Vibecode AirHelp
track this build5 steps, step by step0%KINDA · weekend project
A useful personal organizer is buildable, but AirHelp is more than the visible intake form. A local app can assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize evidence, draft letters, and track deadlines. It cannot responsibly reproduce AirHelp's managed airline correspondence, cross-jurisdictional legal judgment, funded court action, and professional accountability in one sitting. This is a credible personal substitute for straightforward self-service claims, not a full replacement.
the project pack4 files · fastest path to a working personal build
You are building a lean indie version of AirHelp. Create the following project files first, then implement the application by following them. Keep the files updated as decisions change. Do not collapse this into a single README or prompt. ===== README.md ===== # AirHelp indie build ## Goal Build the smallest trustworthy replacement for the core AirHelp workflow for one developer or a tiny team. ## Scope Assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize journey facts and evidence, estimate compensation, generate draft letters, and track submission and escalation deadlines locally. ## Quick start 1. Install the documented dependencies. 2. Copy `.env.example` to `.env`. 3. Run the development command chosen during implementation. 4. Complete the acceptance checks in `BUILD_PLAN.md`. ## Honest limits This build deliberately does not replace: - AirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation - case-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions - lawyer access and funded legal action under a no-win, no-fee model - commercial flight, weather, and disruption data used to validate claims - professional support and accountability when a claim becomes contested If those capabilities are essential, use ClaimSolo instead of pretending the gap is solved. ===== AGENTS.md ===== # Agent instructions - Optimize for a working, understandable weekend build. - Prefer the fewest moving parts that satisfy the brief. - Do not invent cryptography, security guarantees, APIs, or compliance claims. - Keep secrets out of source control and logs. - Add focused tests for destructive, security-sensitive, and data-loss paths. - Run the project checks before declaring the build complete. - Record any deliberate shortcut in the README under "Tradeoffs". ===== BUILD_PLAN.md ===== # Build plan ## Original build brief Build me a local flight-compensation claim organizer to replace AirHelp for self-service claims. Requirements: - Node 22 + Express + better-sqlite3, server-rendered pages on localhost, no frontend framework; all data in one SQLite file plus a local uploads folder. - Model passengers, bookings, multi-segment journeys, disruptions (delay, cancellation, denied boarding, missed connection), claims, evidence files, and deadlines. - Deterministic EC261 and UK261 eligibility rules in one versioned rules module: given the journey facts, output eligible / not eligible / needs manual review, the compensation band (250/400/600 EUR distance tiers), and the article relied on. Show which facts triggered which rule branch. - Compute great-circle distance from airport coordinates and timezone-safe arrival delay from user-entered flight details; no commercial flight-data API. - Attach evidence (tickets, emails, receipts) as local files on a chronological claim timeline. - Generate editable draft letters to the airline and the national enforcement body from templates; never send anything automatically. - Track stages (preparing, submitted, escalated to authority or ADR, resolved) with due dates, exported as an ICS file for my calendar. - Export a whole claim as JSON and Markdown so nothing is trapped in the app. - Say plainly in the UI and README: decision support, not legal advice; verify current rules and limitation periods yourself. - Out of scope: automatic submission, airline negotiation, lawyer engagement, court filing, accounts, sync. The staff, legal funding, and accountability are the part you cannot build. - README: setup, where data lives, backup by copying the SQLite file and uploads. ## Required capabilities - Node.js 22 - modern browser - SQLite - user-entered flight, passenger, and evidence data - current official passenger-rights sources ## Delivery order 1. Scaffold the smallest runnable application and document its commands. 2. Implement the primary data model and core workflow. 3. Add validation, safe failure states, and persistence. 4. Cover the critical path with automated tests. 5. Exercise a clean install from the README and fix every missing step. ## Done when - A new user can go from clone to first successful workflow using only the README. - The core workflow works without paid infrastructure unless the brief requires it. - Tests cover the highest-risk behavior. - Known limitations are explicit rather than hidden. ===== .env.example ===== # Copy to .env and document every variable when it is introduced. # Never put real credentials in this file. APP_ENV=development # Add only values required by the selected implementation.
