considered force majeure and what not.
TTL is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 8:25 am
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: HEL
Programs: AY+ Gold (OWS)
Posts: 528
I would advise against using Peruutetutlennot. I doubt they have much interest in taking cases to court due to the cost risk involved. I also doubt that they have the right to appear before Finnish courts (they have to be a 'luvan saanut oikeudenkyntiavustaja').

Their T&C say this about court cases:
b) Jos tulee lisksi viel tarve kytt muita juridisia palveluita, niihin ptevt yleiset oikeudelliseen apuun kytetyt sdkset. Niden jlkeen lasku tullaan mrittmn korvauksen suuruuden, tyn mrn ja saavutetun ratkaisun perusteella. Nist maksuista tiedotetaan kirjallisesti ja asiakkaan pit ne hyvksy ennen kuin oikeudellisia palveluita ryhdytn kyttmn.

d) Lisksi korvausvaatimuksen riitauttaminen voi tuottaa ylimrisi kuluja, kuten esim. asianajajien palkkioista, oikeudenkyntikustannuksista tms. Peruutetutlennot kantaa nm kustannukset, ja ne tullaan korvaamaan vastapuolen toimesta, jos tapaus voitetaan. Jos korvausvaatimus hyltn, Peruutetutlennot maksaa kulut kokonaisuudessaan itse.
Despite any assurances to the contrary, you are personally liable for such costs with relation to Finnair. I would not trust the site to pay up tens of thousands of euros in costs if you do end up losing.

You have a strong enough case without the help of Peruutetutlennot. I recommend using the Consumer Disputes Board (if you travelled as a consumer), but I guess these days you have to go through a Consumer Rights Advisor to get there.

I had to file a claim against Finnair with the Board last summer, as they deducted a € 50 service charge for refund of flights that I cancelled. This was not a part of their T&C, and it was also an unreasonable contract term according to Consumer Dispute Board praxis. Finnair refunded me the € 50 a few months after I made the complaint.
deissi is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 8:57 am
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: HEL
Programs: AY+ Gold
Posts: 416
How quickly have you received answer from AY for these claims? I sent my claim on 18JAN, received a short reply from the person "in charge of my case" on 03FEB saying that she will investigate the case and contact me again asap, still waiting. This claim was about A350 4h delay.
HJP is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 12:51 pm
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Platinum Lumo, TK Elite, AA, BA, SK, DL, NT, WB + hotels
Posts: 7,919
Originally Posted by HJP
How quickly have you received answer from AY for these claims? I sent my claim on 18JAN, received a short reply from the person "in charge of my case" on 03FEB saying that she will investigate the case and contact me again asap, still waiting. This claim was about A350 4h delay.
Their first reply came in about 4 weeks after I sent the claim and the 2nd reply in about a week after my reply.
ffay005 is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 1:19 pm
Join Date: Jan 2011
Programs: OWE,*A G, Bonvoy LT TE, HHonors Diamond, WoH Globalist, bore-core
Posts: 1,906
Finnair have their representative in FT. Must be the most silent lurker/representative in FT,not many posts. Try to send the unsolved claims to him to see his/her real value here and what are the things above his/her payroll.
Jaenks is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 1:24 pm
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Platinum Lumo, TK Elite, AA, BA, SK, DL, NT, WB + hotels
Posts: 7,919
The AY representative here is of zero value. He has made a couple of posts, which if memory serves me right are more or less copy-paste press releases and texts from their website. Nothing like on the BA board, unfortunately.
ffay005 is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 1:29 pm
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Platinum Lumo, TK Elite, AA, BA, SK, DL, NT, WB + hotels
Posts: 7,919
Originally Posted by deissi
I would advise against using Peruutetutlennot.
Thanks for your advise. Might be better to steer clear of them.

I'll write AY a short note, asking them to pass the case up the ladder since the person handling it obviously has instructions from above on what to offer and zero negotiating power. I'll also let them know I'll contact this kuluttajaoikeusneuvoja. If that doesn't lead to any result, then I'll pass it on to Kuluttajariitalautakunta.

I suggested AY pay me the 250 in vouchers, which would obviously be cheaper for them, and they could even save face, claiming their extraordinary BS and give that voucher "out of goodwill". The poor guy writing my reply did not even comment on the claim.
ffay005 is offline  
Old Feb 22, 16, 11:09 pm
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: HEL
Programs: *G, used to be with TK but left due to their corruption and political ties
Posts: 4,334
Originally Posted by deissi
I would advise against using Peruutetutlennot.
Probably a good idea. Only use a service like that if they are willing to go to court for you. Otherwise you might as well make up a fancy letterhead yourself when you send your complaint to the airline, that way you'll save the 25%+VAT fee.
Gnopps is offline  
Old Feb 25, 16, 7:20 am
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: HEL
Programs: AY+ Gold
Posts: 416
Originally Posted by HJP
How quickly have you received answer from AY for these claims? I sent my claim on 18JAN, received a short reply from the person "in charge of my case" on 03FEB saying that she will investigate the case and contact me again asap, still waiting. This claim was about A350 4h delay.
I just received their reply for this case, here some highlights of it:

Pahoittelen Bangkokin lennon viivstymist 17.1.2016 ja sit, ettei sinun ja xxx paluumatka Helsinkiin sujunut alkuperisen suunnitelman mukaisesti. Finnair selvitt lennon AY090 viivstymisen syyt. Kyseess on ollut laipan ohjaajan rikkoutuminen uusimmasta A350 -koneessamme. Vika havaittiin edellisell lennolla Helsinkiin laskeutumisen jlkeen ja se oli korjattava ennen seuraavaa lentoa. Lento Bangkokiin lennettiin heti kun varakone oli saatavilla. Ottaen huomioon, ett kyseess oli aivan uusi A350 -lentokone ja vika oli yllttv ja arvaamaton, on vian todennkisimmin aiheuttanut valmistus- tai suunnitteluvirhe. Lentokoneiden kuntoa tarkkaillaan jatkuvasti ja Finnair varmentaa matkustajien turvallisen lentomatkan kaikin mahdollisin ennakoivin toimenpitein. Nist toimenpiteist huolimatta koneissa voi esiinty odottamattomia lentoturvallisuuteen vaikuttavia vikoja, jotka ilmenevt luonteensa tai alkuperns vuoksi ylltten. Vakiokorvausta ei tss tilanteessa makseta, koska kyseess oli vika, jota ei voinut ennakoivin toimenpitein vltt. Niss olosuhteissa Finnair tarjoaa kuitenkin huolenpitoa. Mikli teille on tst huolimatta aiheutunut viivstyksen aikana ylimrisi ateria- ja puhelinkuluja ja sinulla on mahdollisuus skannata kuitit, voit lhett ne meille shkisesti alla olevan vastauslinkin kautta.

Ymmrrn, ett tst pitkst viivstymisest on aiheutunut harmia ja vaivaa. Haluamme tarjota sinulle ja xxx hyvn asiakassuhteen silyttmiseksi yhteisen 300 euron arvoisen lahjakortin

Lhetmme lahjakortin shkpostitse, mikli ilmoitatte hyvksyvnne sen sovintona asiassa kahden viikon kuluessa.

How would you answer? Basically we are willing to take a voucher for future travel, but 300 for 2 persons is not much compared to 2 x 600 EC261 cash compensation.
HJP is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread