kbt cruiser Posted July 25 #76 Share Posted July 25 Thanks again @Megabear2. I think your comment about Maleth not being able to afford it actually raises very serious questions about P&Os due diligence in appointing an airline without the necessary insurances in place. Maybe this shifts the liability back towards P&O ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Windsurfboy Posted July 25 #77 Share Posted July 25 Absolutely clear legally Maleth are responsible for compensation. However in terms of good business and reputation. Given difficulties getting money from Maleth by individuals. P&O should pay the compensation, then they can take Maleth to court to get money back. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9265359 Posted July 25 #78 Share Posted July 25 5 hours ago, kbt cruiser said: about Maleth not being able to afford it actually raises very serious questions about P&Os due diligence in appointing an airline without the necessary insurances in place. No airline has insurance to cover compensation for flight delays. 6 hours ago, kbt cruiser said: Maybe this shifts the liability back towards P&O ? Nope. 5 hours ago, Windsurfboy said: Given difficulties getting money from Maleth by individuals. P&O should pay the compensation Zero chance of that happening. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Windsurfboy Posted July 25 #79 Share Posted July 25 2 hours ago, 9265359 said: Zero chance of that happening. Then P&O must accept the bad publicity that comes it's way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Megabear2 Posted July 25 Author #80 Share Posted July 25 (edited) On 7/24/2024 at 5:40 PM, Snow Hill said: Seems the Paul Ludlow video from Malta on social media sites today hasn’t gone down that well with P&O having to limit who can comment on the post after a a number customers affected by the Maleth compensation issue posted comments. I note that he was challenged yesterday by a poster on LinkedIn over the situation. I found that particularly interesting as it is very much a business related forum. It had occurred to me before that I was surprised the claimants had not visited him there before as he's very active on there. Clearly that might be changing. Edited July 25 by Megabear2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrierjohn Posted July 25 #81 Share Posted July 25 1 hour ago, Windsurfboy said: Then P&O must accept the bad publicity that comes it's way As far as PR is concerned P&O has a hide like an elephants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow Hill Posted July 26 #82 Share Posted July 26 Am I reading this correctly from ABTA website which states cruises are package holidays. “A package holiday has both financial and legal protection. Legal protection means your travel company is responsible for making sure that you get the holiday you paid for. If something isn’t provided or isn’t as expected, and your travel company or its suppliers is at fault, they will need to sort this out for you – either resolving the issue, offering an alternative or providing a full or partial refund. In some instances you may be able to claim compensation.” I read that as it’s P&O responsibility for dealing with delays etc caused by Maleth and then would be up to P&O to recover costs from Maleth Aero. https://www.abta.com/help-and-complaints/frequently-asked-questions/what-package-holiday-and-what-linked-travel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9265359 Posted July 27 #83 Share Posted July 27 On 7/25/2024 at 8:59 PM, Windsurfboy said: Then P&O must accept the bad publicity that comes it's way And how many people might actually see it, and then never book with P&O again? Are you? 23 hours ago, Snow Hill said: I read that as it’s P&O responsibility for dealing with delays etc caused by Maleth and then would be up to P&O to recover costs from Maleth Aero. Your reading is mistaken and all the authorities accept that compensation is due from the airline itself - and if the airline is a foreign airline and won't pay, well tough luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrierjohn Posted July 27 #84 Share Posted July 27 27 minutes ago, 9265359 said: And how many people might actually see it, and then never book with P&O again? Are you? Your reading is mistaken and all the authorities accept that compensation is due from the airline itself - and if the airline is a foreign airline and won't pay, well tough luck. I do agree that it's hardly likely anyone will see a penny in compensation, however I am not sure the rules should apply to charter flights. The EU brought this in to encourage scheduled airlines to make more effort to operate on time. I am not convinced this should apply to charter flights where the cost is pared to the bone because the assumption is that the same aircraft will operate the return leg regardless of whether this will run late if the first flight is delayed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow Hill Posted July 27 #85 Share Posted July 27 5 hours ago, terrierjohn said: I do agree that it's hardly likely anyone will see a penny in compensation, however I am not sure the rules should apply to charter flights. The EU brought this in to encourage scheduled airlines to make more effort to operate on time. I am not convinced this should apply to charter flights where the cost is pared to the bone because the assumption is that the same aircraft will operate the return leg regardless of whether this will run late if the first flight is delayed. The