
UK flight delays: What rights do you have to compensation for cancelled flights?
Travellers may be entitled to care while they wait – but not, as this was beyond the control of airlines, compensation. But your rights depend on where your flight begins and the airline involved.
For all flights from the UK and EU airports (as well as those in the wider EEA), European air passengers' rights rules prevail. These were introduced in 2006 and are known as EC261. After Brexit, the UK copied and pasted the same regulations into British law as UK261.
The rules were devised to require airlines to do the right thing for their passengers. They specify the care and compensation you can expect when your plane is cancelled or heavily delayed.
These rules also apply for flights on EU and British airlines departing from outside the European Union and the UK.
A cancellation, or even a delay of hours rather than minutes could trigger the obligation for an airline to provide a hotel room and meals as appropriate. If the airline is to blame it will also owe hundreds of pounds in cash.
Conversely, when flying on a non-EU/UK carrier from outside Europe, you may just have to put a dismal aviation episode down to an expensive experience, and see if your travel insurer can help.
These are the key questions and answers.
In the UK and Europe, what can I expect if my flight is cancelled or delayed?
For delays of under two hours you have no rights (unless a short delay in the UK triggers a missed connection and much later arrival at your final ticketed destination – see below).
For longer delays, the airline should provide refreshments as appropriate after a specified length of time. This applies regardless of the cause of the delay.
The time at which the duty of care kicks in depends on the distance you are flying:
Note that if the airline believes providing the care would further delay the flight, it need not deliver.
If the delay extends overnight, the airline is obliged to find and pay for a hotel room. In practice, carriers often say, 'too difficult', and invite the passenger to book their own and reclaim later.
While this practice does not comply fully with the rules, aviation authorities tend to turn a blind eye to it.
My flight from an airport outside the UK or EU is cancelled. What am I entitled to?
If you are booked on a UK or EU airline you have full rights as above. On any other airline, you have none – though in practice a reputable airline will provide meals and accommodation as appropriate.
Some travel insurance policies will help meet expenses that cannot be claimed back elsewhere, and may pay a modest amount of flight delay compensation.
It's no longer worth going. Can I cancel and get my money back?
If your flight is cancelled, and you decide not to travel, you should get money back within a week. Some airlines may offer a voucher instead. If there is a benefit in taking a voucher – say an 'uplift' in value of 25 per cent – and you know you will be using the same airline within a year, that might be a good decision. But easyJet, Britain's biggest budget airline, does not offer any benefit – insist on cash.
How do I qualify for a cash payout?
If you are flying from a UK/EU airport or on a British/ European airline and have your flight cancelled – or are delayed in arrival by at least three hours – the presumption is that you are owed hundreds of pounds in compensation.
The payment depends on distance:
Under 1,500km, for example London to Barcelona: £220 or €250
1,500-3,500km, such as Manchester- Lisbon: £350 or €400
Above 3,500km, eg Birmingham- Dubai: £520 or €600. If a long-haul arrival delay is between three and four hours, the compensation is halved.
The only way the airline can avoid paying out is by demonstrating 'extraordinary circumstances' were responsible.
Define 'extraordinary circumstances'?
The rules provide only a partial answer: 'political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes'.
Court cases have gradually refined the concept of 'extraordinary circumstances' to exclude technical problems. In other words: if a mechanical failure caused the delay, you are due compensation. A judge ruled such issues are 'inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier'.
Official strikes by the airline's own staff are regarded as within the carrier's control, but oddly 'wildcat' walkouts not sanctioned by a trade union are not.
Crew sickness is a grey area, with no legal certainty.
Ryanair says: 'Only a small number of claims will be eligible for compensation. Most delays/cancellations are out of Ryanair's control.'
How do I claim?
Each airline should enable you to fill out an online form, but these are sometimes difficult to track down. The pages for three leading airlines are here:
Compensation must be paid by bank transfer (or cheque), except if the airline obtains the prior signed agreement of the passenger to pay with vouchers for future travel.
For example, an airline might offer a 30 per cent uplift if you accept vouchers that are valid for a year – so a choice between £350 in cash or £455-worth of flights.
What if I have a justifiable claim but it is turned down?
One course of action is alternative dispute resolution, but The Independent has serious reservations about some of the decisions of these arbiters.
Writing a Letter Before Action – warning that you will go to Money Claim Online if you do not get a positive response within two weeks – is worth trying, so long as you follow through. For a £350 claim the fee is £50, which is refunded if you win.
Since Brexit UK citizens no longer have access to the European Small Claims Procedure, so if you are chasing compensation on a flight originating in the EU it might be easiest to go through a claims handler. One such firm is AirHelp, but be warned that the company will keep between 35 and 50 per cent of any payout (the higher amount if court action is involved).
My flight was an hour late departing, but I missed a tight connection
If you arrive at your final ticketed destination three hours or more late, you are still in line for compensation – as long as the cause was down to the airline.
For example, in 2018 I flew on British Airways from Heathrow to Moscow for an onward connection to Volgograd on the Russian airline S7. The plane was an hour late leaving London because of overrunning engineering work. I missed the connection in Moscow and arrived five hours behind schedule at Volgograd.
