Long-suffering air passengers wrongly turned down for compensation after a cancelled flight have a new, if rather unlikely hero - a Dutch air claims handler whose plane-tracking system can expose the lies airlines tell travellers.

Hendrik Noorderhaven is promising to get compensation for people whose claims have been rejected by airlines for what he can prove are spurious reasons.

Since 2005, passengers who have suffered long delays following flight cancellations have been entitled to compensation of between €250 (£200) and €600, depending on the length of the flight. Since the European Commission introduced the measures, the airline industry has found a number of ways to wriggle out of its obligations.

The most popular excuse is the cancellation has been caused by "extraordinary circumstances" or for "safety reasons", in which case the airline is not required to compensate people.

Critics accuse the airlines of almost universally adopting the "safety" excuse, even if the true reason is that they failed to book enough airplanes.

Thousands of passengers have been denied the money they are owed and fobbed off with excuses, according to Noorderhaven. He says the airlines have been getting away with it because, unlike in the US, no public body has logged the true reason flights are delayed or cancelled and regulators have proved toothless.

"It is virtually impossible for passengers to object to airline statements about technical circumstances. As a result, the airlines have been able to effectively hide behind the claim of extraordinary circumstance. But not any more," says Noorderhaven, who runs the Brummen-based website EUclaim.co.uk.

He has built a giant database which tracks every commercial airliner as it flies round the globe. It combines airport departure information, with the departure and expected arrival time data provided between the airlines to build a picture of where each plane is at any time. The result, he says, enables the company to check whether the excuse passengers are given for not being offered compensation is correct.

"If you look at the data behind cancellations, most flights are withdrawn in the summer when the weather is fine. In most cases it is simply because the airline hasn't got enough planes, so they cancel the flight that will cause them the fewest headaches. They tell passengers it's due to extraordinary circumstances, but really they are making a business decision."

He says that, over the past 12 months, EUclaim has received more than 40,000 enquiries in the Netherlands alone, and has claimed compensation for some 4,500 passengers - collecting an average of £865 per filed claim. His company takes 27% of the money returned on a no-win no-fee basis and, he says, it has taken on all the well-known airlines, including budget operators such as easyJet and Ryanair.

"You can see some airlines always choose certain flights to cancel. One major carrier, when it needs to cancel a flight, always cancels its flight to Beijing. Another airline, which has six flights to operate over a Thursday to Sunday, only ever has an average of 5.2 planes available. It's clear why they are cancelling flights - and it's not an extraordinary circumstance."

"In each case, we have won without the need to go to court. In the past, airlines have tried to claim their plane was grounded because of safety-related issues, but our database has shown it was flying between two other airports. Presented with this information, they have to pay up," he says.

Noorderhaven, who set up the service after spending years flying around the world as an international salesman, now regularly helps bring group actions against airlines that refuse to pay compensation. He says EC regulation 261/2004 clearly states airlines should inform passengers about their rights in case of an incident, but are failing to do so and in some cases are lying to passengers as to why they are not entitled to compensation.

This week Guardian Money was contacted by reader Matthew Searle. He was recently booked on an 8.15am BA flight from Manchester to London, but at 6am he received a text saying the flight had been cancelled. He was able to get on a flight with bmi but BA has since insisted he is not entitled to compensation even though the airline has admitted it cancelled the flight because it failed to provide enough cabin crew. He says he is now going to pursue BA through the small claims court to get the €125 to which he is entitled.

In recent years, Guardian Money has featured numerous cases of air passengers who have been forced to go to the small claims court to get money back - and many have done so successfully.

· To find out whether your claim will succeed, go to EUclaim.co.uk

Flight log backs up family

One woman endured a 30-hour delay to the start of her holiday after a flight was cancelled - and was told she and her family could not claim compensation

Samantha Baron, her partner and two children were booked on an XL Airways flight from Manchester to the Greek island of Kefalonia for a week's holiday in May. The senior lecturer in social services, who lives in Manchester, contacted Guardian Money to find out whether XL was right to refuse compensation.

Photograph: Christopher Thomond

"At the point of cancellation, XL were advising us to claim against our insurance. On returning from holiday, I emailed XL and received an email in which they absolved themselves of responsibility," she says.

XL told Guardian Money she was not entitled to any compensation in relation to EU regulations because the flight was delayed due to a "technical issue". After a delay exceeds five hours, customers can abandon their flight and get a ticket refund - but would not be entitled to a refund of accommodation costs, so most customers do not select this option.

In keeping with other airlines XL has adopted the defence that because the passengers eventually travelled, the flight was not cancelled. However, Hendrik Noorderhaven of EUclaim sees it differently. He sent details from the flight log which clearly shows the flight was cancelled.

He says: "XL couldn't use the original aircraft because maintenance was planned. Then they leased a plane that was unfit to land at the destination. They can't argue it was a delay, as they rescheduled the flight on a different plane the next day."

Samantha has used his website to claim €1,600 (£1,273), minus his 27%. We'll let you know how she gets on.

Right and wrongs of passenger charter

The EU's air passenger rights, in force since 2005, were designed to stop airlines cancelling flights and abandoning passengers at airports. They affect scheduled and charter flights starting or finishing in the EU.

Passengers bumped off flights that have been overbooked, or those whose flights are cancelled up to two weeks before departure, are entitled to €250-€600 (£200-£476) compensation - depending on the length of the flight - plus a refund of their ticket, if they choose not to fly.

If the flight is merely delayed, the airline must offer food and drinks after two hours, plus a hotel room if the delay is overnight. The passenger is entitled to have the fare reimbursed after a five-hour delay, if they then choose not to fly. The airline has the "exceptional circumstances" get-out clause, in which case compensation is not payable. Airlines have launched legal challenges to the legislation, all of which have failed. The main problem is that the law's wording is highly ambiguous, and the airlines have used this to deny claims made by passengers, aided and abetted by a lack of serious enforcement.

However, the new European transport commissioner Antonio Tajani is on record as saying he wants to make sure the rights are better enforced. The Italian, a former air traffic controller, is said to take a keen interest in this area - not least because his entourage suffered at the hands of a low-cost airline, which abandoned them and refused to pay compensation to which they were entitled.

m.brignall@guardian.co.uk