What to do when an airline cites an “exceptional technical reason” to not pay delay compensation under EU law

Although European legislation clearly states that airline passengers are entitled to compensation of hundreds of euros if their flights are delayed for more than 3 hours or are cancelled, not all injured parties manage to receive the money, although they take the necessary steps. An Animawings customer says the airline cited an “exceptional technical reason” without further explanation for not paying him compensation after a 13-hour delay. “Most common technical problems do not fall into this category,” say specialists consulted by HotNews.

• Animawing did not respond to our request for a point of view, but after receiving the questions they offered the customer a voucher. EU legislation stipulates that this alternative form of compensation can only be done with the consent of the passenger. He refused the voucher.

In October 2025, Ionel Olteanu bought, through a tour operator, a five-day stay in Alanya, Turkey, for four people. The package was organized and guaranteed by Christian Tour, and the Bucharest – Antalya transport was to be done by the Animawings company. This is a Romanian airline founded in 2020, part of the MementoGroup, built around Christian Tour.

“We want to become one of the best airlines in Romania in the coming years, which is why the feedback we receive from passengers plays a very important role in our plan to develop and improve the services offered”, Animawings presents itself on its website.

“It was the first time we flew with them. We have been flying to Turkey for years, but usually with Tarom or HiSky. We were curious how it would be, especially since they kept bragging in the press that they had the newest planes,” says Ionel Olteanu.

A few days before the flight, Olteanu received a notification announcing that the flight would be moved from 7 am to 12 noon. Arriving at the airport on the day of departure, he found out, after checking in, that the flight was being delayed again, the passenger says.

“Those who were from the province were taken to a hotel near the airport,” says Olteanu. Later, notices for further postponements began to arrive. Initially for 6 p.m., then 9 p.m., and later for midnight. Finally, after the luggage was taken off the Animawings aircraft and left at the arrivals terminal, from where it was retrieved, the passengers went through the check-in process again and boarded a Tarom aircraft. They took off at 1 am.

What European legislation says about flight compensation

Regulation (EC) no. 261/2004 establishes that people who have a flight delay of more than three hours for journeys of less than 1500 kilometers benefit from a compensation of 250 euros.

Back in the country, Ionel Olteanu wanted to claim the 250 euros per person, in his case it was 1000 euros. According to the purchase contract from the Direct Booking tour operator, the responsibility of the transport falls on the airline. In this case, Animawings.

He contacted the company, and after several requests, Animawings representatives responded, after three months, that the Bucharest – Antalya flight had a delay caused by an “exceptional technical reason”.

At the same time, because the flight was operated by another company, Animawings urged Ionel Olteanu to contact the agency through which he bought the tickets.

The company refused to say what was the exceptional technical reason that led to the delay of the flight, citing the fact that it cannot provide information or documents of a confidential nature to passengers, such as technical or operational documents, that demonstrate the extraordinary circumstance of the flight.

The voucher can only be granted with the written consent of the affected passenger

Later, a few days after HotNews requested by email a point of view from Animawings, the company's representatives contacted Ionel Olteanu and offered him vouchers for compensation of 250 euros/passenger. Under EU law, this alternative form of compensation can only be granted with the written consent of the affected passenger. Ionel Olteanu told HotNews that he refuses Animawings' offer.

Among the options a person has to recover their money is to contact a company that specializes in flight compensation recovery. HotNews contacted Claim Bee, which specializes in flight compensation recovery, to see if Animawings' arguments have any legal basis.

“Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 establishes that the obligation to grant compensation rests with the “actual air carrier”, i.e. the operator who has the operational responsibility for the flight. The mere fact that the flight was operated with an aircraft belonging to another company or that another operator was used does not, in itself, exclude the obligation to compensate. The quality of the actual air carrier is determined by the operational responsibility and the contractual relationship with the passenger, not the property of the aircraft or the crew”, answered the specialists consulted by HotNews.

“I have encountered many similar cases with other air operators”

Claim Bee representatives say that, in their experience, Animawings “quite frequently” invokes arguments such as the existence of an “extraordinary technical circumstance” or the fact that the flight was operated by another company.

“I have encountered many similar cases, not only with this company, but also with other airline operators. In practice, such responses are often used to discourage passengers from continuing their actions or to prolong the procedure, shifting the responsibility between different parties involved – the airline, the operator who operated the aircraft or the travel agency. Most of the time, the reason given is a technical one, and the company tries to present it as an 'extraordinary circumstance', although the jurisprudence European data show that most common technical problems do not fall into this category,” say Claim Bee specialists.

Also, recovery company representatives say, airlines frequently cite the confidentiality of technical or operational documents when they refuse to provide details to passengers. However, the companies have technical logs and internal documents regarding the operation of the flight.

“The existence of such internal documents does not automatically establish that there was an 'extraordinary circumstance'. In the event of a dispute, it is the court that can analyze the relevant documents and assess whether the technical problem invoked is serious enough to constitute an extraordinary circumstance within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004.”

“There are already several court cases for the said flight”

Air Claim, the second company specialized in flight compensation recoveries consulted by HotNews, says that situations like that of Ionel Olteanu are encountered.

“We have had several cases regarding delays or cancellations operated by Animawings for which passengers have used our services to recover the compensation provided for by Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004. There are already several court cases for the said flight.”

Specialists say that, in their experience, the Animawings company does not opt ​​for the amicable payment of damages, and often ends up in court.

“After the pronouncement of the court decision, the airlines are obliged to respect the court's decision, and in the situation where the payment is not made voluntarily, enforcement may be resorted to through a bailiff”, Air Claim representatives also said.

HotNews tried to get a point of view from Animawings on the matter, but by the time of this article, the company had not responded to the request.