The reality here is a high proportion of travellers are relatively inexperienced and not aware of their rights when airlines let them down. There is also a clear financial incentive to the airlines to be less than transparent on passenger rights and/or to deny legitimate claims and/or generally game the system by requiring some application process when they already know who was affected.
Yes this applies to all airlines, but this is the BA board and we are discussing implications for BA. And as we all know BA are as good at gaming the system as anyone else. After all it took a complaint from the insurance bodies to stop BA trying to unload part of its liabilities from the recent debacle on the insurers. Plus whilst some people were paid quickly a perusal of the thread shows there were others given inaccurate info by Twitter team or who initially had claims denied when BA tried unsuccessfully to find an 'exceptional' get out (power surge wasn't it?)
The only way this will be addressed is a tightening of legislation even further. In the same way that if airlines had treated customers fairly there would have been no need for EC261 in the first place. So I understand fully where Which is coming from.
In this context I find the comments above about expecting people to employ no win no fee type as to chase claims a bit silly, as is the suggestion that people are too lazy to claim. I know the drill on FT, however stop and pause for a minute and appreciate that this really doesn't help those who are not aware of their rights.
This is not unique to airlines though. I believe for Delay Repay on the railways the train companies automatically receive money from government when there is network disruption but only pay out to specific claims at around 20% of journeys to the point where the rail companies actually benefit.