How rights are verified

“Community-verified” is not a slogan here — it is a visible process. Two things back every answer on this site: the law it rests on, and the record of who checked the underlying facts.

1. Every claim cites the law

Compensation answers come from an open, audited rules engine that encodes the regulations directly — EU 261, UK 261, the Montreal Convention, Brazil ANAC 400, and US DOT rules. Each entitlement it returns is tagged with the exact article (e.g. Article 7 of EU 261, or §250.5 of 14 CFR) and a link to the official legal text. You can read the engine’s logic, its test cases, and its legal-reference notes line by line.

When the law changes, the change is made test-first: a failing test is written from the new rule, the code is updated to pass it, and the engine version is bumped. An interpretation change that would affect existing claims is treated as a major version change.

2. Every fact shows its verification state

Facts in the dataset — airline contacts, baggage rules, scenario outcomes — carry a provenance record, shown on the page as:

3. Contributions are reviewed, not trusted blindly

Edits move through a review queue. Contributor influence grows with a track record, higher tiers can approve routine changes, and disputes are resolved in public with the outcome recorded. Changes that reinterpret the law get aviation-lawyer review before they ship.

What this is not

This is information to help you understand and pursue your own claim — it is not legal advice, and the engine evaluates only the inputs you give it. The authoritative source is always the regulation itself and the case law interpreting it; both are linked from each regulation guide.

Found a mistake?

Open an issue or a pull request in the public repository. Fixing it there fixes it for everyone who relies on the data.