Some of Europe’s largest airlines have been accused of using “stalling tactics” when passengers seek compensation for flight delays or cancellations.
Bott and Co, a consumer law firm that specialises in flight-delay compensation claims, alleges that carriers including Vueling, Lufthansa, Ryanair and Wizz Air have been routinely mishandling flight compensation payments, according to the law firm’s own data over the past decade.
More than half of the flight delay compensation claims handled by Bott and Co so far in 2024 have required court intervention.
According to the law firm, Spanish airline Vueling was the worst offender for compensation cases in the past decade, allegedly refusing to settle 84 per cent of claims before it initiated legal proceedings.
A Vueling spokesperson said: “We are absolutely committed to delivering an exceptional service to the 36 million we fly across Europe each year; our top priority is to ensure they enjoy a smooth and pleasant journey.
“Cirium, the most trusted source of aviation data, ranked Vueling as the second-most punctual low-cost airline in Europe, and at London Gatwick, in the first half of 2024. When things don’t go as planned, we always respond to compensation claims fairly and in line with industry regulations.
“This data does not reflect the full context of the issue, or account for the complexity of Vueling’s operations. We have flown millions of passengers to and from the UK every year since 2013, and the claims made by Bott and Co are simply not accurate.”
Bott and Co stands by the accuracy of its data, adding that while it has brought forward no claims against Vueling in the past three years, Vueling paid the firm on 4,817 cases in the past decade, 4,064 of which were after court proceedings were issued.
It also found that many airlines are frequently disputing or ignoring passengers’ claims, and only agree to pay compensation when faced with the threat of court. The firm said airlines’ delay leads frustrated passengers to abandon their claims or turn to legal services.
EU regulation for flight disruption has been in place for more than a decade and became part of UK law under regulation UK261 following the end of the Brexit transition period.
It grants legal rights for passengers to claim compensation when their flight is cancelled or when they reach their final destination more than three hours after originally scheduled due to a flight delay.
To avoid paying compensation, the airline must prove that the delay or cancellation was due to an “extraordinary circumstance” and that it took all reasonable steps to prevent it.
An extraordinary circumstance that is beyond an airline’s control could be, for instance, problems with air traffic contol.
“Delays or cancellations caused by air traffic controls issues are a nightmare for passengers and airlines alike,” said Coby Benson, flight delay solicitor at Bott and Co.
“With air traffic control restrictions being an extraordinary circumstance, hundreds of thousands of passengers a year are disrupted and not entitled to any compensation.
“Passengers can, however, still claim back their expenses, such as the cost of any replacement flight.”
Benson added: “Airline compensation practices in accordance with EU Regulation 261 are not working as they should be.
“Unfortunately, airlines are routinely ignoring or contesting tens of thousands of eligible claims, even for flights where they’ve already settled many similar cases, some on the same flight.”
Wizz Air UK was discovered to be among the worst offenders, according to Bott and Co, with 70 per cent of its passengers’ claims submitted to the law firm in the past decade requiring court action.
A spokesperson for Wizz Air said: “This data covers a period of severe disruption to Wizz Air’s service in 2022 which resulted in a number of county court judgments against the airline which have since been resolved. We are serious about providing great customer service, especially in the event of a delay or cancellation, and have taken significant steps since to improve our service, including investing more than £90m.
“While we appreciate there is still room for improvement, we are proud of the results to date, which are among the strongest in the entire industry. Following disruption, customers will on average receive any compensation payment three times faster than 2022-2023, with the majority settled within 25 days. The share of customer claims answered within five days is five times better than it was three years ago, reaching 84.1 per cent of customers today.”
According to the most recent Civil Aviation Authority data, there were 2,037 Wizz Air passenger complaints submitted in the second quarter of 2024. There was an uphold rate of 38 per cent in favour of customers and just 12 payments overdue at the end of the period.
There were 2,434 complaints submitted in the same period against Ryanair, and an uphold rate of 25 per cent in favour of passengers, with 47 payments overdue at the end of the quarter.
This represents an improvement on 2023, when at the end of the year, Wizz Air had 199 overdue payments from a total of 8,651 cases. In the same year, a total of 12,361 cases were opened against Ryanair, with one overdue payment at the end of the period.
In 2023, i intervened in a case involving Wizz Air, after one of its passengers had waited for months for compensation following a severe delay on both legs of a trip from Gatwick to Faro, Portugal.
In the spring of 2022 – which the airline acknowledges was during a period of “severe disruption” caused by the Covid pandemic – Ms Hayes and her party faced a 4.5-hour delay on their outbound flight and a hold up of more than seven hours on the return, followed by a further 1.5 hours stuck on the Tarmac at Gatwick.
