Who should receive the compensation?

[Olanabunny]

An extended family holiday booked to celebrate somebody's big birthday
Birthday person's cost for the holiday was spread between the rest of the people attending. 2 free child places were also applied
Flight was significantly delayed
Compensation was claimed by the lead of the booking and received today.
How should it be split?
Should the children with a free place be awarded it? Should the birthday person receive a share even though they didn't pay anything towards the holiday or should those who paid for their holiday receive a portion of it back?

One is compensation for pain and suffering, one is compensation for the inconvenience and general unpleasantness of being stuck in an airport for hours. There's no real difference.

In some circumstances, the person who bought their tickets is entitled to both a refund on top of their compensation payment - do you think the payer should get their full refund plus everyone else's compensation?

Nope, am not the OP, I just think as a family group booking and a family refund ,my first want would be that everyone was refunded their cost .
It is only because it is a family booking that I would do this, and i would be the person who had the children in this event.
I would have had the benefit of free childrens places. So I would not want to double dip.
Family mean more to me than being greedy for a pay out, on 2 free places.

I get its compensation, and legally theyre entitled to it.
If they were out of pocket due to the delay, then that should be repaid. But if its for discomfort & hassle, I would be expecting just those who paid to share the money. If I was the birthday or the free-child place family I'd not accept a share of the compensation.

Family mean more to me than being greedy for a pay out
Doesn't sound like it.

Out of pocket expenses are separate to this as is a travel insurance claim (depending on delay etc).

it is simply a payment to say sorry your flight was delayed due to operational reasons or cancelling flights without redress - it doesn’t cover weather delays or acts of god merely things the airline should have been able to control

also everyone had the free child places no one paid for them - the cost of the holiday would likely be not that different to with. The compensation without them would be 1k less

@SelMarin I am not the OP. I would be the one not taking £1000 As I would rather my family all got a refund...
So I would lose on the deal...
So how does that make me greedy...lol

Compensation for inconvenience during a free holiday, paid for by others? A hard no.

So people who paid should have it shared amongst them.

Yes. If anyone wants to be really nerdy about this, you can Google CJEU case C-344/04, IATA and ELFAA.

This was a challenge brought by the airline industry in 2004 when the EU first brought in Regulation 261.

What they argued was that passengers already had a right to claim for any financial losses suffered in a delay or cancellation (as long as they have evidence of actual losses). This right is laid down in Article 19 of the Montreal Convention, which establishes the international liability framework for carriage of passengers and cargo by air. So, they argued, this new EU law is in conflict with the existing liability regime.

The European Court said nope, these are two different types of compensation. Our new law is a quick and easy way to give passengers a fixed sum in compensation for the loss of time and general inconvenience they’ve suffered, without having to produce any evidence of financial loss. (Oh and by the way it will give the airlines a kick up the arse because they need to be made to try harder to avoid delays and cancellations). If you want to claim in addition for financial loss, you are free to go ahead and do so. The two regimes coexist side-by-side.

And that remains the law.

Later the the 2009 Sturgeon case (joined cases C-432/07 and C-402/07) stated that the compensation was for “loss of time” which was ascribed a financial value because loss of time is irreversible. This was important because they were arguing that a passenger whose flight is cancelled suffers the same damage as one whose flight is delayed for a very long time (when your flight is cancelled you have the right to be put on the next available flight so you do fly, just a bit later, and that is similar to someone who flies later on the original flight they booked).

So, to all those talking about conceptual difference between refunds and delays and breach of contract and types of loss suffered- I hate to break it to you but you’re not the first to mention this- it has all been thrashed out by the top aviation lawyers in Europe, several times.

To be honest I don’t think this requires a unilateral decision. The person who has the compensation should just make a group chat and ask the group how it should be split. There might be a consensus. There might be a debate. But ultimately I don’t think it should be one person’s decision. People always get funny with money so you’re better off being fully transparent. They won’t care about what mumsnet thinks!

Actually, fair enough- if you'd give someone else your money you're obviously not being greedy.

But I think it would be greedy for someone to suggest they are entitled to someone else's compensation.

I think even putting it to the group is cheeky, when it's not their money. The OP should be making arrangements to transfer the money to the people it belongs to. If those people decline the money, then it's fair to discuss how it should be shared.

Refund to paying adults

LOL 🤦‍♀️

If the compensation is per passenger, not per paying passenger, then that should be the default. Depending on the age of the children and the timing of the delay, their parents may have had a tougher time of it than everyone else if they ended up with disruption to sleep/routines. If the parents offer that the children don't need compensating, fair enough.

The other possibility to suggest is that you put it towards the next big family gathering.

But who decides who the money belongs to? That was my point. The issue is there’s a difference between compensation and a refund. It is not the same thing. Compensation is for whoever experienced the delay and inconvenience on the day, that might not necessarily be the same person who paid for the flight. That includes the birthday person and the kids, especially if any out of pocket expenses were incurred for them. Parents needing to book a hotel room or extra tickets for the kids - as an illustration.

therefore this situation has all the markings of a fall out, so personally I’d tread carefully and get the group to decide to cover myself! Someone’s going to get offended when money is involved

It's a fixed amount of £520 each to compensate for the inconvenience and general unpleasantness of the flight being delayed. The OP will be holding $520 on trust for each passenger.

You can also claim reasonable expenses (including for food and a hotel) on top of that, so anyone who has incurred expenses should claim them from the airline, rather than take it out of someone else's compensation.

Since being delayed in boring, uncomfortable places is generally tougher on children than on adults, maybe the children should get a greater share of the compensation "pot", if you're viewing it that way?

I used to work in the travel industry. The compensation is for inconvenience and is per person. The lead passenger is claiming for each person on the booking. This money is for each passenger and to claim it in their name and not give it to them would be fraud. You can’t just decide to keep someone else’s compensation. If there were fewer passengers, the compensation amount would be reduced, it needs to be split evenly between all passengers including children. Obviously, the parents will receive compensation for any under age children.

All together now....

It's not a refund!!

But, it isn't a refund!!

@llamajohn

Yes we've seen that.

However, it's money returned.

Morally, give the people that paid full "refund" and split what was left.

LEGALLY split by person travelling

no it isn’t though money returned because the services paid for have been rendered and received. It is compensation tied to a specific event that all went through

@creepywoman as to who decides the airline and the statutory law behind it who sets out that each passenger receives it

i can really see it but it does make you think doesn’t it!

imagine though if the manufacturer hadn’t died or being a local man as well how different it all could have been

Morally the right thing is to return the money to the people it was provided for i.e equally split by all passengers.

I'd say morally it's on the non paying recipients to suggest it goes back in a family pot, or refuse to take it.

But why? The people who paid didn’t have any more inconvenience than those who didn’t. The people with children likely had a lot more inconvenience than those without, because of having to keep the kids occupied.

This isn’t linked to paying. It’s linked to who suffered inconvenience and is an apology for that. They all had the same treatment, they all deserve the same level of apology.

If you pay for food in a restaurant but one of the party is served an allergen and gets sent off to hospital, would you tell them to hand over their compensation because morally, it should be yours as you paid for the meal? No, you wouldn’t. This is no different. You don’t steal someone else’s compensation and you don’t judge them or pressure them to hand it over just because you paid.