-
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Robert I think that this should be quite clear cut. If a flight retains the the same flight number then it is a delay. If you end up on a new flight number, then the original flight must have been cancelled. [/quote]
Macka,
I really don't think it is that simple.
Take these 2 cases:
Most airlines have the same Flight Number each day, say, VS60* from Orlando to Manchester. If VS60 is 'delayed' 24 hours and you are put on VS60 the next day is that a cancellation or a delay? put on it 2 days later? 3 days?
*A made up number - I don't fly Virgin.
If Virgin cancelled, say, their Orlando to Manchester flight but flew you the same day from Orlando to London and booked you on a BA Flight to Manchester - what happens? They have cancelled the flight so different flight number. Is that a cancellation under the EEC act?
The re-routing due to flight cancellation is a pretty frequent occurance. 2 cases recently with BA from USA to UK (for a bird strike and smoke in cabin) All passengers were put on other flights back to UK. A cancellation certainly - passengers entitled to compensation?
From Tezz's latest post it would appear that both Thomas Cook and EasyJet are arguing that if they get you to, or near, your destination it does not count as a cancellation under the EEC ruling.
-
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by Robert5988
Does anyone know when a delayed flight becomes a cancelled flight?
By that I mean if a charter firm says it will take you 12 hours later, 24 hours later, 48 hours?
There was a case in the local US paper of a cruise passengers' delayed flight meant they missed the boat(literally) from Cape Canaveral and were trying to claim from the airline.
[/quote]
With a charter, the airline is contracted to the [u]tour operator(s)</u> who have chartered the aircraft to fly their passengers from A to B. The only way the flight can cancel is if the tour operator(s) cancel it with the airline, hence a delay of any length would not be considered a cancellation if the charter airline was fulfilling its obligation to its customer ie the tour operator(s), to transport their passengers to their final destination.
All of which makes the Thomas Cook case very intersting.
-
[/quote]
With a charter, the airline is contracted to the [u]tour operator(s)</u> who have chartered the aircraft to fly their passengers from A to B. The only way the flight can cancel is if the tour operator(s) cancel it with the airline, hence a delay of any length would not be considered a cancellation if the charter airline was fulfilling its obligation to its customer ie the tour operator(s), to transport their passengers to their final destination.
All of which makes the Thomas Cook case very intersting.
[/quote]
Not sure I follow that - why isn't it a 'cancellation' if the airline fails to operate the flight? The obligation upon the carrier must surely be more rigourous than just to carry the passengers to their destination at some future time and date.
I think it comes down to Robert's initial point - when does a delay become a cancellation? I suspect it might simply depend on the particular circumstances of the individual case.
-
The legal jargon............
Article 5
Cancellation
1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:
(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8; and
(b) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 9(1)(a) and 9(2), as well as, in event of re-routing when the reasonably expected time of departure of the new flight is at least the day after the departure as it was planned for the cancelled flight, the assistance specified in Article 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(c); and
(c) have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7, unless:
(i) they are informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departure; or
(ii) they are informed of the cancellation between two weeks and seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than two hours before the scheduled time of departure and to reach their final destination less than four hours after the scheduled time of arrival; or
(iii) they are informed of the cancellation less than seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure and to reach their final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival.
2. When passengers are informed of the cancellation, an explanation shall be given concerning possible alternative transport.
3. An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.
4. The burden of proof concerning the questions as to whether and when the passenger has been informed of the cancellation of the flight shall rest with the operating air carrier.
For the full article go here............
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...030483-02.hcsp
-
thanks Julie - the article defines 'cancellation' as:
"...the non-operation of a flight which was previously planned and on which at least one place was reserved".
I would say that means that if the flight THAT DAY doesn't operate, irrespective of whether it has the same flight number as those on following dates, it is a CANCELLATION.
Clearly, if the airline cancels a future service before it has sold seats on it, it can't be a cancellation.
-
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by Katys Grandad
[/quote]
Not sure I follow that - why isn't it a 'cancellation' if the airline fails to operate the flight? The obligation upon the carrier must surely be more rigourous than just to carry the passengers to their destination at some future time and date.
I think it comes down to Robert's initial point - when does a delay become a cancellation? I suspect it might simply depend on the particular circumstances of the individual case.
[/quote]
Sorry, I probably didn't explain what I was trying to say too well. A charter airline has to operate the original flight (even with a delay in place), - it has signed a contract with a tour operator to do so, it cannot cancel it outright, but must operate as soon as possible. There are new EU regulations now in place to protect passengers, which can only be a good thing.
-
Dawn I think the confusion arises when comparing a charter flight with a scheduled flight, in my view if a flight number does not operate on the day/date you were booked then it is cancelled, if say the VS75 which you were booked on departing on the 1/3/2006 is delayed passed midnight it will still be the VS75 from the 1/3/2006, even though there is another VS75 the next day, but if they 'combine' those two flights and you travel on the 2/3/2006 and not the 1/3/2006, and the VS75 from the 1/3/2006 does not operate as per your booking then your flight is cancelled[msnwink]
-
Yes Julie, I agree. that is the difference between charter and scheduled[msnwink]
-
Hmmmm, interesting.
I see your point Robert.
So are we saying that a passenger on a scheduled flight has more cancellation protection in law than a Charter flight? Possibly.
I'm sure this won't be the last through the small claims court and I guess the definitions will be redefined and the picture becaome clearer with a precedent.
Ultimately, if you feel as though you have been unfairly treated you probably have and should look into your case on it's own merits as has been said.
It's a double edged sword though, it could push the prices up as John said, however I'm always in favour of legislation designed to protect the consumer.
-
We got a phone call last week informing us that the plane we were travelling on doesnt go that day anymore so have to have the day before or day after,we booked up as soon as they came up for sale so we were able to go the day we wanted to,which we found very inconvenient.I wonder what would have happened if there were no seats available on the other planes though