You are building a lean indie version of AirHelp. Create the following project files first, then implement the application by following them. Keep the files updated as decisions change. Do not collapse this into a single README or prompt. ===== README.md ===== # AirHelp indie build ## Goal Build the smallest trustworthy replacement for the core AirHelp workflow for one developer or a tiny team. ## Scope Assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize journey facts and evidence, estimate compensation, generate draft letters, and track submission and escalation deadlines locally. ## Quick start 1. Install the documented dependencies. 2. Copy `.env.example` to `.env`. 3. Run the development command chosen during implementation. 4. Complete the acceptance checks in `BUILD_PLAN.md`. ## Honest limits This build deliberately does not replace: - AirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation - case-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions - lawyer access and funded legal action under a no-win, no-fee model - commercial flight, weather, and disruption data used to validate claims - professional support and accountability when a claim becomes contested If those capabilities are essential, use ClaimSolo instead of pretending the gap is solved. ===== AGENTS.md ===== # Agent instructions - Optimize for a working, understandable weekend build. - Prefer the fewest moving parts that satisfy the brief. - Do not invent cryptography, security guarantees, APIs, or compliance claims. - Keep secrets out of source control and logs. - Add focused tests for destructive, security-sensitive, and data-loss paths. - Run the project checks before declaring the build complete. - Record any deliberate shortcut in the README under "Tradeoffs". ===== BUILD_PLAN.md ===== # Build plan ## Original build brief Build me a local flight-compensation claim organizer to replace AirHelp for self-service claims. Requirements: - Node 22 + Express + better-sqlite3, server-rendered pages on localhost, no frontend framework; all data in one SQLite file plus a local uploads folder. - Model passengers, bookings, multi-segment journeys, disruptions (delay, cancellation, denied boarding, missed connection), claims, evidence files, and deadlines. - Deterministic EC261 and UK261 eligibility rules in one versioned rules module: given the journey facts, output eligible / not eligible / needs manual review, the compensation band (250/400/600 EUR distance tiers), and the article relied on. Show which facts triggered which rule branch. - Compute great-circle distance from airport coordinates and timezone-safe arrival delay from user-entered flight details; no commercial flight-data API. - Attach evidence (tickets, emails, receipts) as local files on a chronological claim timeline. - Generate editable draft letters to the airline and the national enforcement body from templates; never send anything automatically. - Track stages (preparing, submitted, escalated to authority or ADR, resolved) with due dates, exported as an ICS file for my calendar. - Export a whole claim as JSON and Markdown so nothing is trapped in the app. - Say plainly in the UI and README: decision support, not legal advice; verify current rules and limitation periods yourself. - Out of scope: automatic submission, airline negotiation, lawyer engagement, court filing, accounts, sync. The staff, legal funding, and accountability are the part you cannot build. - README: setup, where data lives, backup by copying the SQLite file and uploads. ## Required capabilities - Node.js 22 - modern browser - SQLite - user-entered flight, passenger, and evidence data - current official passenger-rights sources ## Delivery order 1. Scaffold the smallest runnable application and document its commands. 2. Implement the primary data model and core workflow. 3. Add validation, safe failure states, and persistence. 4. Cover the critical path with automated tests. 5. Exercise a clean install from the README and fix every missing step. ## Done when - A new user can go from clone to first successful workflow using only the README. - The core workflow works without paid infrastructure unless the brief requires it. - Tests cover the highest-risk behavior. - Known limitations are explicit rather than hidden. ===== .env.example ===== # Copy to .env and document every variable when it is introduced. # Never put real credentials in this file. APP_ENV=development # Add only values required by the selected implementation.
