When the EU law says you are due 600€ for missing a flight, that also means you are due only 600€ for missing a flight, no matter what. Doesn’t matter if you missed out on the job of a lifetime, or if you weren’t present for your father’s last breath. It’s so disingenuous how they craft a narrative of citizens/consumers first, but in end effect, the only ones who have the ear of von der Leyen and the rest of the EC are the lobbyists. Metsola is the head of the EP and she’s the biggest corporate stooge to ever walk this planet.
I mean, what do you expect? If you miss a flight and lose a possible job, it doesn’t mean you were guaranteed that job and require compensation of the equivalent.
Lose out on a €100k/year job, do you expect to be compensated that? For some indefinite amount of time? What if you wouldn’t get the job in the first place?
Missing out on your father’s last breath because of a flight issue - how much would you value that? Likely it is impossible to put a financial figure against it.
So what do you expect?
Unnecessary pedantry. There are clearly cases where being denied boarding and a delayed flight will result in financial losses of upwards of whatever pittance they give you in exchange. And the court system is there precisely to calculate the actual incurred financial loss, and the law protects the corporations from this liability.
I literally picked the two points you raised from your post. If it’s pedantic, thats a reflection on your own post.
As I already said, the job of the courts is to determine just financial compensation.
For every single possible delay, or for singular specific events for a single person?
IE.
- a flight being delayed because the engine needs to be repaired?
or
- a single person kicked off a flight unfairly?
Courts are funded by tax payers. You want to use the courts to calculate financial compensation individually for every single person ever affected by a delayed/cancelled flight, regardless of the reason?
You are welcome to take cases to the courts, if thats possible.
But what I am interpreting from your replies, you are expecting an insane level of work and cost.
Have you had some specific event affect you, where you have lost out more than €600 euros?
Looks like you’re an immigrant to Germany - what compensation would you get from your “home”/birth country?
edit
As I already said, the job of the courts is to determine just financial compensation.
Is that your own opinion, or the actual legal case which you are being prevented from doing?
Thats not how it works at all:
Article 12
Further compensation
The rigth to compensation amounts are the minimum you get. If you think it’s not enough you’re free to sue the company for more and let the judge decide.
Thanks for correcting the record. In that case I think I was mislead and misinformed by the airline. This keeps getting more interesting. So far, they have broken all of the rules: didn’t properly inform me that I will be denied boarding, didn’t call for volunteers, didn’t give me any information about compensation, didn’t provide any written statements and now misleading “information”. Not feeling very protected right now.
How would you do it? Genuinely curious.
In this very context, what law do you suggest that would enforceable in practice, does apply to all people and all cases and is compatible with past laws?
I’m not saying it is your duty to do so, I’m not saying some politician don’t have other interests in mind beside that of all citizens, yet I also do not think it is trivial so I’m wondering if there is an obvious better alternative than what is in place. I believe by trying we often see that the current solution isn’t great but there are a lot more worst ones and that new ones often have other flaws, at least have different compromises.
The crux of the matter is that these “consumer protect laws” often release the party with the most leverage from liability i.e. they protect the party with the most leverage from ever being held accountable for doing something really damaging to the other party. And their justification for this, is giving you a pittance as compensation.
How you do it is by simply retaining liability for damages caused, i.e. by not trying to short circuit the justice system.
Do you know what happens when the airline does not follow even the laws that are there on the books in their favour? In that case you are first advised to seek justice from a private arbitration court, i.e. they are again trying to avoid the actual legal system. Seems like a pattern.
What has Metsola done?
Her voting record is public for all to read.
