EEA2/refused boarding the plane without schengen 2 holland

[republique]

@richard66

I think you have a good chance.
Compensation would be more difficult than a refund of the tickets bought.
However as in all cases, usually it costs more if you have to go to court.
But starting with a goord letter to the airline would be worth.
And I have no idea what the reaction of the Italian court would be.

An insurrance for legal aid would be helpfull. Maybe take it now before your next flight?

I can give support with actions against KLM.

The worse case scenario would be your being denied boarding at Schiphol to the UK, because the part I-NL is within Schengen.
Preferably travel within office hours, and call me from the gate before you are send away

Once you arrive at Heathrow you get in. With or without my support.

Exactly what I have said all along. Unlikely to get compensation, more likely to get a refund.
Your question to whether you can sue, everyone can sue for anything. Your claim is still weak which is why he said unlikely to get compensation.

[Richard66]

Sigh

[charles4u]

PRAWO, What do you think I should do as I have I cant go to the UK with my RESIDENCE CARD FOR FAMILY MEMBER issued by Romania who is also a member of the EU.

I have even applied to the embassy for the past 2 weeks and I havent gotten a reply yet as they said they will call me and they havent called me for 2 weeks now, What do u think I should do? Call KLM first to comfirm or just buy the ticket and try but am scared cus they might refuse carying me as my passport as a stamp from the embassy and they might think I was refused and just wanna fly or so.

I dont really know but u can advise me on what to do pls...thanks Richard and I wait for ur reply Prawo.

[charles4u]

PRAWO.....maybe if I can get intouch with u somehow maybe mobile or email. I sent u a private message so as to know what to do since u r a lawyer and according to what u told Richard to get to the Hearthrow airport first then somehow u figure it out. so if u can be there and also my wife will be there and if she can get intouch with u for u and her to be present there then we shall see what happens..

Am not just sure but let me know ...what exactly..

[fysicus]

for some airlines it doesn't take much to declare a passport invalid, and you don't need to be an alien to suffer from it, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/7695225.stm
Although this incident is not really immigration-related, I couldn't resist to post it here

[mym]

What might interest you is that I received an e-mail from the Rome Entry Clearance Officer in Rome, who confirms to me that no EEA FP is needed to enter the UK: it is needed by the carrier!

!

Some of these people need to have a photograph of an arse and an elbow posted to them to see if they can tell the difference...

[charles4u]

This is so unfair and I get a report shoiuld be made against Ryanair,some are just not educated enough and this is causing the problem as there not aware of so many regulations or laws. Some are not even well trained and dont have good character.

Well all this same bulshits will never stop.

[Directive/2004/38/EC]

I hope the couple concerns sues the airline. The airline was clearly wrong and a lawsuit is a very good way of encouraging the airline to get the information out to all employees.

[shandave2001]

To OP

Have u come up with any decision yet?

I also concur with people who have advised to sue the air line, as it is simple and practical course of action. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse, particularly when it is by an Airline company. If the airline thinks it was fault of the Dutch immigration then THEY can make them a PARTY to the case, but that will be airline's decision, OP don't need to worry in this regard.

The reason to sue airline rather than the Dutch immigration authorities (or state) is you don't know the airline staff spoken to whom on that occasion and what they were told. In any case, it will be difficult for OP to assemble evidence in regard to the act of Dutch immigration. If the airline decided to make the Dutch immigration a party and the court decided the airline was not at fault, Dutch immigration still be there for liability/damages.

This is more a Contract/Tort case than immigration. As contractual litigation is complicated part of law, an experienced solicitor in civil litigation (particularly in contractual disputes) is needed. Eventually if case goes to final hearing, a counsel (barrister) will be needed, as this is not a simple case. The OP can get a solicitor based on "no win no fees" and still should take relevant insurance (solicitor can advice on this).

Whether the case is only small track worthy (up to £5000), well, I wouldn’t say as don’t know the exact damages occurred in consequence of airline’s action. Remember the damages must not be TOO REMOTE. It seems "incovenience and distress" will cover a big part of the damages.

Any exaggeration of damages can backfire if case end up for final hearing, I mean a portion of compensation can be deducted if claimant has exaggerated her/his damages. Usually losing parties argue heavily in this regard.

In my opinion OP's case is more than arguable and remember it will be decided based on "balance of probability" namely it is more likely than not OP suffered damages. In my prediction, airline will offer settlement in order to avoid other joining the queue.

Good Luck OP and sorry the treatment u suffered.

[Directive/2004/38/EC]

Put another way....

It is very difficult to sue the Dutch government from here, and to even know who the airline talked with (if anyone).

The airline is the one who turned you away. They are the ones to sue.

[shandave2001]

Hope OP is ok:

[DFDS.]

If I were you I would sue the airline, for breach of contract! It is about time someone did that, and so force the airlines to improve their staff training.

You are right!

[DFDS.]

I think there is a greater issue that everybody is missing here. The airline staff phoned the immigration office (which I presume are the immigration people at the other end of the flight). If these guys say no, then the passenger will be refused entry and put on the next flight back.

It is possible that they are partially at fault, but I guess that also depends on the details. Did the airline staff explain the situation correctly? Did they call the right person?

As far as I am concerned, the airline has to check your documentation, and so they should know the rules. And they do not have to decide whether you will be let into the country, but only whether you have the required documentation, and that was certainly the case.

Anyway, under the "denied boarding" directive, this should be worth 250 Euro compensation plus a refund of the ticket.

Airline staff are expected to be in possession of updated information. As one poster has said, this isn't a new law.In may case i see no reason why the airline staff had to phone Dutch immigration in the first place, and it sounds like he wasn't ready to share with the Pax( passenger) the out come.Its most likely airline was trying to minimise their risk.

[ribena]

I have yet to book my ticket to Holland and I emailed Holland Embassy asking if I need a visa even though I am a non-visa national.

I have been told that I need to apply for schengen visa because I will be travelling alone.

Have replied to Holland embassy quoting the Directive and we'll see what they reply.

Irony is that before I acquire the residence permit I was able to travel to Holland freely.

argh!

[ribena]

argh!!!

They replied and said my email was unclear! O()("))*&! even after I mentioned my nationality!

And they are saying that I don't need to apply for Schengen visa.

So phew. Now I can book the ticket