Last weekend’s meltdown of BA’s computer systems brought the EU’s rules on compensation for delayed or cancelled flights sharply into focus. Under those rules, which came into force in 2005, EU airlines and those flying in and out of the EU, are obliged to pay for meals and accommodation to passengers who are delayed for a significant time or overnight. And they are also required to offer additional cash compensation when the delay is the airline’s fault. (This means that they don’t have to pay out for hold ups or cancellations caused by air traffic control strikes or bad weather, for example). The amounts due vary from 200-600 euros depending on the length of the flight and of the delay.

Telegraph logo This video content is no longer available To watch The Telegraph's latest video content please visit youtube.com/telegraph

Although they have been in force for 12 years, the regulations have had a troubled history and are still causing problems. In fact, the failure of airlines generally to recognise their responsibilities over the EU compensation rules has been a minor scandal. At first they tried to ignore them, then they tried to wriggle out of many of the provisions - claiming for example that delays caused by a technical fault with a plane shouldn’t be covered. Only after repeated test cases in national and European courts have they grudgingly started to honour payments with reasonable consistency, and even then one of the most common complaints we receive from readers is the failure of airlines to respond to claims for delay or cancellation compensation.

This reluctance to embrace the rules has opened up a market for claims companies which specialise in helping passengers win their rightful compensation. That means of course that anyone who resorts to using one will lose a large chunk of the payment - usually more than 25 per cent of the overall amount. How is that good either for the airlines or for passengers?

Despite their generally appalling record on paying out, I do have some sympathies with airlines over this issue, however. The essential problem is that the EU rules very often look far too penal. I’m all for giving airlines a strong incentive to improve their punctuality and recognise their responsibilities towards their customers. And of course, they must always be required to arrange and pay for accommodation and meals for passengers who are stranded or delayed. But in the vast majority of cases it strikes me as faintly ridiculous that an airline has to pay out, for example 250 euros in compensation for a two hour delay on a short haul flight, when the passenger might have only paid 50 euros for their ticket. It is another example of our growing compensation culture, simply adding a very significant extra cost, and one which can only push up the cost airfares.

Last weekend was an exception, however. In the light of the chaos and very long delays caused by BA’s computers last weekend, the EU compensation levels - even though BA faces a bill estimated at about £150m - actually seem woefully insufficient, especially for those who have lost days of their holiday, were unable to return home to work, missed family events, honeymoons or celebrations and in the meantime endured hours of uncertainty and anxiety. In fact, so great was the misery endured by so many passengers on one of the busiest weekends of the year, I think BA would do well to offer its long-suffering customers free flights as a gesture of apology and good will.