The assistance services received by the plaintiffs individually and the amounts of the reimbursements
Lee Etzion (plaintiff No. 17 and also declaring on behalf of plaintiff No. 16):
- In her statement of claim, the plaintiff demanded expenses for food, drink, and taxis in the sum of $144.78.
- In the affidavit, she stated that after the flight was canceled, they received a hotel on behalf of the defendant near the airport. She claimed that the conditions in the hotel were unreasonable due to unpleasant odors, dirt and stench. Because of this, they came to a friend's house. To get to your friends' house, to the airport, and while staying in New York City, take taxis for $104.51. She also had to take care of a meal of $40.03
- Her testimony indicated that she was familiar with El Al's letter regarding entitlement to compensation subject to sending receipts, but chose not to forward receipts to the defendant before applying to the legal proceeding (p. 96 of the transcript), she was asked why she did not contact El Al at all in order to receive refunds and a refund because she does not trust El Al. They realised there were hotels however it was about 5am and started taking out shuttles to hotels close to the airport and no one came to her and told her he had arranged a hotel for her. She confirmed that they had received a hotel from El Al. She boarded a shuttle (which the defendant states in the summaries on this matter that it was at the defendant's expense) and went to the hotel, but did not report to El Al that there was a problem and that they had to leave the hotel, which El Al arranged for her because there was no one to talk to. The defendant is of the opinion that plaintiff 17 admitted that they received assistance services in real time, and therefore her demand to receive indemnification for trips that were not from the airport or back to the airport is not understood, and if she had contacted El Al as requested, then the defendant could have examined the reasonableness of the expenses and decided whether they were provided with assistance services in real time. However, the defendant noted that it was possible to indemnify her for the additional expenses beyond the letter of the law. Therefore, she must be indemnified at $144.53 according to EL AL's consent to indemnify her for travel within the city, as well as $15 for the cost of a voucher in view of the waiting time until 5:00 A.M., given that she was supposed to be provided with food and drink at 3:00 A.M. In total, it should be indemnified in the sum of $164.53.
May Liron Ben Hamo (Plaintiff No. 51):
- In her statement of claim, she did not raise a financial demand for reimbursement of expenses. It turned out that she was with Hannah Frances, who sued for $503.06.
- In the affidavit, she said that she was told that she was entitled to a hotel at a cost of $250 per night or to stay in the hotel they allot, but due to the limited number of rooms, she was advised to look for a hotel on her own. Therefore, they took a taxi and arrived at the hotel independently and paid $500.12 for accommodation at the Crowne Plaza Hotel from October 19-21, 2019. She noted that upon arrival at the hotel, they were informed that another couple from the flight they were with had accidentally received their room and therefore had to share a double room with another couple they did not know. It should be noted that this is not a hotel that the defendant provided. In addition, the plaintiff paid $40.50 for food, clothing at a cost of $329, shuttle services from the airport to the city at a cost of $204.2 (for example, there is a receipt in the amount of $139.20 for a trip from the Crowne Plaza Hotel to JFK Airport).
