Rocky Neufeld had settled into his seat on a WestJet flight from Edmonton to Fort McMurray, Alta., in February 2025 when a gate agent boarded the plane with unexpected news.

“The person said, ‘This flight’s cancelled,'” recalled the Winnipeg resident. “‘We need the tail [aircraft] for another flight.'”

Neufeld and about 10 other passengers were told to get off the plane. 

Then came the email.  

WestJet told passengers the cancellation was due to “unplanned aircraft maintenance” required for safety.

That did not match what he had just been told on the plane. And it meant WestJet didn’t have to pay compensation.

Under Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR), airlines only have to compensate passengers if a flight is cancelled, delayed or disrupted for reasons within carriers’ control. However, if there is a maintenance issue that could impact safety, they don’t have to pay. 

• Got a story you want investigated? Contact Erica and the Go Public team gopublic@cbc.ca

One air passenger advocate says cases like Neufeld’s are far from isolated. 

“Passengers are not getting any meaningful answers,” said Gábor Lukács, founder of the non-profit Air Passenger Rights. “I’ve seen a number of cases where there are very good reasons to doubt the airline’s story.”

WestJet declined an interview request, did not respond to written questions from Go Public and did not return multiple voicemail messages.

‘It was just wrong’

After WestJet denied Neufeld’s initial compensation claim, he took the airline to small claims court.

As part of its defence, the company provided a maintenance report, stating the aircraft had been de-iced and that fluid had damaged a sensor.

There was just one problem: Neufeld — a licensed small plane pilot — said the plane was not de-iced while he was on it.

Meanwhile, using publicly available flight info, Neufeld and Lukács uncovered a different sequence of events.

Just eight minutes before Neufeld’s flight was cancelled, WestJet had reassigned the aircraft, which instead flew from Edmonton to Kelowna, B.C., and back that day. For Neufeld’s trip, the airline brought in a different plane — one with mechanical issues.

It was a game of “musical chairs” that the company did not disclose in court documents, said Lukács.

“It’s very serious misconduct, because WestJet had all the knowledge to tell the court, ‘We swapped the aircraft.’ They did not do that.”

A business decision, not a safety issue

As the court date approached last month, WestJet moved to settle the case.

Neufeld says the airline then changed its approach.

“They apologized,” he said. 

According to Neufeld, a WestJet lawyer told him another aircraft had broken down, and the company had made a business decision to cancel his flight and reassign the plane to a route with more passengers. 

Neufeld says he understands the operational choice. What he doesn’t accept is the lack of transparency.

“It was just wrong, misrepresenting what happened here.”

As part of the settlement negotiations, WestJet asked Neufeld to keep discussions confidential. But he said he thinks it’s important for people to know the airline acknowledged wrongdoing.

“I spoke out for the greater good,” he said. “If companies think what they’re doing is OK, they need to be told it’s not.”

Lukács said that while he’s glad to hear, according to Neufeld, the airline acknowledged the swap, he’s strongly opposed to anyone violating a promise of confidentiality.

2nd passenger, similar pattern

Tanmay Mehta contacted Go Public after WestJet cancelled the January flight on which he and his wife were booked, from Cancun to Calgary.

Like Neufeld, he received an email blaming “unplanned aircraft maintenance required for safety.” 

His compensation claim was also denied. But he was skeptical.

“A lot of friends have had a similar kind of situation, where they were told it was ‘unplanned maintenance,'” said Mehta, who is from Calgary. 

Mehta checked the flight records and learned the plane previously assigned to his flight was still flying that day, completing multiple routes.

“I could definitely see that the aircraft was not grounded for maintenance,” he said. “It was kind of heartbreaking for me to have these findings.”

Mehta wrote to WestJet with the new information. Hearing nothing, he wrote again two weeks later, but the denial held.

Flight records reviewed by Go Public shows that Mehta’s case was similar to Neufeld’s: WestJet swapped out the assigned aircraft for a different plane, then cancelled the flight about an hour later, claiming it was for unplanned maintenance.

“This is surprising,” said Mehta, who was unaware of the last-minute aircraft change. “This is definitely a big development.”

Critic says the system falls short

Lukács says it points to a broader problem. 

“Swapping aircraft is permissible,” he said. “Refusing to pay passengers compensation on the basis of a shell game with aircraft is fraudulent.”

WestJet declined to answer questions about Mehta’s case, including why the aircraft was changed shortly before cancellation.

The Canadian Transportation Agency has previously penalized airlines for failing to comply with the APPR. 

Over the last 13 months, that has included Porter Airlines, fined $90,500 for 20 violations, and Flair, fined $174,000 for 72 violations. WestJet was fined twice: $204,000 in February 2025 for various violations, and another $70,000 earlier this month for 35 violations.

But Lukács says these financial penalties are insignificant, calling the airlines’ failure to compensate passengers “an unlawful, unethical windfall.”

“The airline is able to keep the money, because the passenger just gives up … and doesn’t pursue their rights.”

Canada lags behind others

Lukács says Canada’s air passenger protection rules fall short of those in the European Union, where mechanical issues are generally considered part of normal airline operations and require compensation if they cause a cancellation.

In Canada, those same issues are often classified as safety-related, exempting airlines from payment.

“It’s very simple,” he said. “You can very quickly determine whether compensation is or isn’t owed to the passenger.”

He argues weak enforcement and “ongoing and massive airline lobbying efforts” have left Canada behind, with few financial consequences for rule-breakers.

“So the airline just keeps doing the same thing.”

What passengers can do

In the absence of stronger regulation, Lukács says passengers who are told their flights are cancelled due to a maintenance issue should press airlines for specifics — outlined on his website — including which aircraft was originally assigned, whether it was swapped and when any mechanical issues were identified and fixed. 

Because, he says, there’s a fundamental issue at play.

“We cannot really trust what the airlines are telling us as passengers.”