The low-cost airline Wizz Air was visited by a bailiff at Luton Airport. The background is that the carrier had not reimbursed a family's expenses despite a final judgment. The carrier canceled a flight from Luton to Faro in May 2022, but left the travelers with the additional costs.

According to the family concerned, this is how it happened: On the morning of the day of departure, the passengers found out that their flight to Faro would not take place. The carrier did not offer a replacement transport. Only rebooking on other Wizz Air flights would have been possible. According to those affected, the low-cost airline did not want to pay for any additional costs. They asked Wizz Air to assume the costs for alternative flights and additional costs such as transfers.

More than a month after the written request for the expenses of around 4.500 British pounds, there was no response from the low-cost airline. Now the father of the family lost his temper and filed a lawsuit with the responsible district court. A judgment was also issued, a so-called default judgment, because Wizz Air did not respond to the legal intervention.

With a final judgment in hand, it should be easy to get the airline to pay, but after more than seven months, the family still hasn't received the money. Now the passengers applied to the court for an execution by a bailiff. He then paid a visit to the counter at London Luton Airport and is said to have threatened that if payment was not made immediately, the airline's property could also be seized.

Ultimately, money flowed to the court organ in a timely manner, which then passed it on to the family. It is unclear whether the bailiff received cash on the spot or transferred Wizz Air to the escrow account via real-time transfer. In any case, after a flight cancellation caused by Wizz Air, the affected family had to go to execution by a bailiff in order to get the money they were entitled to according to the judgement.

Explaining the matter, the low-cost carrier said: "When things went wrong, we did not respond quickly enough to handle the high volume of customer claims that resulted from this disruption."