You are building a production product version of AirHelp. Create the following project files first, then implement the application by following them. Keep the files updated as decisions change. Do not collapse this into a single README or prompt. ===== PRODUCT.md ===== # AirHelp product brief ## Problem A useful personal organizer is buildable, but AirHelp is more than the visible intake form. A local app can assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize evidence, draft letters, and track deadlines. It cannot responsibly reproduce AirHelp's managed airline correspondence, cross-jurisdictional legal judgment, funded court action, and professional accountability in one sitting. This is a credible personal substitute for straightforward self-service claims, not a full replacement. ## Product outcome Assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize journey facts and evidence, estimate compensation, generate draft letters, and track submission and escalation deadlines locally. ## Target user A serious builder who needs a maintainable product foundation rather than a one-off demo. ## Required capabilities - Node.js 22 - modern browser - SQLite - user-entered flight, passenger, and evidence data - current official passenger-rights sources ## Explicit non-goals for v1 - AirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation - case-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions - lawyer access and funded legal action under a no-win, no-fee model - commercial flight, weather, and disruption data used to validate claims - professional support and accountability when a claim becomes contested ## Success criteria - The primary workflow is measurable end to end. - Setup is reproducible in a clean environment. - Failure, recovery, and support paths are documented. - Product claims match what the implementation actually guarantees. ===== ARCHITECTURE.md ===== # Architecture ## Starting brief Build me a local flight-compensation claim organizer to replace AirHelp for self-service claims. Requirements: - Node 22 + Express + better-sqlite3, server-rendered pages on localhost, no frontend framework; all data in one SQLite file plus a local uploads folder. - Model passengers, bookings, multi-segment journeys, disruptions (delay, cancellation, denied boarding, missed connection), claims, evidence files, and deadlines. - Deterministic EC261 and UK261 eligibility rules in one versioned rules module: given the journey facts, output eligible / not eligible / needs manual review, the compensation band (250/400/600 EUR distance tiers), and the article relied on. Show which facts triggered which rule branch. - Compute great-circle distance from airport coordinates and timezone-safe arrival delay from user-entered flight details; no commercial flight-data API. - Attach evidence (tickets, emails, receipts) as local files on a chronological claim timeline. - Generate editable draft letters to the airline and the national enforcement body from templates; never send anything automatically. - Track stages (preparing, submitted, escalated to authority or ADR, resolved) with due dates, exported as an ICS file for my calendar. - Export a whole claim as JSON and Markdown so nothing is trapped in the app. - Say plainly in the UI and README: decision support, not legal advice; verify current rules and limitation periods yourself. - Out of scope: automatic submission, airline negotiation, lawyer engagement, court filing, accounts, sync. The staff, legal funding, and accountability are the part you cannot build. - README: setup, where data lives, backup by copying the SQLite file and uploads. ## Boundaries Separate the product into replaceable modules for interface, application logic, persistence, external integrations, and operational concerns. Keep domain logic independent from delivery frameworks and vendors. ## Production baseline - Configuration: validated at startup with safe local defaults where possible. - Security: least privilege, input validation, secret redaction, rate limits on abuse-prone paths, and no invented security primitives. - Data: explicit schema and migrations, transactional writes where integrity matters, backup and restore instructions. - Integrations: adapters around third-party providers, idempotent webhook or job processing, bounded retries, and timeouts. - Observability: structured logs with request or operation IDs, an error-tracking hook, and health/readiness checks where a server exists. - Quality: unit tests for domain rules, integration tests at module boundaries, and one end-to-end critical-path test. ## Decision records For each major dependency, document why it was chosen, its failure mode, and how it can be replaced. Do not introduce infrastructure until a requirement justifies it. ===== AGENTS.md ===== # Agent instructions - Read `PRODUCT.md` and `ARCHITECTURE.md` before changing code. - Implement milestone by milestone; keep each change reviewable and leave the application runnable. - Treat authentication, payments, encryption, imports, webhooks, and destructive actions as high-risk boundaries when present. - Never invent cryptography or silently weaken a requirement to make a test pass. - Use provider interfaces for external services and deterministic fakes in tests. - Add migrations and rollback or recovery notes for persistent data changes. - Log useful operational context without credentials, tokens, passwords, or personal data. - Update documentation and run all checks before completing a milestone. ===== MILESTONES.md ===== # Delivery milestones ## M0 — Decisions and scaffold - Confirm the runtime, persistence model, threat boundaries, and deployment target. - Create a reproducible local environment and continuous checks. ## M1 — Core workflow - Implement the smallest end-to-end product path with validation and tests. - Keep integrations behind interfaces. ## M2 — Trust layer - Add secure failure behavior, recovery paths, audit-relevant events, and data safeguards. - Test abuse cases and destructive operations. ## M3 — Operability - Add structured logs, error reporting hooks, health signals, backup/restore documentation, and deployment configuration. ## M4 — Release gate - Run a clean-install test, critical-path end-to-end test, dependency review, and documented rollback exercise. - