EU261 claims management that pays or refuses each claim on the flight’s own record, with the evidence a court will ask for
Each claim paid or refused on the flight’s own record, with evidence a court accepts.
See one case, screen by screen ↓EU261 claims management, also called EC261 claims handling, is how an airline validates and settles passenger claims for delay and cancellation compensation under EU261 and UK261: checking eligibility, finding the cause, deciding whether it was an extraordinary circumstance, working out the amount, paying the right person once and defending refusals. EU261 Claims Management does this with eight agents that rebuild each flight’s day from your own records and draft every decision with its evidence, while your claims handlers decide and sign.
How to choose AI for airlines: a buyer's guide to agentic AI solutions →
Updated
EU261 claims management starts with one question the claim form cannot answer: why was the flight late? EU261 and UK261 owe €250–€600 (£220–£520) to every passenger who arrives three hours late for a cause within the airline’s control. The delay code says “41, aircraft defect”, but whether the cause was extraordinary sits in the technical log, the movement messages, the METARs, the air-traffic slot messages and the crew roster — five systems a claims handler cannot read for every claim.
So handlers decide from the delay code and a template. Refusals on technical faults and crew sickness come back as court claims the airline loses, with the other side’s costs. Passenger compensation claims arrive by the thousand, most of them through agencies that file in bulk, so the same passenger is paid twice, staff-travel tickets and sub-three-hour arrivals are paid because nobody checked, and two passengers from the same flight get different answers — and the court sees both letters.
Estimated split for the claims from one long-haul flight, by hand and with the solution.
Eight specialist agents rebuild the flight’s day, test the cause and draft the answer; the claims handler decides and signs.
Corvane Airways flight CV 95, Paris Charles de Gaulle to Chicago O’Hare on Saturday, October 3, arrived 4 h 10 min late. On Wednesday, October 14, Camille Arnaud asked for €600 through the web form. It is Thursday morning. Here is how her claim — and the 63 others from the same flight — gets answered, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Nora’s home is a short list, not a dashboard. Overnight the agents read 418 new claims and rebuilt nine flights’ days. 37 claims need her — a duplicate, a mandate, a receipt or a cause to check — 212 are ready to sign, and 19 are due within 7 days against Corvane’s 14-day answer. Beside the list, what the agents found since 06:00, each finding with its record.
“The hydraulic leak on N815CV is in the technical log at 07:05 — the delay code alone said only “41”. Not extraordinary, 96%.”
CLM-26-48213 opens with the facts in one strip: CV 95 CDG → ORD on Boeing 787-9 N815CV, 6,654 km, 4 h 10 min late with the doors open at 17:05 CDT, EU261 Art 7(1)(c), not extraordinary, €600. Below it, the Delay Investigator’s timeline from 17 records in 6 systems: schedule, aircraft movements, technical log, weather at both ends, air traffic and passengers, with the delay at the door split into 3 h 54 min technical repair, 12 min air-traffic slot and 4 min taxi-in. On the right, the conversation with the agents.
Every point on the timeline opens the passage it came from. The 07:05 entry is technical log TLB 815-2291: “HYD QTY LOW R”, a leak traced to the right engine-driven pump pressure-line B-nut fitting, aircraft not dispatchable, fitting and seal kit required. The certificate of release to service follows at 13:38.
“Read by the agents from the system of record, read-only · the highlighted passage is the one relied on.”
The Circumstance Assessor finds the leak not extraordinary at 96%: a fault found in service is part of normal operation, under Wallentin-Hermann and van der Lans. The Challenger then argues as an agency’s lawyer would, finds no hidden manufacturing defect, no airworthiness directive on the fitting and no spare aircraft that could have flown sooner, and agrees. The 12-minute slot is outside Corvane’s control, but without it the delay is still 3 h 58 min. The Amount Calculator gives €600, about $648, and does not deduct the €15 meal voucher, which was care.
Six checks on the claim, all clear: booking matched, flew on it, revenue ticket, flight covered, not paid before, payee is the claimant.
The Letter Writer asks: “Shall I set this claim to pay €600 to Camille Arnaud?” Nora opens Decide. The agents propose Pay €600; she picks APV-01, Pay as drafted, over Pay with an edit, Ask the claimant for information or Send to counsel, and signs as herself. The claim moves to payment batch PB-1015-B, and the letter goes when the batch is countersigned.
