EU261 - Denying compensation because of a 'hidden manufacturing error'

[tdimdad]

A question to the brain trust about a "hidden manufacturing error" being an extraordinary circumstance. Would this kind of situation be within the airline's maintenance department's realm and therefore seen as a technical problem rather than extraordinary safety (or any other) issue?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Hmmm. IIRC i think finnair has pulled this excuse before? It’s very rare for an airline to try and rely on it.

I think you have two options here... either try and pursue it yourself by asking finnair for further details (exactly what is the supposed defect, and proof that it was a hidden error), or, go through one of the claims companies.

They have direct access into the airlines’ systems so know exactly what and why a delayed occurred. They’ll take 25-33% of your claim, but might be worthwhile (and if they say it’s an error, then you know it actually is one).

 

[serfty]

Given Finnair, then I'd take @MEL_Traveller 's advice.

Although, with case law, "Mechanical" is not necessarily "Extraordinary" and in general isn't.

European Court Of Justice EC 261/2004 Ruling: Mechanicals Not Considered “Extraordinary Circumstances”

European Court of Justice ruling that mechanicals are not considered “extraordinary” circumstances and airlines are required to pay compensation.

loyaltylobby.com

What If Airlines Claim Extraordinary Circumstances

Extraordinary circumstances is a term overused by airlines to get rid of their responsibility to pay compensation for delays. Find out how to deal with it.

www.claimair.com

This thread is on the BA FlyerTalk forum and is BA related but had a lot of useful information:

The 2020 BA compensation thread: Your guide to Regulation EC261/2004 - FlyerTalk Forums

Also, this decade old thread: Mechanical Failure - extraordinary?

 

[tdimdad]

Lot of good and clear reading in that. Thanks, Sertfy!

My friend has now outsourced this to one of those claim companies. Though, I think it's a sad situation if we have a whole service industry spun up around airlines trying to flout the regulation and it seems to have become the de facto direction that you better use them to obtain a compensation.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Agree with serfty. What is unusual here is finnair a’s claim of a manufacturing defect... something which should really be outside normal wear and tear, outside of normal maintenance. Something caused by the manufacturing process itself. I guess things like the 787 battery issues, or weaknesses in fan blades which couldn’t be picked up through maintenance.

Claims companies have their uses... easy to lodge a claim, direct access to validate your claim, fast payment, useful in cases where airlines might be using an obscure exception, saves the passenger time.

But passengers can do it themselves. I had a claim drag on for just over 12 months. Got my full €600! but that involved around five emails back and forth with the airline, and two or three hours of my time. Was that worth the extra €200? for me it was but YMMV

 

[ethernet]

Somewhat off topic but Choice Magazine points out complaints with Online retailer KOGAN in April 2009.
I then had Acer computer (.au) deny keyboard issues even though it is all over the internet, but for a different reason than say Apple. On Aliexpress my sat/H265 decoder box had an intermittent turn on, and I lost the appeal/claim because the pictures did not prove anything! Plenty of supermarket Android phones with no security updates. Making it difficult for consumers is a trend.