Wizz Air flight from Poland to London forced to divert due to ‘technical issue'
Flight WUK1KM from Poznań–Ławica Henryk Wieniawski Airport to London Luton Airport on Sunday 20 July landed in Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport following a 'technical issue'.
More than 200 passengers were evacuated as emergency services, including ambulances, fire trucks and a medical helicopter, attended the scene, according to local media.
No casualties were reported and pilots were assessed as medically fit to fly.
The Airbus A321 departed Poland at 11.35am on Sunday, touching down in the Netherlands just 20 minutes later. It finally arrived at its final destination of London Luton at 9.12pm that evening, over nine hours later.
Wizz Air did not respond to requests from The Independent regarding the reason behind the incident, stating investigations were 'ongoing'.
In a statement, they said: 'We can confirm that flight WUK1KM from Poznan Airport to London Luton Airport was safely diverted to Amsterdam due to a technical issue.
'As a recovery plan, Wizz Air immediately sent an aircraft from London Luton Airport to bring the affected passengers to London Luton as soon as possible.
'The safety of our passengers and crew is of utmost priority. We are keeping all affected passengers promptly informed on developments and will be providing Wizz vouchers to all of them.'
The budget carrier was forced to ground an average of 44 planes over the year because of issues with the engines, which are made by US aerospace manufacturer Pratt & Whitney.
It confirmed in June that profits had fallen by 62 per cent to €167.5 million (£141 million).
Despite these challenges, it added that it flew a record 63.4 million passengers and remained optimistic about its capacity to serve more passengers than ever before.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
James Haskell's debt hits £1.5 million amid legal row over damaged property at his failed rented gym
James Haskell 's financial woes have been revealed as he enters litigation with his landlord over damaged property and equipment from his failed gym business. The former rugby star, 40, opened a F45 fitness centre in Bath seven years ago, which never survived the pandemic, and is now in nearly £1 million debt. According to its latest accounts, Hask 45 (Bath) Ltd reveals that it is in 'an ongoing legal dispute with the landlord in respect of rent, and other services including repair of the damage site and equipment'. The firm is now £927,738 in the red - although £437k of that figure is to another of the 40-year-old's firms. Plans to expand the fitness enterprise to London and Manchester ground to a halt during the pandemic - Hask 45 (Manchester) Ltd was shut down in March 2021 and Hask 45 (Richmond) Ltd shut down in September 2022. Another of his firms Hask 45 Ltd is £456,367 in debt, according to accounts filed this month and upto 31 May 2024. James has also got two other sport companies in the red. James Haskell Health & Fitness has losses of £58,318 while Rugby Connections UK is £68,855 in debt. In total, the debt from the four firms comes to £1,511,278. The ex-England international first announced his plans to open a F45 franchise site in 2017. He said: 'I tried F45 in the US when I was over there on holiday. I found the circuit based training really engaging and fun. 'It's all the kind of stuff I would use to get fit for rugby, and for the majority of people, regular F45 sessions are everything they need to maintain and achieve good levels of fitness. 'I think people are crying out for an accessible, group-based fitness programme that isn't intimidating, and most importantly delivers amazing results. That is what F45 is all about and why I am so delighted to be involved. 'I have always loved Bath as a city, it's rich in rugby history and has a young, fitness-focused demographic, which suits our target audience and ambition.' It comes after James recently discussed what really caused his marriage to Chloe Madeley to end after five years. Haskell and Chloe, 37, the daughter of television presenters Richard Madeley and Judy Finnigan, split when their daughter, Bodhi, was aged just one at the time. He explained his love of boozing contributed to the demise of their union. 'If I put more time into my marriage than I did Guinness, then I wouldn't be divorced now,' Haskell said. Speaking at the Pub in the Park festival in west London, James said he now has a much better relationship with Chloe. 'It's one of those things in life where some things don't work out, but I have so much love for my daughter and Chloe,' he told the Daily Mail's Richard Eden. 'It's team work.' He added: 'What we all forget is when you have children and a marriage finishes, it's all about the kids. Chloe and I are amazing co-parents. Our priority is always Bodhi.' Haskell said he's now single after dating advertising executive Helen Barclay at the start of the year. 'I don't really date,' he says. 'My priority is not that at the moment. I don't need anyone. I'm very happy and comfortable. 'My focus is, obviously, saying goodbye to my dad, work, and being the best dad in the best order.'
Finextra
6 hours ago
- Finextra
Wise US relisting plan faces pushback from co-founder and proxy advisers
Wise's plan to move its primary listing to the US is drawing fire from co-founder Taavet Hinrikus and proxy advisory firms because the vote on the move will also ask shareholders to greenlight an extension of the money transfer company's dual-class share structure. 0 When it floated in London in 2021, Wise put in place the duel-class share structure that effectively ensures that a small number of investors control the company. That structure was set to end in 2026 but the plan to move the listing to New York includes a resolution to extend the duel-class share until 2036. Earlier this week, Hinrikus - who owns over five per cent of Wise via his Skaala Investments OÜ vehicle - told Sky News that he was "disappointed" that proxy advisory firms Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) did not advise shareholders to oppose the duel-class plans. "We are keen to discuss this with them and for them to revise their reports ahead of the vote," said Hinrikus. Since then, Glass Lewis has issued a report stating "we are concerned by the extension of the sunset provision". According to Bloomberg, the report continues: "Glass Lewis believes multi-class share structures with unequal voting rights are typically not in the best interests of common shareholders." Meanwhile, another proxy advisory firm, PIRC, is also lobbying shareholders to vote against the proposal because of the inclusion of the dual-class share resolution, says Bloomberg. In response, Wise has issued a statement saying: "The dual-class structure is an integral element of Wise's listing proposal which shareholders are being asked to vote on through a scheme of arrangement, which inherently involves a vote on a single proposal. "Wise values shareholder democracy and governance principles and has put forward a scheme that requires a super majority of 75% shareholder support, for each class of shares, on the basis of 'one share, one vote'."