BA paid delay compensation without a fuss; the issue of meals was easily solved because S7 sent me to the business lounge to wait.
It is notable that in the CAA delay figures for 2023, almost all the airlines that are largely feeding 'hub' airports did better than the average: Air France, Emirates, KLM, Lufthansa and Qatar Airways all outplayed easyJet and Ryanair in getting planes away on time.
They have a strong incentive for punctuality, with connections sometimes less than an hour and the penalty for messing up so high.
Turkish Airlines is unique among the big network carriers with an average delay of 29 minutes, which must wreck a significant number of transfers.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
17 minutes ago
- BBC News
Lost library book was found in Paris and returned to Reading
A book which was borrowed from a library in the UK was found abandoned on the Paris Metro before being diligently returned by a travel guide, "Top 10 Paris," was borrowed from Battle Library on Oxford Road in Reading earlier in the eagle-eyed Parisienne found it on Metro Line 1 in the French capital a few weeks later and messaged the library to find out how to send it staff have now contacted the original borrower to reassure them the book has been returned. Reading Borough Council's lead councillor for leisure and culture, Adele Barnett-Ward, said: "It's wonderful to see how far our library books can travel, although we do prefer they come back home eventually." You can follow BBC Berkshire on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.


BBC News
17 minutes ago
- BBC News
Emma Little-Pengelly: DUP defends minister's Wimbledon trip
The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) has moved to defend the deputy first minister over a publicly-funded trip with her husband to £1,000 was spent on flights and accommodation when Emma Little-Pengelly and Education Authority (EA) chief executive Richard Pengelly attended the tennis Stormont parties have criticised the spending, but The Executive Office (TEO) said it was in line with civil service policy and "no additional expenditure" was incurred on behalf of her a fresh statement to BBC News NI, the DUP said the invitation was issued "in her capacity as deputy first minister and it will be registered in the normal way". The EA said Mr Pengelly attended while on leave and "no spend was incurred" by the education than £980 was spent on the trip, according to a Freedom of Information request revealed last month by The Irish couple were pictured in the Royal box at centre court alongside celebrities including American pop star Olivia Rodrigo, professional wrestler John Cena and former England football manager Roy posted photos online, describing the invitation as the "honour of a lifetime".The DUP minister and First Minister Michelle O'Neill were invited by the All-England Club, but O'Neill did not take up the invitation. Register of interests Members of the legislative assembly (MLAs) declare any gifts or hospitality they receive worth more than £250 on a public register of is "including those received in a ministerial capacity", according to assembly the DUP said the Wimbledon invite did not need to be declared on the assembly register.A party spokesman said: "The invitation was issued to Emma Little-Pengelly in her capacity as deputy first minister and it will be registered in the normal way via the department in the register of ministers' gifts and hospitality."Because invitations to the Royal box are never offered for sale it is not possible to put a value on this and therefore does not meet the threshold for inclusion in the register of members' interests."The only comparable price available is for the price of a centre court ticket for the relevant day of attendance, which does not meet the threshold for inclusion."Tickets for centre court seats on 2 July cost between £95 and £120, according to Wimbledon's website.A spokesman for the club in south London said Royal box tickets "are not commercially available". 'Beggars belief' Several Stormont parties have criticised the Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) MLA Matthew O'Toole, leader of the opposition, said it "beggars belief"."The idea that official business was conducted in the Royal box at Wimbledon insults the intelligence of the public here," he Party MLA Paula Bradshaw, chair of the assembly's Executive Office scrutiny committee, said she would be raising Unionist Voice (TUV) MLA Timothy Gaston, a member of the committee, also questioned the "justification for the public paying the bill". A spokesman for TEO said: "Details of gifts and hospitality received by ministers are recorded on the 'Register of Ministers' Gifts and Hospitality Received' which is published on a quarterly basis."In a previous statement, The Executive Office said the deputy first minister "flew economy"."While she was accompanied in her official capacity by her spouse, no additional expenditure was incurred by TEO on behalf of her guest," a spokeswoman said."The travel and accommodation costs incurred by the deputy first minister are in line with NICS (Northern Ireland Civil Service) policy."The EA said "no spend was incurred" by it and the trip was "made in a personal capacity" while Mr Pengelly was on annual Executive Office said while the first minister declined the Wimbledon invite, she attended the Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) football all-Ireland semi-final later in said there were "no costs" associated with O'Neill's attendance at the match between Tyrone and Kerry at Croke Park in Féin said O'Neill attended the semi-final "at the invitation of the GAA" and there were "zero costs to the department".