- In her testimony, she clarified that she did not ask for reimbursement of expenses because she received it from the defendant (p. 124, Shor. 14-15). She is seeking compensation following the cancellation of the flight. In this context, it is not clear why when she had already approached the defendant for a refund in any case, she did not describe that they were forced to be with another couple in the room (and whether they were forced or felt constrained by unpleasantness in view of the distress of the other couple they met when they were stuck without a room, according to Daniel's testimony, three rooms were booked in advance and two were accepted, and according to Hannah's testimony, three couples came to the hotel and the hotel had only two rooms available). Moreover, this point is also unclear since according to her testimony another couple received their room and ostensibly allowed them to be with them when she was the one paying for her and Hannah - did the hotel where they came independently demand that they pay double the amount for the same room despite its mistake - when both couples had paid? And if she shared the payment with her friend, did the others pay her when she didn't pay them? In her testimony, she confirms that they were told in a positive way that they would have a place to sleep - "Either you find an independent woman or El Al will arrange a room for you, but keep in mind that we don't have many rooms and we probably won't be able to find them all, so whoever can manage on his own is better because we won't find you rooms and whoever can on his own will keep receipts for refunds." She remembers returning to Hannah Frances the half she had paid her, but after being confronted with Hannah's testimony that she said she didn't get the money back and if she paid for it and she paid her and she got the money back from El Al then why doesn't she say that she gave her the money back, she replied, "I don't remember if I submitted to El Al about my half as if it were for the hotel. Hani had other expenses of her own, regardless of the hotel and the taxi" and she doesn't remember if she only served for her half even though the receipt is one, or if she applied for the whole and returned her half to Hannah. According to the testimony of Mrs. Ben Hamo in the affidavit (paragraph 10), they remained in the field until about four o'clock, and therefore they should be compensated according to the cost of a voucher of $15 per person, meaning that $15 of the rest of her expenses were refunded and she did not claim receipts.
Maspin Getahun, Sindu Cabaret Getahun and Chen Getahun (Plaintiffs Nos. 41, 43 and 44)
- The statement of claim did not indicate that he demanded reimbursement of expenses.
- In his affidavit, he described that they received a hotel from the defendant when the next morning they transferred them to another hotel. When they went to have dinner while staying at the hotel, they were asked to bring a ticket, but they did not have the requested card, and when they tried to ask, they were refused because they had to register and the person who lists names in the hotel for an evening guest left, so they went out to buy food and drinks and did not have the receipts. Here it should be said that there was a meal at the hotel that was provided by the defendant, but due to the circumstances described above, they did not receive a meal. According to him, the room offered at the hotel was suitable for the couple since it included only a double bed, so they had to sleep three people in one double bed.
- His testimony revealed that his family slept on the floor in the field until the hotel was accepted. He confirmed that he had received a hotel from El Al and that they had arrived at the hotel via the bus that everyone had boarded (from the defendant's side, as it turned out) and that he had no money, including not for a taxi that they had to take to return as well. He confirms that the hotel they stayed at did have meals, but they did not sign up for dinner and they bought food at the grocery store. He didn't attach receipts because he thought there would be no one to give him back. He claims to have purchased food at the grocery store. He confirmed that they were told that those who could take a hotel for a certain amount would go, and those who had money went, and those who didn't have money waited and received, even though they waited almost all night and only at 4:00 A.M. did they take them. According to the testimony of Mr. Maspin (p. 130, s. 2 and paragraph 6 of his affidavit), they remained in the field until about four o'clock, and therefore they should be compensated according to the cost of a voucher of $15 per person, i.e., $45 for three people. They should also be compensated at $42 per person for the two days (since they had an option for dinner and they are the ones who did not register and were not denied because there is an option for breakfast from the hotels or just breakfast or breakfast and dinner). In total, they should be compensated for $171.
Tal and Orit Chava Leibowitz Nowitz (Plaintiffs 3-4):
- In the statement of claim, they claimed expenses for taxis and a hotel in the sum of $1,037.11.
- The affidavit required $76 for hotel accommodation "which was available and met the budget we received downtown." However, the Roxy hotel reception does not mention that it costs about $800 and the dates are not mentioned. The defendant claimed that no receipt for a stay at the hotel was attached - neither to the statement of claim nor to the affidavit. However, in the testimony of the plaintiffs' counsel claimed that a room charge of $800 was stated and the plaintiff confirmed and was claimed by her counsel that it could have been omitted from the documents (p. 82, paras. 8-11), but she stated in the statement of claim $870.76. For taxis to get to the hotel and to the airport, $326.13 was paid (Tal and Orit - $85 for a trip to the airport on the new date of the flight - October 21, 2019, and the cost of another taxi ride in the amount of $167.05 when the destinations and travel routes were not specified). They were forced to take care of food but did not keep the receipts "even though it is clear to every bar that two and a half days of stay requires the purchase of food and drink" (paragraph 18 of the affidavit). She spoke with an EL AL representative and asked him about the size of the hotel's amount (hence there was a counter with a representative who answered).