She reached out to Wizz Air but, months later, had not received a penny of the compensation she was entitled to. Eventually, she managed to secure compensation for the outbound flight, but not for the inbound journey.
“They closed the case and it says ‘claim resolved’, which it clearly isn’t,” she said at the time.
“I have separate cases for each flight. I raised a complaint about customer service and how the case was closed incorrectly and [the airline] said it was a ‘work in progress’.”
After i’s intervention – and a wait of 11 months – Ms Hayes finally received compensation.
In response, Wizz Air said her claim was “rejected due to an isolated internal error.”
However, i is aware of at least one other case during the same period in which a passenger claiming compensation from Wizz Air received a similar apology for significant delays. Again, the case was eventually settled, almost a year later.
Bott and Co worked with one family, which included an autistic child, which was on a diverted Vueling flight from Florence to Gatwick that ended up in Pisa due to thick fog.
They say Vueling failed to inform the passengers that Florence airport had been closed since the morning of the flight, which caused confusion and significant delays. Passengers were left without food, drink, or meaningful assistance during the prolonged wait.
When they eventually arrived at Gatwick, they discovered that their luggage had not been loaded onto the plane – leading to further distress for the family.
Vueling initially denied compensation, citing the weather as an “extraordinary circumstance”. It was only after Bott and Co intervened and took Vueling to court, that the family received compensation. It was a year-long process.
In another case, a Lufthansa passenger, Brett Mickelburgh, faced significant obstacles in his attempts to secure compensation after a delayed flight.
Mickelburgh initially contacted Lufthansa directly, but said he was met with persistent delays and denials.
He then found out that colleagues who had travelled on the same flight had received their compensation swiftly.
While he did eventually receive compensation after the airline was threatened with court proceedings by Bott and Co, the legal firm says that Lufthansa “failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay, offering only a vague list of potential reasons instead of a clear justification.” The airline has declined to comment on the matter.
Which other airlines have rejected legitimate compensation claims?
“If the airlines fully complied with the law, 100 per cent of payouts would be made without needing court proceedings, and in some cases, in less than half the time, said Benson.
“It’s only when challenged in court that they accept responsibility and pay compensation. This practice is fundamentally unfair, as it hopes passengers will simply give up.”
Among the airlines with the highest number of claims requiring court action, based on data from Bott and Co’s business, were Vueling (84 per cent), Deutsche Lufthansa AG (76 per cent) and Ryanair (74 per cent).
Next was Wizz Air UK with 70 (per cent), followed by KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and Virgin Atlantic, with 61 per cent and 56 per cent respectively.
Wizz Air Hungary performed significantly better than its British counterpart, but, according to Bott and Co’s data, 54 per cent of compensation claims made to the airline required court action.
Tui Airways and easyJet were close behind, with 48 per cent and 45 per cent.
At the other end of the scale, Jet2.com (18 per cent) and British Airways (16 per cent) recorded the lowest percentages of claims needing court action.
However, according to CAA data, 76 per cent of claims made against British Airways in 2023 were awarded in favour of customers, with more than £3m awarded. There were no overdue payments at the end of the year.
i has learnt of a recent claim against the airline, which, almost two months after it was made, may see the passenger compensated.
Two passengers were significantly delayed on a flight from Rio de Janeiro to Heathrow and, so far, remain out of pocket having used Avios and cash to cover seat selection and food. They were also subject to delayed baggage on the outbound flight from Heathrow.
The passengers told i that they had been informed by a member of check-in staff that the delay was due to one of the pilots wanting to watch England play in the final of the Euro football tournament. Subsequent announcements informed passengers the delay was due to crew sickness.
British Airways had officially closed the case and offered the passengers a £50 voucher “as a gesture of goodwill”. i understands that British Airways will now pay the full compensation requested by the passenger.
British Airways said: “This flight was delayed due to crew sickness and any suggestion otherwise is nonsense. We are contacting our customer to resolve the payment matter.”
How long have airlines been delaying passenger compensation?
A 2018 report by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) highlighted a lack of passenger awareness and problems with the enforcement of their rights when it comes to claiming compensation.
In particular, the report revealed that European airlines have, for years, frequently attributed delays to “circumstances beyond their control.” When these claims are properly challenged, however, airlines are significantly more likely to provide the appropriate compensation.
In the UK, the previous government published new proposals on passenger rights in June 2023, which would strengthen the CAA’s powers to enforce consumer protection law and commit to undertake further work on compensation for flight disruption.
