> the worst that can happen is being ordered to refund the original amount.

That just isn't true. The airlines often pretend that isn't the case, but just linking to, e.g., the site below usually make them pay without too much hassle.

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-right...

Certain EU airlines, particularly Lufthansa and TAP, don't pay up very easily unless you hold status.

Doesn't reflect well on the EU if they let companies get away with that. It's a law, and systematically ignoring them should anger the hell out of the EU. Since these are big corps based in Europe, perhaps they get a more lax treatment.

They count on people not having the energy to push through to get their money, but in my experience they pay as soon as they realise you know your rights and is dedicated enough. But it’s the main reason I never fly Lufthansa any more when I can avoid it.

Individual countries are usually left to enforce these laws on their own. Many EU countries are already subsidizing their national carriers in one way or another, so they aren't always keen to push passenger rights. For example Germany notably allowed Lufthansa to illegally hold customers' funds for more than a year after cancelling flights during COVID.

Those are passenger rights, a set of rules different from German laws of contract. Also, for cancellations there is no compensation if the flight was cancelled early enough or if the airline can prove exceptional circumstances.

All airlines starting or landing in Germany have to follow those laws. It’s inconsequential whether they are directly codified in German law or not. It’s correct that they aren’t without conditions, but I don’t think anyone think they should be. They have to compensate you if they cancel the flight less than 2 weeks before departure. I’ve gotten €600 twice after different delays or reroutings.

So while you can have opinions about the exact conditions, you can’t argue there are none.

There are services like Airhelp [1] which do the legal part for you, for a small cut. I've used them several times when flights were delayed.

1. https://www.airhelp.com/

The fact that there is an entire business model built around helping passengers claim their rights due to the reluctance of airlines to attend to their duties should already be an alarm signal.

There are sites that charge a fortune to fill an esta in on your behalf too. Just because a scam is successful doesn’t mean there’s a problem with the normal way.

Same with tax refunds in my country, where its doable online in like, a half hour.

You can pay a company to do it for you, and onboarding with them takes longer than a half hour.

I used them in the past and they worked, but a colleague told me I was being an idiot and should do it myself. He was right, at least with British Airways, there's an online form that you fill out and money appears in your account. It took the same amount of effort as Airhelp.

I would use them only after trying to do it yourself.

Does not work with low costs :) They'll just say 'extraordinary circumstances'.

My daughter was trying to come home from university this summer and they canceled her flight twice while she was in line at security. Guess what Wizzair said.

She has claims opened with Airhelp now, we'll see what happens.

I would only resort to services like that if your case is really stuck, in my experince (with 4 different airlines).

A quick e-mail to the airline with the order number, stating the expected flight plan, and comparing it with the actual flight plan and a calculated delay have always worked, even with the cheaper airlines.

"Small cut" was 30% in my last experience.

> the worst that can happen is being ordered to refund the original amount. Behaviour-correcting damages do not exist under German law.

Maybe if they want to change the laws anyway, this is what they should fix instead. In particular, there should be punitive damages for everything illegal that are high enough that it's almost never profitable to break the law even if you get away with it a significant proportion of the time.

Allowing punitive damages would be a major change to the foundations of German civil law. German law (mostly and traditionally) thinks of damages as a means to make the other party whole rather than to incentivise a certain behaviour of the injurer. Hence German law is utmost reluctant to give anyone more than they suffered in losses.

Adding some obscure consumer protection rule is a much less controversial change to the law.

The traditional German legal doctrine sees the enforcement of fair business practices rather in the hands of the authorities than in those of consumers. Of course, there is little evidence of this to work in this or similar contexts.

> Allowing punitive damages would be a major change to the foundations of German civil law.

There ARE punitive damages the airline has to pay you if they cancel or delay your flight. It's EU law. See the sibling comment.

For instance if they cancel or delay a flight over 1500 km in the EU you're entitled to 400 Euro compensation on top of cost of ticket and other expenses you had due to it.

That's not punitive though. That's to compensate the traveler for caused inconvenience. It also happens to work as some form of punishment yes, but it's by far not high enough to work as a deterrence.

You are correct that the provisions of EU law can be construed as punitive damages. That’s why I emphasised the German legal tradition. Also, those damages do not apply in all possible situations of cancelled flights and they do not punish withholding refunds for no reason. If the airline cancels three weeks prior and then refuses to pay, the EU law does not apply and the behaviour we would like to disincentivise is not to honour the refund claims rather than the cancellation.

> German law (mostly and traditionally) thinks of damages as a means to make the other party whole rather than to incentivise a certain behaviour of the injurer.

Does that include payment for time spent seeking a verdict?

Often but not invariably.

Well punishment is for Strafrecht.

And do you have evidence that the US style works? Or was that just a throwaway "of course the state doesn't work!" comment without justification?