Flight Compensation Claim Rejected or Ignored? What to Do Next

You submitted a claim to an airline because you believe you are owed compensation, reimbursement or a refund.

Then one of two things happens.

The airline replies:

“Your claim has been rejected.”

Or perhaps even more frustratingly, it simply stops responding.

Neither situation automatically means that your claim is over.

Sometimes an airline is completely right to reject a claim. But there are also cases where passengers disagree with the airline’s explanation, important evidence has been overlooked or the passenger-rights rules appear to have been applied incorrectly.

And if the airline does not respond at all, you do not have to keep chasing it indefinitely.

The important thing is to follow the complaint process properly, keep your evidence and, where necessary, escalate the dispute through the correct ADR provider, regulator or enforcement body for that particular airline and journey.

Court action may ultimately remain an option, but it should normally come after reasonable attempts have been made to resolve the dispute without proceedings. Pasted markdown

Last updated: October 2026. This guide provides general information about passenger rights and is not legal advice.

Start with the airline

Before escalating a dispute elsewhere, make your claim directly to the airline through its official claims or complaints process.

Explain clearly what happened, what you believe you are entitled to and how much you are claiming.

Keep a copy of everything.

The Civil Aviation Authority advises passengers to complain to the airline or airport first. Approved aviation ADR providers will also normally expect you to have raised the complaint with the business before they become involved. Civil Aviation Authority

That first complaint becomes the starting point of your paper trail if the case later needs independent review.

If your claim is rejected, read the reason properly

Do not stop reading as soon as you see:

“We are unable to pay compensation.”

Find out exactly why the airline says no.

Your claim might have been rejected because the airline believes the disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances, the delay did not meet the required threshold, UK261 or EU261 did not apply, the cancellation rules did not create a compensation entitlement, you did not qualify for denied-boarding compensation, or an expense was not considered reasonable or recoverable.

Once you understand the airline’s actual argument, you can assess whether there is anything worth challenging.

An airline rejecting your claim does not automatically mean that its interpretation is correct.

But equally, an airline rejection is not automatically wrong simply because you are unhappy with it. Pasted markdown

Check that your claim is actually valid

Before escalating, go back to the passenger-rights rules that apply to your journey.

If your complaint involves a delay, check Flight Delayed? Your Rights to Compensation, Expenses and Care.

If the flight was cancelled, see Flight Cancelled? Your Rights to a Refund, Rerouting and Expenses.

If you were bumped from a flight, see Denied Boarding: Your Rights to Compensation, Rerouting and Expenses.

If an earlier flight caused you to miss a protected connection, see Missed Connection Compensation: When Can You Claim?

And if the airline says the disruption was outside its control, see Extraordinary Circumstances: When Airlines Don’t Have to Pay Compensation.

Also make sure you understand what you are actually claiming.

Compensation, reimbursement of expenses, refunds and replacement-travel costs can be separate rights.

You may therefore find that the airline was correct to reject one part of your claim but still owes another part.

For example, extraordinary circumstances may prevent fixed compensation being payable while the airline’s separate duty to provide care or reimburse reasonable expenses still applies.

Do not automatically interpret:

“No compensation”

as:

“The airline owes me nothing.” Pasted markdown

Has the airline blamed extraordinary circumstances?

This is one of the most common disputes in flight-compensation cases.

Certain events outside the airline’s control can prevent fixed UK261 or EU261 compensation being payable.

But the airline should be able to explain what actually happened.

A vague statement such as:

“The disruption was outside our control.”

does not necessarily give you enough information to assess whether the rejection is correct.

If the explanation is unclear, ask what specifically caused the disruption, why the airline considers it an extraordinary circumstance and what reasonable measures were taken to prevent or reduce the disruption.

Under EU passenger-rights rules, the airline bears the burden of showing that extraordinary circumstances applied when it relies on that defence.

For the full explanation, see Extraordinary Circumstances: When Airlines Don’t Have to Pay Compensation. Pasted markdown

Challenge the airline clearly if you think it is wrong

If you have checked the rules and still believe you have a valid claim, give the airline an opportunity to reconsider.

You do not need to send ten increasingly angry emails.

One clear, evidence-based response is usually more useful.

Explain which part of the airline’s decision you disagree with, why you disagree, what evidence supports your position and what outcome you want.

If the airline misunderstood a fact, point to the document that proves it.

If an expense was rejected as unreasonable, explain why the expense was necessary.

If extraordinary circumstances are being relied on, explain why you believe the stated circumstances do not resolve the issue.

Keep your response focused on the actual dispute. Pasted markdown

Keep the airline’s final response

If the airline tells you that its position is final, keep that response.

Do not delete it simply because you disagree with it.

A final response can show exactly what the airline decided, why it rejected your claim, which facts remain disputed and when its internal complaint process ended.

It may also tell you which independent complaint body handles unresolved disputes involving that airline.

And importantly, you may not always need to wait eight weeks if the airline has already reached deadlock and issued its final response.

The CAA says airlines that use an ADR provider should notify passengers when they reach “deadlock” — where the airline and passenger cannot agree on a way forward — and identify the appropriate ADR provider. The eight-week point is particularly relevant where the complaint remains unresolved or the airline has failed to respond or engage sufficiently. Civil Aviation Authority

So if you receive a clear final response before eight weeks, check the rules of the airline’s ADR scheme rather than assuming you must simply wait.

What if the airline does not respond at all?

A non-response is slightly different from a rejection.

In the UK aviation complaints system, passengers can generally approach the relevant ADR provider after eight weeks where the complaint has not been resolved.

The CAA also says passengers can escalate when an airline takes more than eight weeks to respond. Civil Aviation Authority

Where an airline is not a member of an approved ADR scheme, the CAA’s Passenger Advice and Complaints Team — PACT — may be able to consider eligible complaints.

For EU passenger-rights complaints, current EU guidance provides a separate escalation route through the appropriate national authority where the airline has not responded within the relevant period or the passenger is dissatisfied with the answer.

The practical point is simple:

You do not need to keep sending the same complaint indefinitely.

Once the appropriate escalation point has been reached, move to the next stage. Pasted markdown

Find the correct ADR provider, regulator or enforcement body

This is one of the most important parts of the process.

There is not one complaints organisation that deals with every airline.

For UK aviation disputes, many participating airlines use one of the two CAA-approved ADR schemes currently operating:

AviationADR

or

CEDR.

The CAA confirms that both schemes continue to deal with unresolved aviation complaints. Civil Aviation Authority

But do not automatically send every airline complaint to one of them.

First check which ADR provider your airline actually belongs to.

If the airline is not covered by an approved ADR provider, PACT may be able to consider certain eligible UK passenger-rights complaints.

For EU261 disputes, the correct route may instead involve the appropriate National Enforcement Body or other competent complaint body in the relevant country.

Some airlines and journeys can therefore involve completely different organisations.

Always check the correct complaint route for the airline and flight concerned rather than assuming that the CAA, CEDR or AviationADR automatically handles it.

What if you live in Northern Ireland?

There is also a specific point for Northern Ireland passengers.

The CAA states that complaints from Northern Ireland residents concerning a flight into or out of Northern Ireland should be addressed to the Consumer Council for Northern Ireland.

The Consumer Council can therefore be relevant instead of the usual PACT route in those circumstances. Civil Aviation Authority

ADR and the CAA are not quite the same thing

This distinction is useful to understand.

An approved ADR scheme provides an independent out-of-court process for trying to resolve a dispute.

The CAA currently confirms that AviationADR and CEDR are the two approved aviation ADR schemes. Civil Aviation Authority

PACT is different.

PACT can assess eligible complaints, give its view and take the matter up with the airline, but the CAA states that PACT cannot impose a decision on an airline.

Approved ADR providers can provide a binding determination through their schemes in circumstances covered by their rules. Civil Aviation Authority

So the correct escalation route can matter considerably.

What should you provide when you escalate?

Make the dispute as easy as possible for someone independent to understand.

A useful evidence pack can include:

• your booking confirmation and boarding pass
• flight number and travel date
• your original claim or complaint
• the airline’s rejection and final response
• follow-up correspondence
• delay or cancellation messages and screenshots
• relevant photographs
• receipts and invoices
• previous ADR or regulator correspondence, if applicable
• a short chronological timeline
• a clear calculation of the compensation, reimbursement or refund you believe is due

Do not bury the important issue inside pages of unrelated information.

The independent reviewer should be able to identify quickly:

what happened

what you claimed

why the airline refused

and

why you say that decision is wrong. Pasted markdown

A simple timeline can make a big difference

Imagine the dispute looks like this:

10 June — flight cancelled

12 June — claim submitted

25 June — airline rejects compensation

27 June — passenger asks the airline to reconsider and supplies additional evidence

5 July — airline issues final response

12 July — complaint submitted to the airline’s ADR provider

That immediately tells an independent reviewer what happened and when.

The documents can then support each stage of the timeline. Pasted markdown

What if ADR or the regulator agrees with the airline?

Read the decision carefully.

An independent decision going against you should make you reassess the claim.

It might identify a legal point you had misunderstood.

It might show that important evidence is missing.

Or the independent body may simply have reached a conclusion that you continue to dispute.

An unsuccessful escalation does not automatically mean a court could never reach a different conclusion.

For example, PACT cannot impose a binding resolution on the airline. Civil Aviation Authority

The important thing is to understand why the complaint failed rather than treating the outcome as either meaningless or automatically definitive.

Try the appropriate resolution routes before considering court

Court proceedings should normally be treated as a last resort.

Before issuing proceedings, you should generally make reasonable attempts to understand the dispute, exchange the relevant information and consider whether it can be resolved without litigation.

That is why the sensible sequence is usually:

Claim directly from the airline → challenge an incorrect rejection or wait for the appropriate complaint period → keep the final response where available → identify the correct ADR provider, PACT, Consumer Council or relevant national body → submit the dispute with your evidence → carefully consider the outcome → then decide whether court proceedings are appropriate.

This gives the airline and the relevant independent complaint body a reasonable opportunity to resolve the dispute first.

It also creates a clear paper trail showing what you did to try to settle the matter.

Importantly, that does not mean every possible ADR provider, regulator or enforcement body must always be exhausted as an absolute legal prerequisite before a court claim can be issued.

The exact pre-action requirements depend on the circumstances.

But going straight from an airline rejection to court without considering the appropriate available dispute-resolution route is generally not the approach I would recommend. Pasted markdown

What if the airline’s ADR provider or regulator cannot resolve it?

At that stage, reassess your evidence and the amount in dispute.

Look at the airline’s explanation.

Look at the independent decision.

Look at the passenger-rights rules or legislation you rely on.

Then decide whether you still believe you have a sufficiently strong claim to take further.

The CAA recognises that legal action can remain an option where an airline dispute has not been resolved. Its guidance also makes clear that ADR provides an alternative to court and that passengers can still consider legal action afterwards. Civil Aviation Authority

I would not go into the court process in detail here, because that is a separate stage.

If you have tried the appropriate complaint and independent-resolution routes and the dispute remains unresolved, see:

Taking an Airline to Small Claims Court: UK Guide

That guide covers what happens once you are seriously considering legal proceedings. Pasted markdown

Keep your complete complaint file

Do not throw correspondence away once ADR, PACT, the Consumer Council or another regulator becomes involved.

If the dispute progresses further, you may need to show its entire history.

Keep your airline correspondence, original claim, supporting evidence, final response, independent complaint, ADR or regulator decision, settlement offers and your calculation of what remains outstanding.

Keeping everything in chronological order makes it much easier to demonstrate what happened. Pasted markdown

The bottom line

If an airline rejects your compensation, reimbursement or refund claim, do not assume the first rejection is automatically the final word.

Read the reason.

Check that your claim is genuinely valid.

Challenge the decision clearly if the airline appears to have misunderstood the facts or passenger-rights rules.

If the airline ignores you, do not chase indefinitely.

If you already have a clear final or deadlock response, check whether you can move to the appropriate ADR stage without waiting for eight weeks.

If no meaningful response arrives, the eight-week point can provide a route to escalation in the UK system.

Then identify the correct ADR provider, PACT, Consumer Council, regulator or national enforcement body for that particular airline and journey.

Do not assume every airline uses the same organisation.

And before considering court proceedings, make a genuine attempt to use the reasonable complaint and dispute-resolution routes available to you.

An ADR provider, PACT, regulator or other complaint body deciding against you — or being unable to resolve the dispute — does not necessarily prevent you from considering legal action afterwards.

But court should normally be the final stage, not the first reaction to an airline saying no.

If you reach that point, move to Taking an Airline to Small Claims Court: UK Guide rather than trying to cover the court process inside this article.

An airline rejection is a decision. A lack of response is frustrating. Neither automatically means you have reached the end of the road.