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Why Canada isn't the trouble-free alternative to America you think it is
Canada is having a moment this summer with bookings by European holidaymakers reportedly surging by 32 per cent – and almost all of this increase comes at the expense of the United States. Travellers are avoiding the US because of its newly hostile environment, a steady stream of visitors reporting arbitrary, despotic US border officials, and even, this past week, a possible requirement for visitors to the US to pay a deposit to enter its borders. Canadians call their country's soaring popularity the Trump Bump. Canada is often seen as an idealistic antidote to this American era: a safe, welcoming destination with spectacular scenery, no xenophobia, no guns, universal friendliness and politeness, a sensible government, and no thorny visa or ESTA requirements. All of this is true, as my partner and I, as well as others, discovered last month – apart from the visa bit. Because what most people don't know – and flight booking sites and airlines mostly hide – is that Canada has a rigid Electronic Travel Authorisation (eTA) regime. And that if you don't have an eTA, which is a visa in all but name, your airline will turn you away at the airport, no exceptions. The Canadian eTA has existed since 2016, but wasn't enforced strongly at the start. The eTA is often issued online in a couple of minutes, much like the Australian version, which became the first in 1996. The Canadian immigration department says eTAs can take up to 72 hours to be issued. But for no given reason and with no way of speeding up your application, it can, in reality, take several days. Facts we weren't aware of when, in May, we booked a well-priced flight on Expedia to Calgary, flying Delta Air Lines via Minneapolis. It was only when we checked in the maximum 24 hours before the flight, that Delta warned us we needed to get the £4 eTA. We applied. My partner received hers within two minutes. Mine still hadn't come the next morning when we left for Heathrow. But having flown into Canada in 2018 without an eTA and driven in just last year without one, I assumed it was not mission-critical. However, Delta refused to let me board. They can be fined €9,000 for every passenger they carry not correctly documented to their destination, they explained – I didn't even have the option to leave the flight at Minneapolis (I have a US visa) and make my own way for the final leg. We went home despondent and with no option but to buy two new tickets. The cheap ones we had were non-transferable. My eTA arrived after 35 hours from the Canadian immigration department, with no reason given for the delay. I spoke with Expedia, who said visas and eTAs are not their responsibility, and that their small print warns that travellers to check for visa requirements themselves. It does indeed, if you can find it in the small print – but Expedia link you to a visa shop that charges £180 per person for the eTA – triple the rate of even other opportunistic commercial visa sites and 46 times the £3.93 charged by the official Canadian government eTA site. Since we fell foul of the eTA trap, we have, without trying hard, found two families merely from our small group of friends affected by it. The ex- Times journalist Michael Crozier, from north London, got caught out having also not been warned by his airline. He and his wife applied for the eTA at Spokane International Airport in the US. They were flying to Vancouver. Hers came in 20 minutes, but his took five hours – so they missed the flight. 'We booked the flight three months in advance, and it really wouldn't have been hard for the airline to warn people clearly that some will need this visa,' Crozier told me. 'We had no idea about it. The onus should be on the airlines and booking sites. What reason could they have for not flagging it up?' Simon Hewitt, from Hampton, almost lost his family holiday because he knew nothing about the eTA requirement. The Hewitts were booked to fly to Calgary earlier this week. He bought the tickets weeks ahead, but got no warning, again, from Expedia or from the airline, that an eTA was needed. Simon is the marketing manager for a large German company, well-travelled, and famously ultra-organised. After our disaster, I had warned him to apply. The family still had two weeks to get the documentation. His wife's and teenage kids' eTAs came within minutes, but his took 10 days. As the days went by, Hewitt tried to contact the Canadian immigration department. 'It was like a labyrinth,' he says. When I asked Expedia, Air Canada and British Airways why they don't simply flag up clearly that your flight to Canada cannot go ahead if you don't have an eTA, all predictably and wordily took the 'it's in the small print' approach. Expedia – who defended recommending a company that charges £180 per person to obtain the visa on your behalf as an 'optional, additional service' – showed that deep within its terms and conditions, they do link to the official Canadian government application site. I asked the government body, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, if they were having difficulties due to the influx of applications for eTAs this year. 'Most applicants get their eTA approval (via email) within minutes,' they replied. 'However, some applications need more time to be processed. For example, some applicants must submit official documents that take several days to obtain from the appropriate authorities in their country. To avoid travel delays, applicants should get their eTA before booking their flight to Canada.' I asked an experienced Canadian immigration barrister, Will Tao of Heron Law Offices near Vancouver, if he was hearing stories of chaos from within the immigration service. 'The system has always been mostly automated,' Tao says, 'I think they must have expanded the number of rules and flags, to triage more humans in the interventions and take into account their power of cancellation, which was expanded in January. But only the department can possibly confirm this.' 'They used to advertise eTAs as taking no more than 7 minutes. Go figure!' the lawyer adds. The strangest thing about the Canadian eTA, meanwhile, is that while it is supposedly to maintain their borders, it doesn't apply to land and sea entries to the country. The rationale, Tao says, is in the original proposal for the eTA, which says, 'It is not anticipated that travellers will switch their mode of transport to avoid the $7 fee.' Right. Regardless, a lesson. And one to remember: for all travellers in the coming year, the eTA issue is going to expand far beyond Canada. Australia and New Zealand have an eTA, but their systems are easy, efficient and quick. A new eTA system in Britain is up and running, but by all accounts, is running smoothly. From next year, British travellers will require an eTA to go into the EU. Canada has a relatively efficient bureaucracy. With the likes of many EU countries, the same can't be said.