Yes, let me just expand on this a bit, then I think it becomes clearer what is going on here. Montréal provides a framework for the relationships airlines have with each other and with passengers, mainly to limit their financial exposure. There is a provision in there, which after inflation caps their total baggage limitation to around £1400 per passenger, but equally they have to provide that for lost luggage and the passenger's financial costs of delayed luggage (such as the cost of buying cosmetics and clothes). There is no "home" or "away" aspect to this, but there is a requirement that this reimbursement is for necessary costs to passengers, it's not compensation. Airlines then come up with a heap of extra requirements, some legit, some less so, to keep their costs down. One such extra requirement relates to "necessary costs" - if you are returning home there is an assumption that you have spare clothes and cosmetics at home. That assumption may not always be valid - here because you have no UK home, in other cases the delayed item may be your only pair of formal shoes and you need them for work - but then the onus switches to the airline to justify the assumption. If taken to CEDR or MCOL the focus goes back to Montréal's wording and away from any airline assumption. It's certainly true that some airlines do their best to not spend any extra monies here, which really is against the spirit of the Convention, but it doesn't justify made up extra policies.