CHARTER FLIGHTS – DELAYS AND CANCELLATIONS

Many people assume that the EU regulations for delays and cancellations on flights to, from or within Europe apply only to scheduled flights. This is not so: EU 261/2004 specifically states: “Since the distinction between scheduled and non-scheduled air services is becoming increasingly blurred, such protection should apply not only to passengers on scheduled but also on non-scheduled flights, including those forming part of a package tour.”

Charter airlines and agents would very much prefer their customers to believe that this regulation does not apply to them – but it does. Late changes of departure times, airports or long delays are all covered in the same way as a scheduled flight. The only problem is that the airlines have the same escape clauses: they can deny liability if a delay was due to exceptional reasons beyond their control, such as strikes, weather or a sudden safety issue.

The other issue is working out who you approach if you feel you have not been treated in the way the regulations proscribe. You do not have a direct contract with the charter airline but with a tour operator (that may be part of the same group) or you could have bought a ‘ticket only’ deal from an agent that may also be a subsidiary of the airline. A reader contacted us with a letter from one of these agents denying liability for a delay because “this is covered in our Terms and Conditions”. This is complete nonsense. No agent or airline can have small print that overrides the law.

If you are travelling on a package tour and your flight is delayed, the tour company can arrange for meals and accommodation, which broadly fit the limits under the regulations. If the company does this, and you accept what is offered, then you probably have little right to further compensation. An alteration to flight times ahead of departure is more contentious. Package-tour companies love to bring forward departure times and even alter airports (particularly for regional departures). When they do this, they may offer some compensation or tell you none is due because it is covered by their Terms. This may not be the case. You should look at www.caa.co.uk/auc and click on ‘Travel Advice’ to see what the precise terms are for pre-advised flight changes and whether you are being treated correctly. If you are not, then you should write to the company and tell it what you require. In the absence of a satisfactory answer, you should take out a claim in the County Court (we can advise on this).

Remember,most delays (whether on scheduled or charter flights) will be excluded from the EU Directive under the ‘exceptional causes’ rule. Strikes, weather and normal breakdowns are all included in this. A Monarch Airbus had a delay of 47 hours in Sharm El Sheikh and the airline kept its passengers fed and watered and gave them £100 compensation. The aircraft did not have a record of mechanical problems (so there was no question of negligence) but required a spare part in Sharm El Sheikh. The part was not available locally and had to be sent from Cairo. The new part was faulty and a replacement had to be flown in from Luton. The payment was ex gratia because the cause of the delay was ‘exceptional’. In such circumstances, the airline does not even have a duty to provide food or drink for passengers (though a tour operator normally does for those travelling on a package). By stating what airlines must pay in certain events, and then giving an almost open-ended list of exclusions where payments need not apply, the EU Directive could be said to reduce passenger rights in many cases. The Directive is far more likely to be useful in cases of flights that are cancelled or rescheduled.

Was it a delay or a cancellation?

If your flight is delayed and the airline puts you on a later flight, then it is not necessarily a delay but a cancellation. This is not legal semantics but a question of cold cash. Compensation under the EU regulations can go up to €600 for flights that are cancelled at short notice but amounts to little more than food and accommodation for delays.

Airlines operating routes with a few flights a day have been known to cancel flights with small loads but tell passengers there is a delay to the flight of four hours. After four hours, the airline may announce that the aircraft is still “unavailable” but it can rebook passengers on to a later flight. With the cost of fuel, it would not be surprising if this tactic became more popular. The airline could be claiming an entirely spurious ‘technical delay’ (hence not covered under EU regulations) whereas, in fact, it is simply cancelling a flight it does not wish to operate.

Back to Top