TL;DR

  • Airlines paid nearly £11m in compensation, often only after passengers challenged rejected claims.
  • Many claims were later approved, showing that initial airline decisions are frequently wrong.

Introduction

Airlines operating inside and outside the United Kingdom paid almost £11 million in compensation to passengers for delayed or cancelled flights in the year to October 2025. However, a large portion of that money was paid only after claims were initially rejected or left unresolved. Figures published by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and reported by the BBC show that many passengers had to escalate their complaints to independent dispute resolution bodies before receiving the compensation they were entitled to.

The data showcases an ongoing problem in the airline industry. While passenger compensation rights exist by law, securing them in practice can be relatively difficult. For many travellers, an initial refusal from an airline marks the start of a longer, more complex process.

The Business Case

The largest share of these payouts came from British Airways, which paid around £6.9 million after 10,679 complaints were escalated. About 81% of those cases were ultimately upheld in passengers’ favour after independent review, but the figures reveal a new pattern. They highlight a significant mismatch between the airlines' initial responses to claims and the conclusions reached by adjudicators.

Other airlines also made substantial payments after rejected claims were overturned. Wizz Air paid approximately £1.7 million, Ryanair paid around £1.68 million, and easyJet paid roughly £371,000. These payouts reflect only cases in which passengers pursued their claims beyond the airline’s internal complaints process through established dispute-resolution organisations.

Importantly, the data does not account for passengers who abandoned their claims after an initial rejection, meaning the total amount of unpaid compensation is likely higher. From a commercial perspective, the figures show how dispute resolution claims have become a high cost for airlines, particularly when claims are not resolved at an early stage, leaving customers to their own devices and research.

Legal Perspective

When airlines reject or fail to resolve complaints, passengers can escalate their cases through CAA-approved Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) schemes. These independent bodies assess whether compensation should have been paid under existing consumer protection laws.

The BBC reported that many payouts occurred only after such escalation, demonstrating the importance of independent oversight. While airlines may argue that some delays or cancellations fall outside their control, adjudicators often reach different conclusions after reviewing the full circumstances.

This process can be time-consuming for passengers who have incurred considerable losses and are seeking a resolution. However, the high proportion of claims upheld after escalation indicates that ADR plays a crucial role in enforcing passenger rights when airline decisions are disputed.

Future Outlook

The CAA payout figures point to a system under strain. High success rates for escalated claims suggest that many passengers are being wrongly turned away at first contact. As awareness of compensation rights grows, more travellers may be willing to challenge refusals rather than accept them.

For regulators and airlines, the data raises questions about whether current processes are fit for purpose and serve customers’ best interests. For passengers, the message is clear: an initial rejection does not necessarily mean a claim is invalid. The millions already paid out after escalation show that passengers should continue to pursue their compensation.