ABTA website Travel companies are responsible if their suppliers default or fail to provide the service offered. It could be argued that Maleth is a supplier of charter flights, thus P&O as the package provider are responsible. I would suspect only a court can make the judgement as the regulations currently stand, but I think the regulations need reviewing in respect of charter flights that are supplied as part of a package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molecrochip Posted July 27 #86 Share Posted July 27 On 7/25/2024 at 12:26 PM, Windsurfboy said: P&O should pay the compensation, then they can take Maleth to court to get money back. No they can’t. P&O have no legal obligation either solely or jointly to pay the compensation. If they do, and try to sue for it back, Maleth will ask for proof that they legally had to make the payments. When that is not forthcoming, case closed. P&O lose. Moral obligations don’t carry weight in court. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molecrochip Posted July 27 #87 Share Posted July 27 5 hours ago, Snow Hill said: The ABTA website Travel companies are responsible if their suppliers default or fail to provide the service offered. It could be argued that Maleth is a supplier of charter flights, thus P&O as the package provider are responsible. I would suspect only a court can make the judgement as the regulations currently stand, but I think the regulations need reviewing in respect of charter flights that are supplied as part of a package. But Maleth did provide a flight service A to B. It might not have been comfy, up to the quality anticipated etc etc, but they provided the flight. There is case law which stipulates no matter what you pay or expect for a flight, if they get you from A to B then the contract is substantially complete. Airlines own charters may offer you a sweetener but it’s not legally required. The EU compensation was partially introduced to deal with this gap. Hence the burden wholly on the airline. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare MyriamS Posted July 28 #88 Share Posted July 28 On 7/27/2024 at 10:52 AM, terrierjohn said: The EU brought this in to encourage scheduled airlines to make more effort to operate on time. I am not convinced this should apply to charter flights where the cost is pared to the bone because the assumption is that the same aircraft will operate the return leg regardless of whether this will run late if the first flight is delayed. That is also often the case for regular flights. Lufthansa London-Munich services is operated by the same aircraft flying back and forth between the two cities, with a measly 50 min between each arrival and departure. With so little wiggle room, the slightest delay has a domino effect, with each flight getting increasingly delayed as the day goes on. As long as the delay remains under 3h, they don't have to pay anyone a penny, so I guess this strategy must be profitable. Not fun for passengers though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Windsurfboy Posted July 28 #89 Share Posted July 28 (edited) On 7/27/2024 at 8:36 PM, molecrochip said: No they can’t. P&O have no legal obligation either solely or jointly to pay the compensation. If they do, and try to sue for it back, Maleth will ask for proof that they legally had to make the payments. When that is not forthcoming, case closed. P&O lose. Yes they can, nevermind what P&O pay passengers Maleth will still owe the passengers the compensation under EU law 261 now UK law 261 which Malethsigned up to inorder to flyout of any UK or EU airport. So if as part of compensation agreement by P&O passengers promise if Maleth pay they will return it to P&O. P&O lawyers sue Maleth not on behalf of P&O but collectively on behalf of the passengers for the legally owed compensation, which is then returned to P&O. Edited July 28 by Windsurfboy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snibs Posted July 29 #90 Share Posted July 29 14 hours ago, Windsurfboy said: Yes they can, nevermind what P&O pay passengers Maleth will still owe the passengers the compensation under EU law 261 now UK law 261 which Malethsigned up to inorder to flyout of any UK or EU airport. So if as part of compensation agreement by P&O passengers promise if Maleth pay they will return it to P&O. P&O lawyers sue Maleth not on behalf of P&O but collectively on behalf of the passengers for the legally owed compensation, which is then returned to P&O. But the compensation is legally due to the passengers, so if P&O paid out first they would then have to get agreement from the passengers that they would then give P&O the money from Maleth and incur all the legal costs with a risk of not getting anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Windsurfboy Posted July 29 #91 Share Posted July 29 Yes P&O would have to have the promise from passengers, but why not. Other approach is P&O guarantee lawyers costs. P&O will have to guarantee costs, but it is an open and shut case. Maleth will loose and passengers awarded costs and legally due compensation. Only risk is Maleth declares bankruptcy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9265359 Posted July 29 #92 Share Posted July 29 1 hour ago, Windsurfboy said: Yes P&O would have to have the promise from passengers, but why not. Because there is nothing in it for P&O doing that! