"Extraordinary circumstances" ?

Old Nov 14, 18, 12:47 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: ZRH, GVA
Programs: LX FTL, GHA Black
Posts: 33
Question "Extraordinary circumstances" ?

Dear all,

On last Sunday my flight from Heathrow to Geneva (LX357) was cancelled. The only alternative that LX proposed me was the next day morning flight at 9h so I have arrived to Geneva on Monday noon instead of Sunday evening.

Following my flight, I sent an email to LX claiming the monetary compensation based on EC261/2004. Today, I have received a reply from their side saying the following : "flight LX357 had to be cancelled in London Heathrow due to engine bleed system failure. As such circumstances are considered extraordinary; we are unable to comply with your request for monetary compensation".

Instead they offered me 5k miles which I consider to be a joke.

As I know that some of you might have been already in a same situation, I would appreciate your opinions on how I should proceed. If the aircraft had technical issues, who exactly determines if this can be considered an "extraordinary circumstance" ? Even the EC261/2004 is not very clear at that point.

Thank you all for your help and have a nice evening!

Patrick
Pattrick555 is offline  
Old Nov 14, 18, 1:07 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: ZRH / YUL
Programs: UA, TK , Starwood > Marriott
Posts: 6,394
There are many, many threads in this forum already on EU261 and how LX handles this - please do a search.

In a nutshell: They owe you duty of care for sure. You will need to fight them for compensation.
airoli is offline  
Old Nov 15, 18, 6:10 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 3,073
Originally Posted by airoli View Post
There are many, many threads in this forum already on EU261 and how LX handles this - please do a search.

In a nutshell: They owe you duty of care for sure. You will need to fight them for compensation.
It is really a disgrace how LX handles these issues. Anything is considered an "extraordinary circumstance" beyond of the airlines' control by them. Almost a reason to fly "real European" airlines like LH and OS instead.
worldclubber is online now  
Old Nov 15, 18, 6:32 am
  #4  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 42,944
It is far from a disgrace, but LX has it wrong in this instance. However, collecting against LX will require a small claims action against LX in the UK (unless OP has a UK address from which he can file through MCOL).

In this particular instance, EC 261/2004 applies as provided under EU and UK precedent because this was a departure from the EU. Under those facts, the reason cited by LX would almost certainly not qualify as an "extraordinary circumstance" and OP will be due his delay compensation.

However, Switzerland is not an EU Member State nor is LX an EU carrier. But, Switzerland has adopted the language of the Regulation. However, Switzerland is not only not bound by EU and UK precedents, but its courts have affirmatively (and wisely) rejected most of the more outlandish holdings. One of those is that technical problems are almost never "extraordinary". Thus, in a Swiss court applying Swiss law, OP would almost certainly lose.

It goes without saying that LX had a duty of care to OP to cover or reimburse his hotel and meals. That applies whatever the reason for the delay.
Often1 is offline  
Old Nov 16, 18, 4:03 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 3,073
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
It is far from a disgrace, but LX has it wrong in this instance. However, collecting against LX will require a small claims action against LX in the UK (unless OP has a UK address from which he can file through MCOL).

In this particular instance, EC 261/2004 applies as provided under EU and UK precedent because this was a departure from the EU. Under those facts, the reason cited by LX would almost certainly not qualify as an "extraordinary circumstance" and OP will be due his delay compensation.

However, Switzerland is not an EU Member State nor is LX an EU carrier. But, Switzerland has adopted the language of the Regulation. However, Switzerland is not only not bound by EU and UK precedents, but its courts have affirmatively (and wisely) rejected most of the more outlandish holdings. One of those is that technical problems are almost never "extraordinary". Thus, in a Swiss court applying Swiss law, OP would almost certainly lose.

It goes without saying that LX had a duty of care to OP to cover or reimburse his hotel and meals. That applies whatever the reason for the delay.
Do you mean "always" instead of never?
worldclubber is online now  
Old Nov 24, 18, 3:08 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: VIE, TYO, CAX
Programs: LH-SEN
Posts: 63
Never in CH is correct. Always in the EU. Exceptions feed the lawyers.
Abouttimetoo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread