Avianca rejected your compensation claim: what to do next
Do not answer an Avianca rejection until you know which issue it actually decides. A refusal may be correct because the Avianca-operated journey began outside Europe, or challengeable because it ignores the final destination, names only “operational reasons”, treats a routine technical defect as extraordinary, or relies on the marketing airline instead of the operating carrier. Match the response to the precise weakness, request evidence and then use the redress route linked to the departure.
Free eligibility check
Check your case in the form
Enter your route, date and type of disruption. We will check whether your case qualifies for a claim under EU 261/2004 or UK261.
What happened to your flight?
Claim up to €600 for a delayed or cancelled flight.
Choose the situation that applies to your flight:
Recheck the itinerary in the flight compensation calculator. A longer letter cannot repair a territorial claim that never fell within EU261 or UK261.
Sort the refusal into one of five boxes
Read the full answer and identify its main proposition. Avoid sending a generic rebuttal that never addresses it.
| Refusal basis | First verification |
|---|---|
| “Flight is not covered” | First departure, operator and continuous booking |
| “Delay under three hours” | Final destination and door-opening time |
| “Extraordinary circumstances” | Specific event, causal link and reasonable measures |
| “Wrong airline” | Operating carrier on affected segment |
| “Claim already settled” | Scope and validity of voucher or release accepted |
If the airline mentions several reasons, answer each in numbered form. Preserve the original response and its case number rather than opening a new, disconnected complaint.
A territorial rejection can be correct
Avianca is not an EU or UK carrier. An Avianca-operated Bogota-Madrid or Bogota-London journey normally does not qualify for EU261 or UK261. Destination, residence and payment currency do not change that. In this situation, examine Colombian passenger rules, the contract and the Montreal Convention instead of repeating a demand for EUR 600.
However, challenge the refusal if the continuous booking actually began at a covered European airport or if an EU or UK carrier operated the inbound sector. Attach the full ticket, not only the disrupted boarding pass. The direction guide maps these exceptions.
Final destination errors after Bogota
Avianca may focus on the delay of the first flight even though a missed connection caused a much later final arrival. On one directly connecting ticket from Europe through Bogota, EU case law allows the last ticketed destination to control the delay assessment.
Answer with the original itinerary, one-ticket proof, replacement boarding pass and final door-opening time. State both the first-flight delay and final delay so the distinction is explicit. If the onward ticket was purchased separately, do not conceal that fact; the final-destination argument is materially weaker.
Use the Bogota connection guide to organise the chronology.
Technical fault: ask what failed and why
Routine aircraft defects arising in normal airline operations are generally not extraordinary under EU case law. Avianca should identify the component or event, when it was found, why it caused this flight and what measures were attempted. “Technical reasons” alone does not establish the defence.
A hidden manufacturing defect announced by the manufacturer, sabotage or external damage can be different. Do not state that every defect must pay compensation. Ask for evidence that places the event on the correct side of the legal distinction.
Crew availability, aircraft rotation and ordinary maintenance planning usually require similarly specific proof. A safety decision may be proper while the underlying operational cause remains within airline control.
Weather and ATC need a route-specific chronology
Severe weather can be extraordinary, but ordinary rain or a generic forecast is not enough. Ask which airport, time window, restriction and aircraft rotation were affected. Compare that chronology with other operations only as supporting context; another flight departing does not prove identical operational conditions.
An external air-traffic-control restriction can also be extraordinary. Avianca must show that it caused the relevant disruption and that reasonable rerouting, reserve or recovery measures could not avoid the final delay. If the restriction ended but a later airline allocation decision added many hours, separate the phases.
Extraordinary circumstances remove only fixed compensation. Care, refund and rerouting rights on a covered journey continue.
Operating carrier and codeshare rejections
An AV number may be a marketing code. If another airline actually operated the affected flight, a refusal directing the passenger to that carrier may be correct. Conversely, an Avianca aircraft sold under a partner code can leave Avianca responsible as operator.
Attach the “operated by” line and boarding pass. Ask Avianca to identify the legal entity and aircraft operator it relies on. Do not pursue Star Alliance or Abra Group as though an alliance or holding company performed the flight. The operating-carrier guide explains Avianca's group structure and partner bookings.
A focused response format
Open with the case number and disputed conclusion. Then provide four short sections:
- protected journey and operating carrier;
- event and final arrival calculation;
- why the stated cause does not establish the defence, with an evidence request;
- amount per passenger and separately documented expenses.
Avoid accusing staff of dishonesty without evidence. Ask for operational records in proportionate terms and preserve your own proof. Give Avianca a clear opportunity to correct the result before external escalation.
Escalation follows the departure state
For Spanish-origin cases within scope, Avianca describes the AESA ADR process after a prior complaint; its contact page states that the decision is binding on the airline. For UK departures, use current CAA information to identify the applicable ADR or CAA route. For other EU departures, consult the current national enforcement-body list and national redress mechanism.
An enforcement authority may focus on compliance rather than ordering individual payment. Court jurisdiction and limitation periods require separate assessment. The claim and escalation guide explains what to send and when.
FAQ
Is “operational reasons” enough to reject compensation?
No. It does not identify a specific extraordinary event, causal link or reasonable measures. Request a precise explanation.
Can Avianca reject Bogota-Madrid because EU261 does not apply?
Usually yes when Avianca operated a journey beginning in Colombia, unless the complete itinerary or actual operator creates an exception.
Is every technical fault compensable?
No. Routine defects are generally within airline activity, while hidden manufacturing defects, sabotage or certain external damage can be extraordinary.
Does bad weather remove hotel reimbursement?
Not on a covered journey. Proven extraordinary weather may remove the fixed amount, but reasonable care remains due.
Should I open a new claim after every rejection?
Usually no. Reply with the existing case reference where possible so the evidence and chronology remain connected.