Times
6 hours ago
- Times
A stitch-up to sate anger at bankers
As establishment stitch-ups go, little beats the case of Tom Hayes: the former UBS and Citigroup trader who has just won a ten-year fight to overturn his conviction for rigging Libor. At the centre of it was the London interbank offered rate — a since-junked benchmark for pricing $400 trillion of contracts. It was crucial to the financial system. But, despite that, it was set by an archaic process where submissions from 16 banks established the rate. Overseeing it all was not a legal authority but a trade body, the now-defunct British Bankers' Association. Instead of reforming the process, banks made the most of it. Egged on by their bosses, traders pushed for submitters to put in a rate most favourable to their trading books. Worse, once the 2008 financial crisis hit, it's clear that the Bank of England knew what was going on. Banks were using a practice called 'lowballing' to avoid reporting a higher cost of borrowing than rivals, which may have implied they were in trouble. As it cut interest rates to boost the economy, lowballing suited the Bank of England, too — even if its then-deputy governor Paul Tucker insisted it didn't encourage it. Still, in a nice bit of establishment doublethink, the authorities were also on the hunt for something else: banking scalps to sate public anger over the financial crisis. Into that void stepped David Green, the former Serious Fraud Office chief since knighted for his services to wrecking other people's lives. What better than nailing a few traders for rigging Libor? Green's record as a prosecutor includes a Welsh mining case that a judge found 'was from the outset doomed to fail'; the Olympus farrago that was 'inevitably doomed as a matter of law'; and the action against former Tesco execs that was thrown out by a judge after eight weeks, saying: 'The prosecution's case is so weak that it should not be left for a jury's consideration.' Yet, he brought a case that banged up Hayes: a man the SFO dubbed the Libor 'ringmaster', convicted in August 2015 of conspiracy to defraud. He was sentenced to a ludicrous 14 years in jail, cut to 11 on appeal. He served five and a half, during which he lost his career, home and marriage. His was the first of nine convictions — none of which involved senior bankers. They included Carlo Palombo, an ex-Barclays trader sentenced to four years for manipulating Euribor, who's also just had his conviction quashed by the Supreme Court. Green has always maintained that it is the prosecutor's role to seek justice, with what happens after down to the jury. And, in Hayes's case, the Supreme Court points the blame at the trial judge, Mr Justice Cooke, for misdirecting the jury. It found there was 'ample evidence on which a jury, properly directed, could have found the appellant guilty'. The problem? Hayes did not get a fair hearing. He'd 'denied that he had attempted or conspired to induce submitters to put forward rates which did not represent their genuine opinion'. But 'the effect of the judge's directions was to remove consideration of that defence from the jury'. Instead, Cooke went out of his way to instruct jurors that 'if any consideration had been given to trading advantage, the rate submitted could not as a matter of law be a genuine or honest assessment of the bank's borrowing rate'. It was 'that misdirection' that 'undermined the fairness of the trial'. Ask Green if he still feels he was right to bring the case and he hides behind the paragraphs quoted above, simply advising to 'read' them. But he ducks an invitation to comment on something else: the Supreme Court's criticism of the SFO for its role in the indictment. 'Regrettably', it said, 'the indictment did not give sufficient particulars to enable the defence and the trial judge to know clearly and precisely the nature of the prosecution's case. Had it done so, the problems which have beset this case might have been avoided.' Exactly. Green brought his case against a backdrop of political and public anger over the financial crisis. And Hayes was a convenient fall guy. Tellingly, too, even when his conviction looked increasingly unsafe, Green gloried in his successful prosecution. Hayes had various attempts to appeal his case dismissed, even after the US courts threw out a similar action against him and others accused of rigging Libor. Notably, the Supreme Court begins its verdict by saying the case raises 'concerns about the effectiveness of the criminal appeal system … in confronting legal error'. Yet, contrast that with Green's gloating in March last year when Hayes lost his case at the Court of Appeal. Having been advised by The Times in advance that he may be asked for comment, Green sent back a sarcastic 241-word email saying he had received 'not a single request for a quote', asking, 'what ever has happened?'. He added: 'If you can spare a moment in your busy search for the truth, do let me know your answers to this puzzle'. He signed off: 'Feel free to quote me'. Strangely, now that the Supreme Court has overturned Hayes's conviction, there have been no quotes from Green. Surely that's not because he prefers rough justice? A reminder that US tech stocks go down as well as up. Who from? The Informa boss, Lord Carter of Barnes, who was so excited about his deal last year to take a 57 per cent stake in the Nasdaq-listed Tech Target that his press release zinged with random words in bold: 'Priority Engine', 'Demand Generation', 'Industry Dive'. The final one is most bang on. Having injected Informa's markets insight wing and $350 million cash into Tech Target, Carter completed the deal in December — only to see its shares plunge 56 per cent this year alone. The result? A £484 million writedown on Tech Target goodwill. The rest of Informa is doing fine. But this US bit is well off target.