“The letter is drafted in French and English. Nothing is paid until you decide.”
The cause is a fact about the flight, so it is decided once. CV 95 has 64 claims — 23 direct, 41 from three agencies: 58 owed €600 (€34,800 ≈ $37,584), 3 agency copies of direct claims, 2 staff-travel tickets and 1 passenger who did not fly. The finding goes to Marcus to sign with FLT-01 for all 58. A claim that arrives later inherits it and still gets its own checks. The manifest shows 219 more passengers covered but not yet claimed, and offering them compensation now is a manager’s decision with a reason code.
“Claims that arrive later inherit the finding and still get their own checks.”
This morning’s Velora Claims file had 214 rows: 205 matched, 6 duplicates of direct claims held, 3 unknown bookings. Four agency claims across Velora and Northgate Passenger Claims have no signed mandate, so nothing is paid on them until one arrives — one click requests all four, and the claims pause rather than being refused.
“Nothing is paid to an agency without a signed mandate or assignment.”
Camille’s letter is drafted in French and English: CV 95 arrived 4 h 10 min late because of a hydraulic leak found on the aircraft that morning, a technical fault that is part of an airline’s normal operation and not an extraordinary circumstance; €600 under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) 261/2004 goes to the account she gave within 7 days; the €15 meal at gate K45 was care and is not deducted. Refusals carry their evidence annex — and the CV 99 refusal is held, because the Challenger is still reading the rotation plan.
“A refusal is never sent without the records it relies on — this letter unlocks when the finding is signed.”
Payments go by bank transfer in the passenger’s currency. Batch PB-1015-A — 84 payments on CV 52 and CV 140, €50,400 ≈ $54,432 — is over the $25,000 line and waits for Tomás to countersign. Every payee was checked for account holder, mandate and duplicates, and the three payments the bank sent back come to the handler as exceptions.
Four EU261 court claims are open. The Challenger expects to lose DSP-2598 in Paris (92%), a crew-sickness refusal from August, and DSP-2604 in the UK County Court (95%), an avionics fault refused as “safety”, and recommends settling both. DSP-2611 in Frankfurt, with a 12% chance of losing, can be defended: the air-traffic controllers’ strike notice is on file. The Case Builder assembles each court pack from the flight’s records; Ingrid decides each one.
“The Challenger forecasts how a court would see each case; the Case Builder assembles the pack from the flight’s records. Counsel decides.”
The same claims, seen by the five people who carry them — what their week looked like, and what it looks like now.
Eight specialist agents rebuild the flight’s day, test the cause and draft the answer; the claims handler decides and signs.
Reads every claim from the web form, email, agency files and court papers; extracts claimant, booking, flight, bank details and mandate, and matches the booking, the ticket and the boarding scan.
Rebuilds the flight’s day from movement messages, the technical log, weather reports, air-traffic slot messages and the crew roster, and splits the delay at the door into its causes by the minute.
Tests each cause against EU261, UK261 and the case law, checks whether reasonable measures were taken, and gives a verdict with a confidence.
Argues the passenger’s side as an agency’s lawyer would, from the same records and the case law, and forecasts how a court would see a refusal.
Works out the great-circle distance from origin to final destination, the arrival delay by the door-open time, the amount, any reduction, the currency and offsets agreed in writing.
Drafts each decision letter in the passenger’s language from approved templates, with the cause in plain words and the evidence annex on every refusal.
Checks agency mandates and assignments, the bank account holder and duplicates across every channel, and prepares the payment batches.
Builds court and regulator packs from the flight’s timeline and the decision, drafts replies and tracks their deadlines.
Approves with a reason code and signs. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask about any claim, flight, agency or rule — or tell the agents what to do. Answers come with their sources, and nothing is paid, refused or sent unseen.
Why is the CV 95 hydraulic leak not extraordinary?
The leak was found on a routine walk-round and logged at 07:05. The courts hold that a technical fault is extraordinary only if it comes from outside normal operation — a hidden manufacturing defect revealed by the manufacturer or an authority — and no directive covers the fitting.
Which court cases are we likely to lose?
Two: DSP-2598 in Paris (crew sickness, 92%) and DSP-2604 in the UK County Court (avionics fault refused as “safety”, 95%). The Challenger recommends settling both before the hearing.
Show the agency claims without a signed mandate
4 claims: 3 from Velora Claims (CV 1418 and CV 99) and 1 from Northgate Passenger Claims (CV 81). Nothing is paid to an agency without a signed mandate; you can request them in one step.
How much have we paid under EU261 and UK261 this month?
October 1–15: €917,728 ≈ $991,146 on 1,904 claims. 541 refusals, every one with its evidence annex.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
The lines the agents act inside and the rules they apply, set by your team — every change versioned, approved by a manager and on the audit trail.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Counsel decides below | 85% confidence | Any value from 50% to 99%, with a reason · and whenever the Challenger disagrees |
| Second approver on batches over | $25,000 | Changed from $20,000 on Oct 15 by Jordan Pike, approved by Marcus Hale |
| Bulk approval sample | 1 in 20, at least 3 | The person sees the sample before signing |
| Hold any single claim over | €1,200 | More than two passengers on one claim |
| Answer every claim within | 14 days | Corvane standard CR-07 · warn at day 7 and day 12 |
| EU261 and UK261 rule sets | In force | Versioned by flight date · CJEU case law to Oct 1, 2026 (41 decisions) · UK case law (17 decisions) |
| EU261 reform, Council position of June 2025 | Ready, off | Simulate on last month’s claims · nothing changes until it is in force and a manager switches it on |
| Letter templates | 6 languages | English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Dutch |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (IATA, December 2024 — EU261 costs airlines over $5 billion a year; Regulation (EC) 261/2004 Art 7 and UK261 — €250/€400/€600 and £220/£350/£520 by distance). Case law named: Sturgeon C-402/07, Wallentin-Hermann C-549/07, Germanwings C-452/13, van der Lans C-257/14, Folkerts C-11/11. Corvane Airways, the claim agencies and the people named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
EU261 claims management, also called EC261 claims handling, is how an airline validates and settles passenger claims for delay and cancellation compensation under EU261 and UK261: checking eligibility, finding the cause, deciding whether it was an extraordinary circumstance, working out the amount, paying the right person once and defending refusals. EU261 Claims Management does this with eight agents that rebuild each flight’s day from your own records and draft every decision with its evidence, while your claims handlers decide and sign.
Usually not. The courts hold that a fault found in service is part of an aircraft’s normal operation, unless it comes from outside it, such as a hidden manufacturing defect revealed by the manufacturer or an authority (Wallentin-Hermann, van der Lans). The Circumstance Assessor tests each cause against the case law, the Challenger argues the passenger’s side, and counsel decides anything below 85% confidence.
At the moment the first door opens at the final destination, not the in-block time or a flight tracker. In the working solution, CV 205 doors opened 2 h 56 min late, so six refusals were drafted with the door log attached — while a passenger booked through to Denver who missed the connection arrived 4 h 35 min late and is paid.
Airline delay compensation is €250, €400 or €600 under EU261 and £220, £350 or £520 under UK261, by distance. The Amount Calculator measures the great-circle distance from origin to final destination, shows the US dollar equivalent at the treasury rate, and never deducts care such as meal vouchers, or goodwill not agreed in writing.
The Claim Reader imports each EU261 claim agency’s file or feed the same day and matches every row to a booking. The Payee Agent holds agency copies of claims the passenger also made directly, so each passenger is paid once, and pays nothing to an agency without a signed mandate or assignment — the claim pauses and the mandate is requested.
Yes. The cause is decided once per flight and signed by the customer relations manager, so two passengers on the same flight never get different answers on the cause. Every claim still gets its own checks — booking, boarding, ticket type, payee and duplicates — including claims that arrive after the finding is signed.
Yes. EU261 automation here covers the reading, the investigation, the amount and the drafting; the claims handler decides each claim with a reason code, counsel decides contested causes, the manager signs flight findings and a second person countersigns batches over $25,000. The agents never send a letter, file with a court or pay, and a refusal cannot go out without its evidence annex.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your claims policy, reason codes, letter templates and the systems behind each flight’s day — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. Setup ends with a back-test on last month’s claims, so you see how the agents’ decisions compare with your team’s before anyone relies on them.
Every disrupted passenger rebooked and told before reaching the counter.
1-min demoAirline Refund AutomationEvery refund decided inside the DOT clock, each with its rule and its proof.
1-min demoAirline Complaint ManagementEvery complaint answered inside its DOT clock, with the trip facts cited.
1-min demoWe’ll run EU261 Claims Management on last month’s claims and the records of the flights behind them.