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrierjohn Posted July 29 #93 Share Posted July 29 1 hour ago, Windsurfboy said: Yes P&O would have to have the promise from passengers, but why not. Other approach is P&O guarantee lawyers costs. P&O will have to guarantee costs, but it is an open and shut case. Maleth will loose and passengers awarded costs and legally due compensation. Only risk is Maleth declares bankruptcy I would rate that possibility as very high, and then Maleth mark 2 would be able to takeover the airline, free of any outstanding compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Windsurfboy Posted July 29 #94 Share Posted July 29 46 minutes ago, 9265359 said: Because there is nothing in it for P&O doing that! Goodwill , good publicity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrierjohn Posted July 29 #95 Share Posted July 29 11 minutes ago, Windsurfboy said: Goodwill , good publicity If they are filling their ships,despite the Maleth problems, then why would they feel the need? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Windsurfboy Posted July 29 #96 Share Posted July 29 25 minutes ago, terrierjohn said: If they are filling their ships,despite the Maleth problems, then why would they feel the need? Publicity is like advertising, it has slow cumulative effects. Bad publicity is like a few termites eating away at foundation of sales. At first it has no effect but if it keeps happening then given time they collapse. Good publicity is like someone adding a few extra beams to foundations or spraying preservative. If you only care about current sales then no need to do anything, if you are in it for long-term that's another matter. In the end P&O is a brand, a good image can add hundreds to prices , a bad image and it's discounts and down hill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doog442 Posted July 29 #97 Share Posted July 29 (edited) It's all well and good people quoting case law but for gods sakes P&O should bite the bullet and put this right. They basically offered a 'package' as mentioned above by snowhill. In the big scheme of things it would cost them very little but until this is settled its a blot on their copybook that will only fester for as long as this goes on. There's 'law' that can always be challenged and apparently a stated case (can we see it for context) but in the spirit of booking a package holiday of this nature P&O should step in an compensate folk for their fault in not doing due diligence on the Maleth clowns they chartered. Edited July 29 by doog442 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare carlanthony24 Posted July 29 #98 Share Posted July 29 P&O did the due diligence to get you to A-B back to A again minus the delays and IFE which they said about. It has already been said by the insider that it's not P&O's fault for them delaying the flights and deciding not to pay compo because they would be worst off. It's on Maleth who did not keep to contract. Already seen complaints of people who have not even flown Norse who just want to accept the bad reviews even though plenty of good reviews showing. It just be another year of complaints with the aircraft's and companies used. Looking forward to seeing the ones that complain that they can't take off due to what ever reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrierjohn Posted July 29 #99 Share Posted July 29 (edited) 2 hours ago, Windsurfboy said: Publicity is like advertising, it has slow cumulative effects. Bad publicity is like a few termites eating away at foundation of sales. At first it has no effect but if it keeps happening then given time they collapse. Good publicity is like someone adding a few extra beams to foundations or spraying preservative. If you only care about current sales then no need to do anything, if you are in it for long-term that's another matter. In the end P&O is a brand, a good image can add hundreds to prices , a bad image and it's discounts and down hill Sounds credible, but experience tells me that PR comes quite a long way down the importance list for P&O, and it seems to have served them very well over the last 20 years. Edited July 29 by terrierjohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molecrochip Posted July 29 #100 Share Posted July 29 (edited) Note that P&O are in dispute over food and drink services - not about getting passengers from A to B. I agree that if P&O get their money back because the contracted food and drink services were not offered then every passenger should get compensation. Remember that’s less than £10 each way per passenger. Also to add, certain influencers are complaining food and drink was not to BA or Virgin standard. The contracted service was Tui standard, which whilst ok is not Virgin or BA standard. The planes they chartered never had Premium cabins or IFE despite suggestions by others it was a late change. The contract was signed really late. There was a real chance of no flights being available and holidays cancelled. It was the only operator not the cheapest. The planes arrived from the previous operators in a poorer condition than Maleth expected. There was not time to refurbish. It won’t surprise me if Maleth are seeking damages from the previous operators due to the condition of the planes. Re reputation: more damages was done by the P&O Ferry layoffs than this. This impacts a few thousand. The ferry issue was seen by tens of milliions. . As for Norse. Good airline, used to be Norwegian Airlines, have their own Dreamliner fleet and offer service on par with Tui. Edited July 29 by molecrochip 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now