Norwegian: Mandatory Engine Checks
Nov 27, 2019, 11:58 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Moraga, CA
Posts: 6
Norwegian: Mandatory Engine Checks
Rome-Oakland flight first delayed, delayed, delayed and then cancelled. Norwegian put us on a next day flight to LAX, connect to SFO on Alaska, cab home. Norwegian is picking up out of pocket expenses.
BUT no compensation for cancellation because:
"Unfortunately, Norwegian flight DY7077 (FCO-OAK) 22.10.2019 was cancelled. This disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.
Reason for disruption: This disruption was caused by mandatory checks from aviation authorities on a specific type of Rolls Royce engine, forcing us to take the scheduled aircraft out of service."
I understand that Norwegian and Rolls Royce have been systematically replacing Dreamliner engines due to material failure of blades. Thus, I wonder how "extraordinary" anything involving Dreamliner engines could be? I doubt that the "mandatory checks" came out of the blue.
Any opinions on whether Norwegian is just throwing up a first line defense to deny paying compensation and to discourage filing a complaint with their regulator?
BUT no compensation for cancellation because:
"Unfortunately, Norwegian flight DY7077 (FCO-OAK) 22.10.2019 was cancelled. This disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.
Reason for disruption: This disruption was caused by mandatory checks from aviation authorities on a specific type of Rolls Royce engine, forcing us to take the scheduled aircraft out of service."
I understand that Norwegian and Rolls Royce have been systematically replacing Dreamliner engines due to material failure of blades. Thus, I wonder how "extraordinary" anything involving Dreamliner engines could be? I doubt that the "mandatory checks" came out of the blue.
Any opinions on whether Norwegian is just throwing up a first line defense to deny paying compensation and to discourage filing a complaint with their regulator?
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Nov 27, 2019 at 2:35 pm Reason: Moved to forum for Norwegian Air
Nov 27, 2019, 11:05 pm
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Bregenz, Austria
Programs: AA, BAEC, Alaska, Flying Blue, United, IHG, Hilton
Posts: 2,950
Absolute rubbish. There have been several precedents where this issue has been ruled not to be extraordinary and compensation is due.
You are being given the mushroom treatment here. Go after them.
You are being given the mushroom treatment here. Go after them.
Nov 28, 2019, 1:08 am
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brighton. UK
Programs: BA Gold / VS /IHG Diamond & Ambassador
Posts: 14,196
You need to push back and clearly state that these engine checks are nothing new and they have had ages to reorganise their operations to take account of the need to carry out the engine checks on a more regular basis.
Nov 29, 2019, 12:39 pm
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pacific Northwest
Programs: UA Gold 1MM, AS 75k, AA Plat, Bonvoyed Gold, Honors Dia, Hyatt Explorer, IHG Plat, ...
Posts: 16,848
They delayed and then cancelled the flight when they “suddenly” discovered extraordinary, unexpected mandatory engine checks? That seems hard to believe.
Nov 29, 2019, 9:38 pm
#6
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,639
If one is not positioned to take Norwegian to court after they deny your initial claim, do you have any other option besides using a claims agency? I asked about similar situation in another thread below - is there any recommended claims agency to proceed with in this situation?