United Flight Gone Bad From London to Chicago

The EU rule doesn't apply to extraordinary circumstances and weather is considered an extraordinary circumstance.

Having been diverted multiple times due to weather, I think it is pretty unlikely you will get additional compensation. They got you to your final destination.

May I suggest you send them a letter in writing via registered mail or whatever it's called where you live. I think it's called certified mail in some countries. Those letters tend to get noticed more than the thousands of emails they receive daily.

According to AirHelp, the EU compensation rules only apply to European airspace. Last I checked, Indianapolis and Chicago were outside the EU. In fact maybe London is now.

Hi sorry for not being specific they ended up cancelling the flight due to mechanical issues (they said the rudder malfunctioned on landing)

I thought since the flight originated in the EU (London is still in the EU as of now) that it is governed by them. Granted they landed in Indianapolis and then canceled the flight. So not sure if redirects and then cancelations effect the rule. I'm just very annoyed by the lousy bus ride and getting home at nearly midnight instead of 1:30pm.

I have to agree that $125 seems like some pretty meager compensation. Why don't you contact them and ask for what you really want?

Your flight originated in the EU, so EU261 would apply. The weather/mechanical reason will be key. Here is a link to a very detailed thread over on FlyerTalk that specifically addresses filling EU261 claims with United. As you will see, it's usually not easy, but if indeed the reason for the cancellation was mechanical, EU261 does apply.

While you can always try, I don't think you will be succeed in getting 600 EUR.

Take a look at this link which is a draft list of "extraordinary" circumstances. In particular, look at number 10 (your initial delay due to weather) and number 25 (the failed rudder).

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/passengers/air/doc/neb-extraordinary-circumstances-list.pdf

I know this won't make you feel better, but it could have been worse. At least you weren't stuck in your airplane seat for another 8 hours.

Hi All

I appreciate the feedback.

As for the regulations of what is considered extraordinary circumstances the link you provided was a draft from 2013 but there have been some resent rulings in both the UK & The EU narrowing that definition.

I found this on an official UK site referring to KLM vs van der Lans (2015):

"In September 2015 the European Court looked at the same issue in the case of KLM v van der Lans. The court found that technical problems were not extraordinary and neither was the early failure of an aircraft component. The ruling noted two types of technical fault that may be extraordinary, a hidden manufacturing defect and damage to an aircraft caused by sabotage or terrorism. "

http://www.caa.co.uk/Passengers/Resolving-travel-problems/Delays-cancellations/Your-rights/Am-I-entitled-to-compensation-/

So unless they claim it was a manufacture defect they are still responsible even if they maintained the plane. I think

I would suggest that EU exception rules like US exception rules on flight delays/cancellations are intended to promote safety. The rule making likely considers allowing air carriers to make safety related go/no-go decisions without disincentive penalties. The concept is better late than not at all.

Disregard what they "told" you and look at what actually happened.

The flight was not cancelled. It took off on time (or within a reasonble time period) for your destination. En route, bad weather at your destination forced your plane to divert. The airline is still responsible for getting you to your destination. When a mechanical issue arose, the airline decided to bus you to Chicago instead. While they told you they "cancelled" that portion of the flight, that is not the correct wording and is not the same as cancelling a flight. The official record of the flight will be a diversion due to weather.

So, the EU rules won't apply because the flight took off on time and weather forced the diversion and delay.

You can hold out for more than the $125 but only your negotiating skills will get you more. And I doubt you will get close to the 600. Or, you could file a complaint with the EU that should only take a year or so before you get a response. If you're lucky.

Was the 600 round trip airfare? Do you expect to recoup the total cost of your flight, even though you completed the trip?

Your flight was NOT cancelled. You got on the plane and it flew you (close) to where you were going. The airline also provided transport from where it landed to your original destination for the flight. OK, you were 8 hours late, but you got there. They didn't leave you stranded to find your own way to Chicago. This is better than a lot of my experiences with United.

Are you wanting compensation because it is a big profitable airline that has deep pockets and it can afford to pay? Or are you actually out something (other than the time you were late) and suffered a financial loss due to the lateness of your arrival? Go ahead and file a claim. Don't expect any more than you have already been offered.

Personally I think you are fishing. I do think that some US consumers think that any inconvenience is a jackpot. I think you should be compensated for any financial lost that can be documented. If you had a critical meeting in Chicago and had to book a car rental or another flight to make the meeting, then that should be compensated. You personal time and mine is worth very little in this situation. And besides, Chicago is famous for it's summer-time, thunderstorm delays. I think asking for 600 Euro for your inconvenience is little over the top. The classic example in law - someone knocks a half eaten apple our of your hand, your are entitled to half an apple and not new, whole apple. Nothing wrong with pushing them a little but don't have much expectations.

I can imagine that situation was frustrating, but I would not expect to get any compensation from the airlines for a weather delay. I think you are lucky to have received what you did.

You can ask for them to add miles to the deal: 10, 000 or more.

I do not think weather was the issue.
Zlso what plane needs to refuel due to low fuel, they know how much fuel they need to get to destination.
They landed and then said they had a mechanical issue.

Airline was lying.

I do not think weather was the issue.
Zlso what plane needs to refuel due to low fuel, they know how much fuel they need to get to destination.
They landed and then said they had a mechanical issue.
Airline was lying.

That's not correct. Airlines take only enough fuel to get them to their destination plus the amount needed to get to their alternate airport. Weather can cause delays at the airport as air traffic controllers will increase the space between planes during storms. That means delays. At that point, the captain has to decide if he wants to risk low fuel while waiting or divert to take on more for safety purposes. Sometime the pilots have no choice as fuel gets too low.

Airliners used to carry much more fuel but now they take as little as possible to cut costs. It's an ongoing battle between the pilots and the airlines.

This happened to me a few weeks ago enroute to Heathrow. Bad weather was causing delays and the captain decided to divert to Stansted to pick up fuel.

Additionally, unexpected strong headwinds can slow a plane down causing a need for more fuel. A few months ago, numerous airliners flying from Europe to the U.S. were stopping in the Maritime Provinces and Maine to refuel.

The bounds of what is encompassed within EU261/2004 compensation continues to be stretched. In at least one case heard in England (Evans v Monarch Airlines Ltd for those who want to look it up) bad weather, in this case a lightening strike was ruled not to be exceptional.

However, expect any case involving weather to be contested at least as far one level of appeal as the individual circumstances will almost always be different from those in previous cases.

Although you can pursue it yourself, you may find it easier to employ a specialist solicitor, especially if court hearings are required.

Am I the only that thinks this is not really that big Iof a deal. Your flight was diverted and the airline got you to your final destination. You were on your return flight home.
Weather happens.