AirHelp is a online service that allow airline passengers to seek compensation for flight cancellations, delays, or overbookings.
38-627: The company's initial focus was Europe where it uses European Regulation No 261/2004 to seek to obtain compensation that a passenger is entitled to in the event of denied boarding, cancellation, or a long delay of flights. However, since 2020, AirHelp has broadened its service and also supports passengers with flights in the US, Canada, Brazil, Turkey and Asia. The company was founded by Henrik Zillmer, Nicolas Michaelsen and Greg Roodt in 2013. AirHelp utilises clauses of Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 and other local Air Passenger Rights regulations, such as UK261 in
76-440: A claim in exchange for a fee, with a fee only being charged if the company is successful in obtaining compensation. Where an airline refuses to settle, AirHelp, together with its partners, can take legal action. On several occasions, these lawsuits have led to the courts to clarifying legal questions regarding passenger rights. To substantiate claims against airlines, AirHelp compiles information from multiple databases to verify
114-564: A delay of over three hours. The Sturgeon ruling was reconfirmed in a ruling of the European Court of Justice on 23 October 2012 in Nelson v Deutsche Lufthansa AG and R (TUI Travel, British Airways, easyjet and IATA) v Civil Aviation Authority . In the case of Denise McDonagh v Ryanair Ltd (C-12/11), the Third Chamber of the European Court of Justice ruled that natural disasters such as
152-461: A fixed-wing aircraft , nor to flights from Gibraltar Airport . While Switzerland, Iceland and Norway are not members of the EU, the regulation does apply to flights to and from these countries as if they were member states under bilateral agreements. Before denying passengers boarding involuntarily, the airline is required to first seek volunteers to give up their reservation in return for whatever benefit
190-408: A flight is delayed by five hours, passengers are additionally entitled to abandon their journey and receive a refund for all unused tickets. They may also ask for a refund on tickets used already if the flight no longer serves any purpose in relation to their original travel plan, and, if relevant, a flight back to their original point of departure at the earliest opportunity. Flight delay is based on
228-553: A lack of transparency regarding its collaborations with travel agencies and openly stating that it treats flight disruptions as opportunities to attract partnerships. Depending on an airline, the claims process can take weeks, months and even years. AirHelp's has been criticised by users for its practice of emailing travelers monthly claiming that their request is on-track before abruptly announcing that their case has been closed unsuccessfully (after failing to reach an agreement with an airline or due to new evidence proving that an airline
266-481: A notice at their check-in counters stating: Additionally, when an airline cancels a flight, denies a person boarding, or incurs a delay exceeding two hours to a flight, it is obliged to provide each passenger affected with a written notice setting out their rights under the regulation, and the contact details of the national body tasked with enforcing the regulation. In the case Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia—Linee Aeree Italiane SpA (Case C-549/07) of 22 December 2008,
304-540: A number of its practices. It has been criticised for offering its services in the first place, with some arguing that AirHelp and others make a business out of something that a traveler is entitled to for free. Airhelp has countered by pointing out how difficult airlines make it for passengers both to know their rights and to claim compensation. Although most passengers seem satisfied with AirHelp's services, some aviation authorities have warned that its success could lead to fare increases. The company has been criticized for
342-413: A part of any potential reimbursements for unused tickets, trips in vain, additional transport costs, meals and accommodation. Airlines are not obliged to provide cash compensation in the case of extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if the airline took all reasonable precautions, according to Article 5, Paragraph 3. Rerouting or refunding is, at the passenger's choice, one of
380-463: A technical fault within an aircraft as a defence from a valid claim under the Regulation, "unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control". Various passenger rights groups reported the case and encouraged passengers to bring claims against airlines in the event of
418-416: A ticket onto another carrier. The airline is also required to pay cash compensation as described below, unless one of the following conditions applies: The airline must also provide an explanation to passengers of alternative transport. The requirements for an entitlement to compensation and the specific amount owed depend on the length of a flight, whereas the relevant distance is determined according to
SECTION 10
#1732859196194456-500: Is a regulation in EU law establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding, flight cancellations , or long delays of flights. It requires compensation of €250 to €600 depending on the flight distance for delays over of at least three hours, cancellations, or being denied boarding from overbooking . Delays shorter than three hours means no entitlement to any compensation of any kind even if
494-550: Is denied boarding for reasons of health, safety and security, or inadequate documentation, the passenger may not be entitled to compensation or assistance. If a flight is cancelled, passengers are automatically entitled to their choice of Any ticket refund is the price paid for the flight(s) not used, plus the cost of flights already flown in cases where the cancellation has made those flights of no purpose. Where applicable, passengers are also entitled to refreshments, communication and accommodation as described below. Where re-routing
