Our legislation, unlike European legislation, provides for three categories of flight disruptions, one of which includes disruptions attributable to the airline, but necessary for safety reasons. Should this “loophole” be closed, as it appears to be problematic in the resolution of complaints and compensation?
Sometimes an airline will say that a disruption was necessary for safety reasons, even though everything seemed to be working fine. We want to believe this, but the company does not provide details. Does this become a loophole? Safety is very important, that's very clear to everyone, but should we simplify things by removing this category or changing it?