Flight compensation claim rejected?
After waiting weeks for a response, receiving a simple “no” from LOT can feel incredibly frustrating—especially when you believed your case was valid. Many passengers give up at this stage, unsure whether they’re truly entitled to flight compensation or if fighting the decision is even worth the effort.
The good news? A rejection is often not the final word. Airlines frequently deny claims automatically or rely on broad excuses that don’t always hold up legally.
This is where a flight compensation company can step in, re-evaluate your case, and take the necessary legal steps to overturn a rejected claim. In this guide, we’ll explain why claims get denied and how professionals challenge those decisions.
Check your compensation online.
Why LOT Flight Compensation Claims Get Rejected?
Flight compensation claim rejected?
Many passengers assume that a rejected claim automatically means they are not entitled to compensation. In reality, airlines reject a large number of valid claims every day, often for procedural or strategic reasons rather than legal ones. The most common reasons include:
Incomplete or Incorrect Documentation
Airlines require a specific set of documents to process a compensation claim, including booking confirmations, boarding passes, proof of delay or cancellation, and bank details for payment.
If even one document is missing, outdated, or filled out incorrectly, the airline may reject the claim without ever fully reviewing its validity. In many cases, passengers are not clearly informed about what went wrong, leaving them confused and often discouraged from challenging the decision.
Misuse of “Extraordinary Circumstances”
This is one of the most frequently used — and most abused — reasons for rejection.
Airlines often label delays and cancellations as being caused by weather, air traffic control restrictions, or “unforeseen circumstances,” even when the disruption was actually due to technical problems, crew shortages, or operational failures.
Often, airlines state that technical problems are extraordinary circumstances, events that could have been avoided. But it’s not true – technical problems are not extraordinary, and you are entitled to flight compensation if your LOT flight was disrupted due to a technical issue.
While extraordinary circumstances can legally block compensation, airlines frequently apply this exemption too broadly.
Misapplied Regulation EU261 Rules by Lot (And Other Airlines)
Regulation EU261 is complex, and its interpretation depends on case law from the European Court.
Many airlines either misinterpret these rules or apply outdated legal standards when assessing claims. For example, they may wrongly deny compensation for long delays, missed connections, or rerouted flights that still qualify under EU law.
Missed Flight Compensation Deadlines (by Passengers)
Each country has its own legal deadline (statute of limitations) for filing a flight compensation claim, and missing this deadline usually means you lose your right to EU flight compensation entirely—no matter how strong your case may be.
So, how long can you claim flight delay compensation?
For example, in Poland, where LOT Polish Airlines is based, passengers generally have 1 year to file a compensation claim. In Germany, the limitation period is 3 years, while in France it is typically 5 years, and in the United Kingdom, passengers usually have up to 6 years to submit a claim.
These are significant differences.
Automated Rejections by Customer Service Systems
Large airlines increasingly rely on automated systems to filter flight compensation claims.
These systems often issue standardized, template refusals based on limited data, without any real human investigation.
As a result, valid claims are frequently rejected simply because the system flags them incorrectly.
Flight compensation claim rejected? A reputable flight compensation company can help!
What Changes When You Use a Flight Compensation Company?
Once a professional compensation company takes over your case, the entire dynamic with the airline changes. Instead of dealing with an individual passenger, the airline now faces legal specialists who understand the rules, the evidence, and the tactics used to delay or deny payouts.
Legal Expertise vs. Individual Passenger Knowledge
Most passengers are unfamiliar with the full scope of EU261, related court rulings, and cross-border enforcement procedures.
Flight compensation companies, on the other hand, handle thousands of claims and use specialized legal teams to interpret the law correctly.
This expertise allows them to challenge weak airline arguments and respond precisely to legal loopholes.
Access to Historical Flight, Weather & ATC Data
Compensation companies have access to professional databases that track flight operations, weather conditions, air traffic control restrictions, and airport disruptions in real time and retrospectively.
This data is critical for proving whether “extraordinary circumstances” actually applied — something individual passengers usually cannot verify on their own.
Formal Legal Pressure vs. Informal Customer Complaint
When you submit a claim yourself, it is treated as a customer service request.
When a compensation company intervenes, the claim becomes a formal legal demand.
This triggers different internal procedures within the airline, including involvement from legal departments instead of frontline support agents.
Airline Response Behavior When Facing Legal Representation
Airlines are far more likely to negotiate, settle, or approve compensation when they know a case could escalate to court.
The risk of legal costs, enforcement action, and negative precedent often leads airlines to reconsider claims that were previously rejected without thorough review.
Check your compensation online.
Flight Compensation Claim Rejected? How a Compensation Company Overturns It
Once a compensation company takes over a rejected flight claim, the process becomes far more strategic and evidence-driven.
- The first step is a complete re-analysis of the airline’s rejection. Legal experts review the original response to identify inconsistencies, check whether “extraordinary circumstances” were misapplied, and confirm that all eligibility criteria and timelines under EU261 or other relevant regulations were met. Many rejections are overturned at this stage simply because the airline relied on a weak or incorrect legal justification.
- Next, the company strengthens the case by collecting independent operational evidence. This includes verified flight performance data, weather records at the exact time of disruption, airport and runway status, air traffic control restrictions, and documentation of strikes or staffing issues. This objective data is crucial for proving whether the airline’s stated reason for the disruption is legitimate or not.
- With the legal analysis and supporting evidence in place, the compensation company then issues a formal legal demand to the airline. Unlike a standard passenger complaint, this notice sets out clear legal arguments, cites applicable regulations and case law, and imposes strict response deadlines. At this point, the airline usually transfers the file from customer service to its legal department, which often leads to a more serious reassessment of the claim.
- If the airline still refuses to pay, the claim may be escalated to national enforcement bodies or to court. This can involve aviation authorities, small claims courts, or cross-border litigation procedures depending on the route and jurisdiction. Flight compensation companies handle all legal filings, communication, and representation, removing the burden from the passenger. Litigation is used only when necessary, but it often becomes the decisive factor in forcing a payout.
- Finally, many cases are resolved through negotiation and settlement before a full court judgment is required. Airlines may offer partial approvals or propose settlements to avoid lengthy legal proceedings and additional costs. Flight compensation companies evaluate these offers, negotiate on the passenger’s behalf, and ensure that any payout reflects what the law actually allows. In most successful cases, passengers receive their compensation without ever needing to step into a courtroom.
How Long It Takes to Overturn a Rejected Claim?
The time required to overturn a rejected flight compensation claim depends largely on how quickly the airline cooperates and whether legal escalation is necessary. In straightforward cases where the airline accepts the legal review and evidence presented by the compensation company, the average resolution time is typically between 2 and 8 weeks. These are cases where no court action is required and the airline agrees to settle after receiving a formal legal demand.
If the airline continues to dispute the claim, the case may proceed to court or a national enforcement body, which significantly extends the timeline. Court escalation can take anywhere from 3 to 12 months, and in some complex cross-border cases, even longer. While this process requires patience, it often results in a legally enforceable decision that forces the airline to pay.
Several factors can slow down or speed up recovery, including:
- How quickly the passenger submits complete and accurate documents
- The airline’s internal response time and willingness to negotiate
- The complexity of the disruption (technical fault vs. weather or ATC issues)
- Jurisdiction and local court efficiency
- Whether enforcement across borders is required
When a Flight Compensation Company May NOT Be Able to Help
While flight compensation companies significantly improve the chances of overturning a rejected claim, there are situations where the law itself does not allow compensation, regardless of who handles the case. These exceptions are based on verified extraordinary circumstances that are fully outside the airline’s control.
One of the most common examples is proven extreme weather, such as severe storms, heavy snowfall, volcanic ash, or hurricanes that make flying genuinely unsafe. When independent weather data confirms that conditions were dangerous and unavoidable, compensation is usually not legally payable.
Another scenario is airport-wide shutdowns, including full runway closures, complete airspace restrictions, or major infrastructure failures that affect all airlines equally. In these cases, the disruption is not caused by the airline’s own operations.
Compensation is also typically excluded in cases involving security threats, political instability, or emergency government restrictions, such as terrorism alerts, military conflicts, or sudden border closures. These are classified as extraordinary events under aviation law.
Finally, long-expired claims cannot be recovered once the legal deadline in a given country has passed. Each country applies its own statute of limitations, and once this period expires, even the strongest case can no longer be enforced.
Even in these situations, reputable compensation companies will still review the claim for free and clearly explain whether legal recovery is possible, ensuring passengers do not pursue cases with no realistic chance of success.
Flight compensation claim rejected? A reputable flight compensation company can help! Our partners offer such services.
When choosing this option, here is all you will have to do:
And that’s it — the rest is handled by professionals.
* Your boarding pass and passport or ID copy.
Success Rates: Self-Claim vs. Flight Compensation Company
| Claim Method | Typical Success Rate | Main Characteristics | Common Reasons for Rejection |
|---|---|---|---|
| Self-Claim (Passenger Submits Alone) | ~30%–50% | Informal customer service process, limited legal pressure, basic evidence | Misused “extraordinary circumstances,” missing documents, weak legal arguments, automated airline refusals |
| Compensation Company (Legal Handling) | ~70%–95% | Formal legal review, professional evidence, court escalation if needed | Only extreme weather, security risks, airport-wide shutdowns, or expired claims |
Read more:
Featured photo by Mikhail Nilov from Pexels