Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Other European Airlines
Reload this Page >

Can't find Norwegian's Flight Compensation EC 261/2004

Can't find Norwegian's Flight Compensation EC 261/2004

Reply

Old Feb 8, 19, 8:59 am
  #16  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: Gold: A3, AZ, BA, KL
Posts: 23,039
For what it's worth, euclaim.co.uk indicates the flight is not eligible for compensation as the flight "had an arrival delay of less than three hours" and is not accepting claims for this particular flight.
Attached Images  
irishguy28 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 19, 7:38 am
  #17  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Programs: BA Bronze
Posts: 96
To follow up, here is the reply from Norwegian. They claim extraordinary circumstances. They also have the time that the flight was delayed incorrect (it was between 3-4 hours, not 27 hours).. perhaps because they are confused by the flight number change. The aircraft was not inspected on the ground (as they seem to imply) - rather it flew out of CDG, and after failing to reach cruising speed (maybe an hour later) turned back to CDG.

What's your opinion: If the aircraft fails to reach cruising speed and has to divert back to CDG for inspection, is that a failure for the usual mantainance of the aircraft (covered by the EU regulation), or is it indeed an extraordinary circumstance? Would you suggest following this up?

Thank you for contacting us with your claim.

We're sorry for the delay of your flight. We understand that punctuality is vital for our passengers, and Norwegian strives to ensure that all flights operate according to schedule. Regrettably, due to the nature of air travel, delays and cancellations are unavoidable and do occur from time to time. We once again offer you our sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused in relation to the disruption of your travel plans. Unfortunately, Norwegian flight DY7149 (CDG-BOS) 16.01.2019 was delayed by 27 hours and 26 minutes due to an earlier disruption within our network that had a direct effect on this flight. The original disruption was caused by an inspection of the aircraft following a possible technical fault. During inspection, no technical defect was found. The aircraft was then released for operation without the need to replace any components which resulted in mandatory crew rest. This disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.

Although we respect your request for compensation, we’re unable to honour your claim as your flight was delayed due to an event, which constitutes extraordinary circumstances.

In most cases, passengers will be entitled to compensation in the event that the disruption is caused by a technical defect. This is in accordance with the European Court of Justice ruling in the case of van der Lans (C-257/14) which states that technical difficulties resulting in the replacement of a defective component on the aircraft may be within the carrier’s control and entitle the passenger to compensation.

Nevertheless, according to this verdict, certain technical problems may constitute extraordinary circumstances and exempt the carrier from its’ liability of compensation. This would apply in cases where the aircraft is released from inspection without the presence of a technical defect or any need to change a faulty component, as well as technical problems that affect flight safety, such as hidden manufacturing defects, and/or damage to the aircraft caused by acts of sabotage or terrorism.

We apologise for the inconvenience caused on this occasion and hope to have the opportunity to welcome you on board a Norwegian flight when you next choose to travel.

Kind regards,

The Customer Relations Team
zachbb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 19, 7:49 am
  #18  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 39,719
OP - You said that the flight was cancelled due to a "technical fault." What makes you say that? A technical fault is almost never an "extraordinary circumstance" while the response from DY suggests something else.

Your wife should double check the information and then reply in clear and polite terms that the information is incorrect and then provide the information she had. Eg., a DY agent (whom she should name or describe) told her. With that, I would repeat the claim, require that it be paid within a reasonable time periods, I suggest 7 business days, and then on the 8th day refer it to a claims agency unless you are prepared to litigate in the French small claims courts. The claims agency will take 25-33% of the loot, but they also obtain decent results quickly.

DY is on shaky financial ground and I would not count on the ability to collect anything down the road. A compensation claim is an unsecured claim and that means it won't get paid in bankruptcy.

For what it is worth and not relevant to this particular situation, before handing something off to a claims agency, consider the small claims systems available to you. By way of example, on a UK carrier or a flight departing from or ticketed in the UK, I would have no qualms about filing in the small claims part. Courts there do informal telephonic hearings and you can do that just as well from Boston as London.
Often1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 19, 7:54 am
  #19  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Programs: BA Bronze
Posts: 96
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
OP - You said that the flight was cancelled due to a "technical fault." What makes you say that? A technical fault is almost never an "extraordinary circumstance" while the response from DY suggests something else.
The pilot announced during the flight that the plane will return to CDG because of a failure to reach cruising speed. The plane was then inspected upon landing, paper work filled out, a new pilot boarded, and it took off again.

Regarding double checking the information, is there some way to find out the actual recorded time that the plane arrived in BOS? None of the flight tracker sites I've tried list (for free) older flights, and I was never told the new flight number.
zachbb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 19, 11:33 am
  #20  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 39,719
Your wife (I would make certain that your wife, as the passenger, is communicating with DY) would presumably know this and ought to have a new boarding pass for the new flight with the new flight number. But, to be frank, I would not worry about it. DY does not seem to be contesting the three hour issue. If it is important to you, call DY and ask.

She should simply be polite and insistent. At this stage, no need to involve a claims agent.
Often1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 19, 11:37 am
  #21  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Programs: BA Bronze
Posts: 96
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
Your wife (I would make certain that your wife, as the passenger, is communicating with DY) would presumably know this and ought to have a new boarding pass for the new flight with the new flight number. But, to be frank, I would not worry about it. DY does not seem to be contesting the three hour issue. If it is important to you, call DY and ask.

She should simply be polite and insistent. At this stage, no need to involve a claims agent.
ye presumeth incorrectly good sir, the pax never left the plane and no new passes were issued.
zachbb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 19, 3:42 pm
  #22  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 39,719
Originally Posted by zachbb View Post


ye presumeth incorrectly good sir, the pax never left the plane and no new passes were issued.
Still not a reason for her to forgo her claim. What matters is the time her originally ticketed flight was scheduled to arrive and the time at which she did arrive. At 3 hours, EUR 300 and at 4 hours EUR 600. She might be concerned at 2:59 or 3:01 or 3:59 vs. 4:01, but if squarely in the first block as you set forth in your OP, she is due EUR 300.
Often1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread