Thanks for your reply and useful comments. My replies are in RED. What you should have done at first is have a little moan, accept it and pay the difference. You could have sorted this out when you got home with Thomas Cook. This is exactly what I and my adult companions decided to do when they got the police to turn up to a ‘non-event’, as nobody was causing ANY problems, certainly nobody was being of ANY security risk whatsoever! I didn’t want to be arrested in front of my 11 year old son for no reason, as my wife and the other adults had overheard a couple of the police officers stating ‘why don’t we just arrest him?’! Another two were heard stating ‘we have been called to a very low level incident’ and ‘they should let him get on the flight’, since they couldn’t believe that I was being denied boarding. This has caused upset for you and your fellow travellers, family just when you were to go on holiday for a good time. It is in their terms and conditions about excess luggage fees so I would forget about taking this into Court. All they will say is read the terms and conditions supplied with the tickets or your booking documents. Absolutely, as they didn’t just cause us grief on the outward journey, but also refused me carriage on the return flight, which at least the arbitrator has judged to have been against the law and the agreement/contract by awarding me a refund of the extra return flight I had to purchase. Please note that none of us, certainly not me, were refusing to pay the charge. We just wanted to know the individual excess charges for each suitcase. But, due to the check in lady not following their own correct procedures by letting 3 of our suitcases enter the airport conveyor belt system BEFORE informing us of the individual excess of each suitcase, they were not able to establish the correct amounts. We asked them to get our cases back, but they declined to co-operate and were extremely rude and belligerent and came up with all sorts of excuses about the plane being delayed etc. It is at this point that we asked to speak with the TC Stansted rep for resolving the stalemate. The ground staff at Stansted must have decided enough is enough to call the Police over to calm down the situation. Armed response is always present at all airports all over the world. If Police are called even in the terminal they will be armed. All British airports are covered by the National Aviation Security Plan. How I know about armed response? I was in an armed response unit in the 80's based at an airport. The Police don't always do a report on this type of response so there probably is only a note in the officers notebook for reference later. They called the police AFTER they had decided to deny me boarding NOT during the discussions about our suitcases. So, don’t know what you mean by ‘enough is enough’. I wish I hadn’t mentioned the racist claim in my posts, as I believe this has definitely clouded people’s judgement and comments on the thread, which is a shame. The bottom line is, we were wronged and they used the police as an instrument to bully us into submission and for use in any future litigation, which is exactly what they have done, as the Arbitrator has fallen for the ‘things MUST have been bad if they called the police’ reasoning. From your experience police may not always do a full ‘report’ on all incidents, but can we request the recording/details of the call (i.e. reason for them being called in the first place and who made it) and a report of some kind to indicate the police’s statement(s) as witnesses to the event? The other thing you need to consider is that the Pilot of the aircraft was probably informed by the ground staff that there is a problem passenger at the desk and that Police were called. The Pilot has to consider the safety of his passengers and crew and of the aircraft if this continued on board. If a passenger’s behaviour is an unacceptable nuisance for the other passengers or the crew, or leads to damage or injury, or there is reason to believe that the passenger will perform one of these acts the Pilot will refuse boarding. It costs on average £40,000 to divert a flight because of a nuisance passenger, so refusal of boarding the flight will be given. This is covered under the Air Navigation Order if you want to look it up. What you state would have been o.k. in the case of a drunk or psychopath causing all sorts of problems at the check in desks and labelling them as a ‘problem or nuisance passenger’! But, none of us were of ANY risk or danger to anyone, especially the aircraft. Again, the police were called to justify exactly this point, that I was a risk or danger to the aircraft and thus justify their decision to deny me boarding. So, the police WERE being used as a tool to bully me into submission, i.e. accept their aggressive and unnecessary stance towards me. I can’t understand why you believe I was of any risk to anyone?! Where do you get that idea from? Could it be due to them getting the police involved? I suggest you put this behind you and learn from the experience as you won't win if they produce the airport CCTV. You are right, as that’s what I am going to do. Thanks for your comments, as you have first hand experience of being at such incidents. I would love to get my hands on the CCTV footage, as it will show all of us very calmly asking for resolution to the problem. It will also show me being away from the discussions for at least 10 minutes, in which time the rep and the other adults had agreed a way out of the stalemate, i.e. the £60 for an extra 20kg weight allowance. So, I don’t think they have a chance, but unfortunately I don’t have the money, time or the inclination to confront the law at present, which is a big shame, as I would love to get the ground staff manager to give evidence in a court. Unfortunately the arbitrator didn’t do his/her job properly either, as they should have requested witness statements from me, as they have used the lack of this to mean acceptance of the outbound refuse to carriage. I should have followed through with the appeal within the ABTA arbitration process, but couldn’t afford the £420. So, it may be both too late and cost even more to go to court now. So, it will go down as experience and put to bed.

It is important to reiterate the sequence of events at Stansted. We arrived with 5 suitcases and 5 pieces of hand luggage, i.e. one of each for each passenger. We were not aware of the high excess weight charge when we arrived at the airport check in desk. The check in lady put 3 of the suitcases through the conveyor belt system before informing us of the excess weight (as a TOTAL) of 18kg for ALL 5 of us with only 2 of the suitcases still at the check in weighing belt. We asked her for a breakdown of the excess weight for EACH suitcase, as we needed to pay separately, which she was unable to provide, since 3 of them were now in the Stansted conveyor belt system. We asked her to request their return to give us the breakdown and also we wanted to rearrange the contents and may be either discard or leave some of the extra items at the airport Left Luggage, which at £10 per day would have cost nearly HALF of what they wanted to charge us for the total excess weight! She stated that this wouldn’t be possible, as it could delay the flight or worse make us miss our flight. We then asked to escalate the matter to speak to her manager and then to the Thomas Cook Stansted rep to see if there was a solution to the stalemate. Please note that we were accusing her of not following the correct procedures for checking in our luggage AND nobody had raised their voice, argued with anyone, been abusive, accused anyone of being racist or been disruptive at this point. I left the other adults, including my wife, to discuss matters with the rep while I took my son to the gents. I returned to find that none of my party were at the check in desk, so asked the rep and check in lady of their whereabouts and what had been agreed. The rep said ‘you better go and ask your lot over there’ pointing to my friend sitting down away from the check in desks! It is only at this point that I accused them of being racist. It is important to note that my wife and friend’s wife had gone to purchase a large case to take advantage of the 20kg for £60 charge offered by the rep. This is the trading standard and CPUTR matter, as the rep had told my wife and the other 2 adults that the check in staff ‘are not allowed’ to mention this ‘deal’ to passengers. We asked the reason, but got no meaningful answer. The police appeared AFTER the check in staff had informed my wife and friend’s wife that I would be refused carriage. So, now that you have a bit more detail, can you appreciate my side of this case? They just called the police to intimidate, bully and cover their unlawful and antagonistic behaviour towards me just in case any one us decided to complain, as they had absolutely NO reason to refuse me carriage. As stated in my earlier posts, if the police were called due to any abusive and disruptive behaviour, why didn’t they arrest me?! Why didn’t Thomas Cook corporate lawyers provide the police report as part of their ‘defence’? You mustn’t allow the mention of the ‘racism’ term cloud your judgement in this case, as the rep WAS racist in her statement and the check in lady in her earlier attitude towards us.

Thanks for your comments and views. However, it is important to point out that many of them are based on misunderstandings and not having knowledge of all the facts and events, as I can't and haven't revealed everything in my posts. The main reason the whole thing began was the lack of competence and professionalism of the ground staff AND the fact that they didn't follow the correct procedures when checking in our suitcases and were breaking trading standards and CPUTR 2008 regulations when they had failed to offer us the £60 for 20kg alternative without us having to request to see the Thomas Cook rep. The accusation of 'racism' was AFTER the Thomas Cook's rep had been 'racist' and derogatory towards the rest of the party in what she said to me. I could have walked away, you're right, but the manner and attitude shown by her and the other ground staff required a response. There's a lot more to the case than the false accusations of being 'abusive' and 'disruptive', which I was not. As I stated in my claim and response to TC’s defence, why didn’t the Police arrest me if they were called because I was indeed behaving badly or being ‘disruptive’?

Thanks for your advice and comments. 8th of August is 28 days since the Arbitration Award notification/decision. I was told by the organisation that administers the arbitration for ABTA that I can either appeal the decision with the scheme at a cost of £420 within 21 days or go through the courts after 28 days. I am now also concerned if what you state is the case, as I have no intention of creating a potential black hole for myself in terms of legal and court costs. So, I'll be calling the admin organisation (CEDR) on Monday to find out what my options are. Thanks again for your help. Rgds. radmm0

Hi stu007 I have decided to take the case to court, but don't have the funds to use a solicitor or know how to do it on my own. I have to commence court action no later than next Thursday (8th Aug), so any help regarding what I need to do would be very much appreciated. Can I use MCOL for raising the claim? Thanks and regards. radmm0

The arbitrator has given me the benefit of the doubt on many aspects of TC's 'defence', e.g. their use of evidence that doesn't have any name, date or time stamp has effectively been ignored, as my side has been taken into account rather than TC's. In other statements the arbitrator actually states in clear English that he/she 'believes me' in my reply to TC's 'defence'. The award has been granted due to TC's failure to follow the correct procedures in notifying me about the return flight. So, I have been compensated for that and other small costs associated with it. However, the arbitrator has accepted TC's side on refusing me carriage on the outbound flight at Stansted due to my 'lack of evidence' in persuading him/her, as the decision was based on the fact that I hadn't provided sufficient evidence to prove that TC had broken the contract T&Cs. The arbitrator has effectively stated that the decision would have been different if I had provided some evidence, e.g. statements about my normal behaviour at Stansted from the other 3 adult passengers in the group. This is the reason I'll be meeting with a solicitor next week to establish the best way forward. I have 14 days to respond to the award. I don't know if I have any grounds to take action against the Manager of the ground staff contractors, as it was the contract staff who caused the return flight problem that cost us so much stress and money. They had effectively broken all company and contract rules by their action, i.e. using a TC headed paper and sending a nameless letter to the foreign airport ground staff (who are also TC contractors) requesting that I should be denied boarding on the return flight, without ANY justification, as stated by the arbitrator. Thanks again for everyone's help and comments with this very strange case. radmm0

Quick Update. The Arbitration process has yielded a part victory for me, which is fantastic really. However, I may still take them to court, as I believe they have a bigger case to answer, both financially and legally. I'm meeting a local solicitor next week for some free advice to gauge whether or not to go down the court route. Thanks everyone for all your comments and help. Rgds. radmm0

Hi Laura Just to update you on my case, as promised. I have half won my case, as the arbitration has awarded me roughly 33% of my claim for compensation, which isn't bad, but I now want to reject this award and go for their jugular, as now I know for definite that I was right all the time and they were in the wrong! With proper legal advice and representation I think I can have them for a lot more! Thanks again and hope you'll enjoy your free holiday! Rgds. radmm0

Thanks again HB. I have the cover, but unfortunately it came into force after the problems with TC started, so they won't help. I was rather hoping stu007 may come back with something, as he asked for specifics in an earlier post. radmm0

Thanks HB. Just getting worried that there haven't been any comments yet. I need to reply to TC's ABTA Arbitration 'defence' by tomorrow, so any comments/advice/suggestions would be much appreciated. radmm0

Thanks a lot for your timely input Steveod, much appreciated. I'll have to carry out your suggestions in case I lose the claim the ABTA Arbitration, for which I need to reply to TC's 'defence' by this Friday (21st July). Unfortunately I can't delay the reply any longer, as I've already used that option last week. So, any assistance for responding to their 'defence' would be extremely helpful. They have mainly rejected ALL my claims for compensation using the following: 1. Terms & Conditions for Refuse to Carriage clauses (refer posts #7 and #10) 2. Terms & Conditions of their ground staff contracting company (whereby they state that their obligation to return the passenger is cancelled due to the outbound refusal). This is the most important point that people with legal knowledge have pointed out as a potential failure for their defence, as they should have notified me of this when refusing me carriage on the outbound flight, which they didn't. In fact, they used the armed police as an 'enforcer' of their intention NOT to provide me with ANY written notification about the refusal or their names. 3. they have referred to the 'duty manager's LOGs' to point out what they have said about the whole episode. The main issue with the LOGs is that neither have a 'heading', date, time or name. They are just a copy of text in capitals, which could have been done at anytime since their actions against me on any word processing software! Any ideas or suggestions please? Thanks. radmm0

Thanks again AB. I and the rest of the party were not arguing or refusing to pay the excess charges. We were requesting to speak to their superiors and the TC rep at Stansted for an alternative solution to the surcharge. That's all. They just didn't like us. That's all. That was apparent from the moment we arrived at the desk, as she didn't even reply to our 'good morning' gesture. I'm certainly not paranoid and have never been involved in any incident that requires Police intervention. This case certainly did not require any Police intervention. They were called to intimidate and to carry out a 'well oiled' routine by the authorities to refuse carriage to someone they want to 'punish', as a result of the passenger being too assertive or knowledgeable. The number of posts on this thread that seem to be 'in total agreement' with the authorities' decisions is rather worrying, as that is exactly what the authorities wanted to create by getting FOUR ARMED POLICE involved to cover themselves for any future action by the passenger(s). So, most of the CAGgers posting on this thread have fallen for their use of authority to pervert the course of justice. All I can do is hope that the Arbiter or any future Judge doesn’t fall for the same trick and will take my side of the incident into account as well. It is worth noting that our group are well travelled and have NEVER had any problem at ANY check in desks of any other airline or airport anywhere in the world! So, stu007, can you please get back with your comments/suggestions? Thanks. radmm0

Thanks for your comment. I don't know about CCTV footage, as I'm sure we could ask for it if necessary. It won't show anything other than myself and my group of 3 other adults and 1 child standing around the check-in desk area speaking face to face with the check-in personnel. There was no 'attitude' and I didn't show any aggression, only questioning their 'zero tolerance' to any excess weight and the extortionate £14 per kg charge. The only time I lost my assertiveness was when the TC rep at Stansted was rather rude towards my friends and myself. Even if I was 'aggressive', which I wasn't, it doesn't justify them refusing carriage, as I was NO threat to anyone. So, no I am definitely not downplaying the incident. radmm0

Thanks for your post stu007. The clauses used by TC when originally rejecting my compensation claim were stated as 7.1.3, 7.1.4 and 7.1.6. However, in their 'defence' to my claims in the ABTA Arbitration process their Legal Dept have also included 7.1.5, which is totally bizarre, as I didn't refuse to have a security check, as they hadn't asked to do such a check anyway. Don't know why they have suddenly included this clause to their 'defence'?! I have a lot more info/evidence if you require, but would prefer not to post it on the forum. I was rather concerned when I was told by ALL the TC and their ground staff officials present at the Stansted chek-in area, including the Police, that 'they don't have to provide me with any names or a written notification of their decision'. My concerns about the lack of any written notification at Stansted have unfortunately shown themselves to be justified, as they have now included two 'logs' without dates, times and names to 'strengthen' their 'defence', which of course I'll be rejecting as acceptable 'evidence' until they can provide a copy of the WHOLE log(s). But, we all know what officials are capable of doing to get 'convictions', to hide their own incompetence and their failure to follow the correct procedures, e.g. too many to mention, but recently there has been Hillsborough and even more current 'Plebgate'! Thanks again. radmm0

Sorry guys, but this thread is getting a bit out of control. None of the above clauses quoted by labrat are being used in their counterclaim/defence, so don't know why you have made your post?! I'll post the correct clauses they are claiming against me shortly stu007. As stated in my previous post (#6 above), there are a lot of factors/evidence that I have not stated on this post. One of the facts is that the ARMED POLICE (4 of them) were called in to intimidate and bully me at Stansted. As stated by two of them (overheard by my wife) 'why have they called us, there is no point for us being here, as this is a very low level incident'. So, labrat, there was NO reason for them getting any Police involved, as I was NO threat to anyone or any property unlike some of the typical drunks and mental cases they must have had in the past and still get to have required the clauses listed by stu007. Another one of the Police was overheard by my wife and friend’s wife saying to his colleague ‘why are we wasting our time, let’s just arrest him’. Having been notified by my family and friend of their intention and not wanting to be arrested in front of my 11 year-old son, I accepted the situation with the intention of taking action after the holiday was over. I even asked the TC rep at Stansted about my return flight BEFORE I left Stansted. She stated that I would need to call a 0844 number the next day to find out. I couldn’t call them the next day, as I was travelling from very early in the morning and couldn’t call the 0844 number from the holiday resort either, so decided to let my wife, who was already meeting the resort TC rep about our luggage, to ask about my return flight. None of us envisaged that they would be denying me carriage on the return flight, as according to their own rep at the holiday resort 'there should be NO problems' for my return flight. TC notified me about their intention to ‘refuse to carry’ at the airport when checking in to return home with a crappy letter without an addressee name, a signature or a name from TC and it was dated the day after our outbound flight! So, the TC rep at the holiday airport had been sitting on this letter for a long time when they should have informed me or the TC rep at the resort the day they received it. My wife and son refused to fly without me AGAIN, so we had to get a single flight back via Germany for 3 people, which cost a lot of money. I have now revealed a lot more than necessary, but I hope it makes the unacceptable use of ARMED POLICE and TC’s total incompetence clearer for everyone. radmm0

Thanks a lot for your advice and reply to my questions. I'll definitely come back and let you know the result. But, as you already know, don't hold your breath!! radmm0

Well done, that's excellent. Did you not first try the ABTA Arbitration route before going for the courts? If so, what made you do that and what were the costs? Thanks. radmm0

Hi laura I have got a claim against TC at the moment (going thru the ABTA Arbitration process). Really interested to find out what happened to your court claim against them? Hopefully you were successful. radmm0

Thanks for your input cityboy62. However, please note that there are a lot of factors and evidence that I have not mentioned in my original post, as it would have made the post at least 30 pages! I certainly agree they would have been within their 'rights' to slam me with their various contract clauses and to behave the way they have towards me and my group if I had been drunk, disorderly, raising my voice, abusive, disruptive, shouting, swearing etc etc. But, I was not doing ANY of these, except to ask/demand to speak to the check-in person's superiors and the TC rep at Stansted. Why are you so confident that I haven't got a case against them, especially not succeeding with my compensation claim? Are you a lawyer or do you work in the industry? radmm0

Thanks AB. I sort of agree with you on the letter of the law if we agree that they were right to refuse me carrtiage. Yes they should have notified me about the fact that I wouldn't be allowed to travel back on the return flight at Stansted, which they 'refused' to do by not agreeing to give me ANY written confirmation of their name(s) or reason(s) for not being allowed on the outbound flight at Stansted. The main points of my claim are: 1. the check-in person did not follow the correct procedure when letting 3 of our 5 suitcases onto the airport conveyor system BEFORE letting us know that we had an 18kg surcharge to pay, which meant we couldn't re-adjust our suitcase content to resolve the situation there and then (one idea we had was to leave our extra belongings at the airport left luggage service, which at £10 per day would have been much cheaper than TC's £14 per kg charge), and 2. they had NO reason(s) to refuse me carriage on the outbound flight, as I hadn't done ANYTHING wrong other than ask to speak to more senior personnel and the TC rep at Stansted airport to escalate the issue. May be I was rather vociferous and assertive in my approach and very demanding, but I certainly I was not abusive, vulgar, disruptive or cause ANY problems or be of potential danger to the flight or any passengers, as stated in TC's 'defence' to my claim. But, how do I convince the ABTA Arbitration service of the above and do I need to get proper legal advice BEFORE I reply to TC's defence? Any help with this matter would be very much appreciated. BTW, the WHOLE group of passengers (5 of us) had 18kg excess weight, not just me! Rgds. radmm0

Hi all I am looking for some advice about the below case please. Thanks. Holiday details: 5 of us (4 adults and 1 child of 11 yrs) booked and paid for an all inclusive holiday with Thomas Cook Holidays online. I was refused to get on the Thomas Cook Airline flight in August 2012 due to issues with their contract check-in personnel. I had disagreed with their extortionate excess weight charge of £14 per kg insisting first to speak to the check-in personnel's manager(s) and later to the Stansted Airport Thomas Cook (TC) representative. They were refusing the latter request until they realised that I'll not be giving up. So, the TC lady agreed a reasonable solution to the 18kg excess weight issue with suggesting the use of a little advertised 'flight only bag', which would cost £60 for an extra 20kg baggage allowance (we would have to purchase a bag to qualify for this option). I was not present at this point of discussions between the holiday party, the ground staff and the TC lady, as I had taken my son to the gents, which is a fair distance from the check-in area/desks. I noticed that my wife and our friends (a married couple) were not present at the check-in area when I returned with my son. I asked the TC rep and the check-in person what had been decided, to which she replied 'you better go and ask YOUR LOT over there', pointing in the direction of my friend sitting down away from the check-in desks. I unfortunately lost my rag and indirectly accused them of being 'racist' WITHOUT using such terms or any foul language ('you need to change your glasses so that you can see people as they are', to which the ground personnel check-in lady and the TC rep took exception and regarded my statement as accusing them of being 'racist'). My wife and my friend's wife had gone to purchase a bag to take advantage of the deal offered by the TC rep and returned to the desks to find that the TC rep and primarily the ground staff had decided to refuse to let me on the flight. It is worth noting that at the same time they had obviously called for the Police to attend. But, FOUR ARMED Police Officers turned up?!! So, they must have either asked for this many or by blowing up the situation to a bigger one than it was, the airport security sent a strong and armed unit to deal with me! It was the first time in my 40 years in this country that I had come across / had anything to do with the Police let alone ARMED ones. I found it intimidating and my wife and 11 year-old son were obviously upset and scared. They were using this method to 'bully' me into submission, as I was the most vociferous in the party and had insisted all along that there must be a solution to the extortionate rates they wanted to charge us. And funny enough there was! I was told to 'make my own way' to the resort. They AND the armed Police (?!) refused to provide me with any written confirmation of TC's decision or the names of the personnel involved in making the decision (this is a key point that I'll come back to later in the story). I asked my wife to speak to the TC rep at the holiday resort to ensure that there would be no problems with my flight back. The TC rep confirmed that there will not be any issues or problems, as the 'refuse to carry' was only for the outbound flight. Unfortunately we don't have her name or this in writing, but my friend's wife was present as a witness. Can you guess what happened on the day of the return flight? Yes, of course, I was refused carriage again! But, this time it was due to a 'letter' from TC at Stansted dated 13 days prior to the return flight date, i.e. the day after the outbound flight. So, why had TC failed to notify me of this intention earlier, i.e. at Stansted? Funny enough this is exactly what their legal department is TRYING to say now, that my 'contract' with their airline was effectively 'terminated/cancelled' when they refused to carry me on the outbound flight. Well, in that case why wasn't I given a written notification of this, as I would then have arranged a TWO WAY RETURN flight for myself knowing in advance that I wouldn't be allowed on the return flight. I jumped ahead a bit there, sorry. I complained to TC and requested a compensation for what they had done and for ruining our first family holiday in nearly 8 years. They obviously have refused and the end result has been for me to take the matter to ABTA and their Arbitration service. I have received TC's 'defence' to my claims and now need to get back to the Arbitration service with my reply to their 'defence'. Any advice or help would be much appreciated. radmm0

Any news on more recent comms with the DCA or MBNA? Rgds. radmm0

Hi all I have been trying to help a friend with his PPI claim from BarclayCard. We got to the stage where he sent them the FSA form back, but they have come back with a rejection of the claim! He doesn't remember ever having been told or sold a PPI when he took out the credit card. He used to pay them by DD on a monthly basis. But, this was rejected by his bank last year and he decided to pay them by telephone going forward. It was during one of his calls to the customer service dept of BarclayCard that he was told he has been paying £60 per month for a PPI since the card was issued (2001)!! Unfortunately he doesn't have any proof of this, only the fact that he's been paying the PPI every month. Apparently the lady he spoke with at BarclayCard told him to continue paying his PPI until he's managed to claim ALL the money back! Any advice would be much appreciated. Rgds.

Thanks CB

Do you mean one of the CAG template letters? If so, which one?