Your Airline Rejected Your Claim? That's Just Round One

You did everything right. You submitted the claim, attached the boarding pass and receipts, explained the situation in detail, and waited. After weeks of silence came the reply you'd feared: "We regret that we are unable to accept your claim. The flight was affected by extraordinary circumstances."

For most people, the story ends there. You shrug, reason that the airline must know its own rules better than the rest of us, and put the matter away. It's a natural reaction. It is also precisely the reaction the airline has budgeted for.

Most first rejections are not final

The numbers are unambiguous: more than eight in ten claims filed directly with airlines are rejected at the first stage, even though a large share of distressed passengers are legally entitled to money. Many of those rejections are form letters written in generic terms, relying on reasons that fail legal scrutiny.

"Extraordinary circumstances" is the most used — and most abused — justification. Legally, the concept covers what nobody could foresee or control: extreme weather that shut down the airport, closed airspace, political unrest, or an air traffic control strike. It does not cover crew shortages, deferred maintenance, or "operational reasons." Yet these are precisely the justifications that fill rejection letters, often in almost identical wording from case to case.

How to tell whether your rejection is worth fighting

Three questions are enough to settle the essentials:

• Does the situation qualify? A delay at arrival of more than three hours, a cancellation with less than 14 days' notice, or denied boarding for overbooking?
• What does the rejection actually say? Is the reason specific and verifiable, or is it a template with "extraordinary circumstances" and no supporting documents?
• Was the cause the airline's fault? Crewing, maintenance, scheduling and "operational reasons" are the airline's responsibility — not excuses.

If the answers point to a valid claim, the rejection is not the end of the story. It's the end of the airline's first tactic.

The difference between giving up and pressing on

Once an airline has rejected, the enforcement route opens up. In the UK, that means the Civil Aviation Authority, the AviationADR scheme, or ultimately the courts. And here is the reality: passengers win a significant share of the cases that airlines first refused. It's not uncommon for a claim rejected on the basis of a form letter to be accepted in full once someone with legal weight pushes it.

The difference between the people who get paid and the people who don't is almost never the strength of the claim. It is the persistence to continue after the first rejection.

What we do differently

When you send us a rejection, we systematically review the whole chain of events. We obtain the airline's internal records where possible, check weather data and maintenance records for the date in question, and build a case that is hard to refuse. We send the formal claim, chase every deadline, and escalate to the CAA or legal routes when the airline continues to stall.

A full assessment of your rejection costs you nothing. If you've received a rejection you believe is unfair, send it to us — we'll tell you honestly whether you have a case, with no charge and no obligation.