532-399: Is negotiated between the airline and the volunteers. Irrespective of such negotiation, such volunteers are also entitled to reimbursement or rerouting. If insufficient volunteers are obtained, the airline may then proceed to involuntarily deny passengers the right to board their flight. All passengers so denied must be offered all three types of compensation and assistance. If the passenger
570-405: Is to another airport serving the same destination, the airline must pay for onward transport to the original airport or to a close by destination agreed with the passenger. These choices, and the entitlement to refreshments, etc., apply to all cancellations, regardless of whether the circumstances are extraordinary or not. It is unclear whether "the earliest opportunity" requires airlines to endorse
608-797: The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg ruled on the interpretation of Article 5 of the regulation relating to cancellations, specifically paragraph 3 which states: An operating air carrier shall not be obliged to pay compensation in accordance with Article 7, if it can prove that the cancellation is caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. The Court agreed with Wallentin-Hermann that any technical issues during aircraft maintenance don't constitute "extraordinary circumstances" that would allow airlines to avoid paying passengers compensation for canceled flights. This case therefore closed
646-451: The great circle method. The Regulation differentiates between three types of flights: Note: In the rest of this article, types 1, 2 and 3 are used to refer to the above thresholds. Passengers are entitled to refreshments and communication if the expected delay of the arrival exceeds: Furthermore, if the flight is expected to depart on the day after the original scheduled departure time, passengers are entitled to accommodation. If
684-570: The United Kingdom, ANAC 400 in Brazil, air passenger protection regulations in Canada and Turkey, and Montreal Convention in US to help passengers obtain compensation. The eligibility of individual travelers is first determined through use of a web form or mobile app. The initial assessment is free. If Airhelp determines that a user is entitled to compensation, the user can commission the company to pursue
722-436: The above amounts are payable if the passenger's actual arrival time exceeds the scheduled arrival of their originally booked flights, by two/three/four hours for type 1/2/3 flights respectively. But if rerouting only exceeds the arrival time by less than these thresholds, half of the specified amounts are payable as compensation. Said cash payments merely serve to compensate a traveller's inconvenience and do not replace or form
760-480: The case of Germanwings GmbH v. Ronny Henning (C-452/13), the Ninth Chamber of the European Court of Justice ruled that the concept of ‘arrival time’, which is used to determine the length of the delay to which passengers on a flight have been subject, refers to the time at which at least one of the doors of the aircraft is opened, the assumption being that, at that moment, the passengers are permitted to leave
798-403: The case of a delay, the airline may withdraw or abrogate these entitlements if offering them would delay the flight further. If a passenger is placed in a higher class than that for which a ticket was purchased, the airline may not request any additional payment. If a passenger is placed in a lower class than that for which a ticket was purchased, the airline must refund 30/50/75% of the cost of
SECTION 20
#1732859196194836-533: The circumstances relating to the flight disruption. The company's also uses AI to check passengers' eligibility against the reason given by an airline to reject a claim, often weather conditions. Airlines then have to offer proof that a flight was disrupted due to weather. The company is reported to have four bots that assist with claims: "Herman", "Lara", "AgA" which reviews all initial claims, and "Docky" which automatically requests additional travel documentation from passengers. The company has faced criticism for
874-484: The compensation as set out in Article 7 for any delay in excess of three hours providing the air carrier cannot raise a defence of "extraordinary circumstances". "Articles 5, 6 and 7 of Regulation EC 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that passengers whose flights are delayed may be treated, for the purposes of the application of the right to compensation, as passengers whose flights are cancelled and they may thus rely on
912-515: The concept of defining what is inside or outside of the "actual control of the air carrier" is not clear and is subject to litigation in many EU-states. Furthermore, in the joined cases of Sturgeon v Condor , and Bock v Air France (C-402/07 and C-432/07), the Fourth Chamber of the European Court of Justice held on 19 November 2009 that despite no express provision in the Regulation to compensate passengers for delay, passengers are now entitled to
950-523: The court affirmed in a statement. In its judgment, the Fourth Chamber of the Court of Justice held: Extraordinary circumstances” was not defined in the 2004 Regulation, but the phrase was to be interpreted narrowly since article 5(3) constituted a derogation from the principle, indicated in recitals 1 and 2 of the preamble, of protection of consumers, in as much as cancellation of flights caused serious inconvenience to passengers. However, what actually lies within
988-745: The court's ruling, air carriers continued to have an obligation of care towards passengers under Art. 5 and 8 of the regulation during the week-long shutdown of European airspace, and this obligation does not have a temporal or monetary limit. In the case of Jet2 vs. Huzar , the English Court of Appeal ruled on 11 June 2014 that "ordinary technical problems that cause flight disruption, such as component failure and general wear and tear, should not be considered “extraordinary circumstances”". Therefore, general technical faults found during routine maintenance checks before departure will generally not be considered "extraordinary circumstances". On 4 September 2014, in
1026-401: The data for their reports. On the basis of their AirHelp score, Bloomberg News has reported on the best and worst airlines and airports in the world for the years 2018 and 2019. AirHelp rankings have also been used by a number of other media outlets, such as MSN and Forbes . Flight Compensation Regulation The Air Passengers Rights Regulation 2004 (Regulation (EC) No 261/2004)
1064-463: The delay on leaving the EU. There are three broad categories where airlines may be required to make payments or otherwise assist passengers, in cases of delays, flight changes/cancellations or denied boarding. If the requirements for a compensation are met, Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 obligates the operating carrier to offer each passenger a lump-sum payment of: Where a passenger has been rerouted due to cancellation or denied boarding,
1102-603: The delay was classified as non-extraordinary. Airlines must provide refreshments and accommodation where appropriate. The Court of Justice of the European Union has interpreted passenger rights strictly, so that there are virtually no exceptions for airlines to evade their obligations for breach of contract. It repealed Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, and went into effect on 17 February 2005. The regulation applies to any passenger: if that person: or unless It does not apply to helicopter flights, to any flight not operated by
1140-487: The distance of the affected flight divided by the total distance the passenger is entitled to travel. Taxes and charges that do not depend on the class of ticket purchased can be excluded from the calculation. Refunds and compensations payable under this regulation may be paid in cash , by electronic bank transfer , bank draft , or cheque . With the signed agreement of a passenger, they may also be paid in travel vouchers or other services. Airlines are obliged to display
1178-487: The distance of the flight. In October 2017, an EU Court of Appeal confirmed the UK CAA 's interpretation that the final destination must be included in the total delay. This means that, if the passenger misses a connection outside the EU and ends up with a delay longer than the times indicated above, even if the delay on the flight leaving the EU was less than the aforementioned times, the total delay will be used and not only
AirHelp - Misplaced Pages Continue
1216-462: The eruption of the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull and the subsequent cloud of volcanic ash in 2010 , which shut down most European air traffic, do constitute "extraordinary circumstances" that release air carriers from the obligation to pay compensation, but that there is no such category as "super-extraordinary circumstances" that would release them from the obligation to provide care. According to
1254-410: The following three reimbursements: If a passenger's destination is an airport at a city with multiple airports and rerouting results in the passenger being taken to another of those airports, the airline must also pay for transport for the passenger to the original intended airport or an agreed nearby destination. When passengers become entitled to assistance, they must be offered, free of charge, In
1292-424: The loophole which had allowed the airlines to abuse passengers by frivolous interpretation of "technical or extraordinary circumstances"; it further defined the phrase and limited its exploitation. The definition of "technical and/or extraordinary circumstances" by the Court now stands firm and solid: any carrier must prove that the alleged mechanical problem leading to the cancellation was "beyond its actual control",
1330-499: The right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of the regulation where they suffer, on account of a flight delay, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is, where they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier." The fourth Chamber also ruled that under the definition of "extraordinary circumstances", technical faults within an aircraft should not be included and therefore an air carrier cannot rely on
1368-478: The scheduled arrival time. This is defined as when the doors are opened on the plane and not when it lands. Although not set out in the text of the regulation, a series of court cases created a rule that in case of an arrival delay of more than 3 hours, passengers are entitled to cash compensation, unless the delay is caused by extraordinary circumstances. Unlike the entitlements to refreshments, communication, or accommodation, this 3-hour threshold does not scale with
1406-525: The ticket for type 1/2/3 flights. For the purpose of this condition, flights to the French overseas departments are not considered to be within the European Union. In the 2016 ECJ case of Mennens v Emirates referred by the Düsseldorf District Court, it was ruled that where a ticket covered multiple flights and did not attribute the cost of each flight separately, the percentage refund was to be based on
1444-513: Was not at fault for the disruption), which has brought some discredit to the company. Each year since 2015, AirHelp has produced a global report of airport and airline rankings. The airports are ranked according to on-time performance (60%), service quality (20%) and food & shops (20%), while airlines are ranked to on-time performance, service quality and claim processing with each category weighted equally. AirHelp uses its own databases , commercial vendors and passenger surveys to compile
#193806