Compensation: Airlines threatened with legal action

Three of some of the biggest airlines could end up in court if they fail to 'shape up' over flight delay claims. Legal action could soon be taken against the airlines Jet2, Wizz Air and Aer Lingus who are not abiding by consumer law. This threat comes as the above airlines fail in the handling of passengers affected by flight disruption. As well as failing to alter their policies despite extensive discussions, according to the Civil Aviation Authority.

The CAA, has claimed that both Jet2 and Wizz Air have "failed to satisfy the regulator that they are consistently paying compensation for disruption caused by technical faults, despite a Court of Appeal ruling clarifying that airlines must do so."

In addition to this, the CAA has also claimed that the same two airlines are also imposing a 2 year time limit on passengers who wish to take a compensation claim to court. This is despite the Court of Appeal ruling that passengers should receive up to 6 years in order to make a claim in court.

Further failures also exist with Jet2 and Aer Lingus who have failed to give satisfactory evidence that they 'proactively' provide passengers with information regarding their rights when disruption occurs. The information provided to customers regarding flight disruption should be in line with the requirements set out in the European regulation.

If these airlines fail to comply, the CAA will launch enforcement action and will seek a court order against them. However, Jet2 have suggested that these claims are 'materially inaccurate' and that "Jet.com is paying compensation for disruption caused by technical faults in line with the landmark Huzar ruling and have already confirmed this to the CAA." Compensation received by passengers is up to 400 euros (£289) per a person, with the average fare equating to £80.

In addition to this a spokeswoman added, "Airlines are entitled to limit to two years the period in which claims can be made by contractual limitations and these have been upheld by the court on a number of occasions. Jet2.com strictly abides by court decisions and is acting in accordance with the law, not contrary to it. No enforcement action has been taken. The CAA is obligated to consult with Jet2.com before considering enforcement action. This process has not started. Given the misapprehensions of the CAA, Jet2.com expects that following the mandatory consultation process the CAA will not wish to take the matter any further."

This failure to comply with consumer law comes as passengers who suffer with long delays bare witness to airlines employing various tactics in order to avoid paying out compensation. Rather than airlines admitting to a technical fault, many passengers will receive a letter stating that the delay was caused by a 'hidden manufacturing defect'. Others have argued that they are simply ignored by airlines who fail to give a response.

Under EU Regulation 261/2004, passengers are entitled to £465 in compensation if their flights lands more than 3 hours late. However, claims cannot be made due to 'extraordinary circumstances' such as bad weather or crew strikes.

Prior to this change, airlines would refuse to pay out for delays caused by a technical fault. However last year, 2 Supreme Court rulings and a 6 year legal battles opened the floodgates to 2 million holidaymakers to make claims. As a result, the court declared that airlines should pay out when a delay is caused by a technical fault. This change could see airlines fitting a bill of around £3.89 billion for cases dating back 6 years.

If your thinking of making a claim for a delayed or cancelled flight, MTA Solicitors can help you! At MTA Solicitors we have experts in travel compensation who can help put things in motion for you. Know your rights and get refunded. We work on a No Win No Fee basis for flight compensation claims.

To find out more simply visit us online today or call us on 0208 313 7804 to speak with a member of our civil litigation team.

Beating The Debt Recovery Storm

David Green, Managing Partner at MTA Solicitors gives advice to small businesses on cash flow and keeping the debts at bay in these tough economic times:

If you’re a small business whose survival is dependent on regular cash flow, the urgency of recovering overdue bills is critical.

Recovering debt as quickly and as smoothly as possible is one of the key aspects to staying afloat in a difficult market. Taking the right steps from the outset will allow you to maximise the monies which are rightly owed to you without damaging your business relationships.

Many businesses find it hard to chase a customer for debts as there is a risk that attempts to recover them will be seen as aggressive.  

But it is important not to lose sight of the fact that the customer has failed to pay you the money they owe, and you simply can’t afford this issue to jeopardise the financial stability of your own business.

A solution for recovering overdue monies needs to be one that can be put into action swiftly to give you every chance of getting your money back at the lowest cost to you.

The first step towards recouping outstanding debts is to ensure that your terms and conditions are clear regarding payment. If you are going to use an external company to collect overdue payments make your intentions clear to your customer so there can be no misunderstandings.

As the payment terms near their end a ‘friendly’ phone call can often result in payment, and if not you have the option to follow this up in writing to instigate a gentle reminder of the outstanding payment due and, to re-emphasise your payment terms.

What has to be avoided is continual phone calls and letters chasing debt as this wastes your time and stops you from concentrating on new business.

Enlisting the help of a recovery agent or a professional solicitor at the early stages could be beneficial in terms of saving you time and money in the long term. These debt recovery companies or specialist solicitors will act on your behalf to recover the debt and although often effective some of the charging models require such firms to be aggressive, which can damage relationships.

In my view, the most efficient debt recovery model is to use a combination of all the various options but not be afraid to allow those representing you to take the action that is necessary to recover the debt.

It is always advantageous to recover a debt without resorting to litigation as costs are often not recoverable unless the unpaid amounts exceed £5000, and you will be expected to cover such costs.

A law firm with the right experience will know how to manage a case in the long run, saving you money and recovering your debts more efficiently. It is important to choose a firm which has efficient case management systems and an impressive recovery record.

Debt Recovery can become very complicated and expensive and choosing the wrong company to represent you may result in processes that sour relationships, costs you don’t expect and recoveries not meeting your expectations.

David Green is Managing Partner MTA Solicitors LLP

www.mtasolicitors.com

See Positive Collections: http://www.positivecollections.co.uk/ for a cost effective online debt recovery process.

New "Reasonable Force" Definition to help Homeowners and Smallshopkeepers?

Prime Minister David Cameron this week vowed to bring in stronger measures to protect homeowners defending their property.
He said: "We will put beyond doubt that homeowners and small shopkeepers who use reasonable force to defend themselves or their properties will not be prosecuted."


It will be interesting to see how this legislation develops and how the definition of 'reasonable force' pans out, as this, it seems to me will be the stumbling block

Already an extreme case has been highlighted today where a burglar has been stabbed by a homeowner in Salford near Manchester and subsequently died from his injuries. The home owner is in custody. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-13885457  Surely it will still have to be assessed on a case by case basis, depending on the threat and the action taken in defence.

For more information about Property Law and Disputes please visit  http://www.mtasolicitors.com/Services/Civil_Litigation/Default.aspx