- In her testimony, she confirmed that they did not send the defendant receipts with the expenses in order to receive a refund, even though they knew of their right. According to her, they were not offered a hotel and did not speak to any representative (pp. 79-80 of the transcript, although it appears that she did speak with a representative). Didn't collect receipts for food but were shown 7 receipts for a taxi which explained that they had travelled from the hotel to any point with a taxi and not just to the airport and from the airport. The defendant is of the opinion that plaintiffs 3 and 4 should be compensated at most by $500. The plaintiff did not attach the missing receipt to the summaries, and on the face of it, it appears that they were indeed in the hotel, but its cost is unknown when it is an amount that exceeds the average amount, and therefore it must be required when it is a proven receipt, and therefore against a receipt that she presents to El Al - she will receive $870.76. In addition, they will receive $326.13 for the taxis from the airport and the airport as well as $83 for food per person (we would have been an additional $166). The defendant will pay, in addition to payment against receipt for the hotel, the sum of $492 for the two plaintiffs.
Elad Cohen and Hadar Shlomit Bloch (Plaintiffs Nos. 29-30):
- In the statement of claim, they demanded expenses for food, drink, taxis and accommodation in the amount of $958.61
- In their affidavit, $29 was required for accommodation - at the Crowne Plaza Hotel on October 19-20, 2019 at a cost of $278.9 and at the Nobelden Hotel on October 20, 2019 at a cost of $235.39. For taxis from the airport to the hotel $217.41 (one clear receipt in terms of the destination of the trip from the Nobelden Hotel to the airport for $85). They did not receive food and therefore paid $289.16 for food and drink (only one receipt for a burger in the amount of $58 was attached, while in the same receipt, which costs $79.48, there are also non-food products).
- Although plaintiff 29 submitted an affidavit on his behalf and on behalf of plaintiff 30, the plaintiff did not appear for questioning on the affidavit and plaintiff 30 was interrogated instead. In her testimony, she confirmed that she was familiar with El Al's letter but did not contact her with a request for reimbursement of expenses (pp. 29-30 of the transcript). She claimed that at that moment she did not know that El Al had provided hotels and independently located a hotel. They changed hotels. They arrived at the hotel on their own with an airport shuttle. El Al was not contacted about reimbursement of expenses because they thought it was not appropriate compensation. She doesn't remember if all the receipts were attached, but the receipts for food and taxis were half the amount asked for ($217.27 when it came to seven taxis). They even attached receipts for the purchase of socks as part of the food refund (pp. 30-31 of the transcript). The defendant claimed that the plaintiffs did not attach receipts for the total alleged expenses, but only partial receipts in the amount of less than $500. Plaintiff 30, who also testified on behalf of the plaintiff that he had filed an affidavit on his behalf and on behalf of him and did not appear for questioning, had no answer to this question, even though the amount of expenses claimed was not even round and was projected to be expenses backed by appropriate receipts. According to the testimony of Mr. Elad in his affidavit (paragraph 8), they remained in the field until about 4 o'clock, and therefore they should be compensated according to the cost of a voucher of $15 per person, i.e., $30 for two people.
I was persuaded that they should be compensated in the sum of $514.29 for the hotel, $217.41 for the trips (at one time of receipt $85 but the defendant did not show the cost of the second taxi and taking into account the costs of the taxi to the airport of the plaintiff May Liron Ben Hamo who also traveled from the Crowne Plaza Hotel to the airport as a return trip in the amount of $139.20, this is a reasonable amount) and as for the food, Given that non-food products have been purchased, they should be reduced so that an additional $209.68 plus $30 is to be paid as mentioned above. A total of $971.18 for both plaintiffs.