Hello,
It's important to start by clarifying the current rules under Regulation 261/2004 of the European Parliament and Council and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
When an airline cancels a flight, it must SIMULTANEOUSLY offer the choice between:
- a refund
- re-routing "as soon as possible"
- or, if it suits the passenger better, re-routing at a later date.
Re-routing must be offered without any additional cost, even in a higher class, and must be provided "as soon as possible," whether through its own flights or those of another airline, even if it’s not part of the same alliance.
If the passenger opts for a refund, it must be processed within 7 days.
No compensation is due if the passenger is informed of the cancellation more than 14 days in advance. So, it’s not a good idea to let the airline know you’ve noticed the cancellation more than 14 days ahead.
That’s the theory.
In practice, you’ll find that Lufthansa blatantly violates these obligations (with everything useful, including forms, court submissions, and the judgment):
https://retardimportantavion.wordpress.com/2024/10/23/lufthansa-championne-du-refus-des-droits-des-passagers/In summary:
Lufthansa cancels a flight well in advance and doesn’t hesitate to claim, in the same message, that no re-routing is available—even when options exist.
After the passenger insists, Lufthansa eventually agrees to re-route but cancels it the very next day!
The passenger then requests a refund. Lufthansa ignores them. So, legal action is taken. Since Lufthansa is based in a different EU member state than where the passenger resides, the "European Small Claims Procedure" is used. This highly simplified process is done by mail.
Unsurprisingly, Lufthansa was ordered to refund the passenger (plus 200 € and legal costs) but chose to fight until the judgment was issued.
Yet, a month and a half later, Lufthansa still hadn’t complied with the ruling.
So, the passenger hires a judicial officer (the new term for bailiffs). Conveniently, there’s one in the same building as Lufthansa’s offices in France. The passenger advances 80 €. The judicial officer serves the judgment to their neighbor.
Things move quickly after that: the same day, Lufthansa refunds the canceled flight ticket. The passenger’s lawyer reminds Lufthansa’s lawyer that the additional 200 € is still owed. Lufthansa pays a few days later.
Then, a message is sent to Lufthansa’s lawyer reminding them that since their client was ordered to pay legal costs, they must reimburse the 80 € the passenger advanced for serving the judgment.
No response, so another reminder.
Still no response, so another reminder—this time specifying that the passenger would hire the judicial officer again, but for a bank account seizure this time.
To be precise: in this case, the passenger would have had to advance 150 € to the judicial officer, with about 20 € remaining their responsibility after seizing Lufthansa’s bank account.
It took a little more patience, but Lufthansa eventually reimbursed the 80 €.
The link above will soon be updated regarding these 80 €.
One clarification: the passenger requested a refund because they found another flight themselves at the same price.
But if they had only found a more expensive ticket, they wouldn’t have claimed a refund for the canceled flight. Instead, they would have demanded, as per their rights, reimbursement for the price difference—with the same certainty of success, as the legal texts on these matters are "clear-cut."
The only real challenge is patience, especially when dealing with Lufthansa—the champion of resisting passenger rights.
Best regards
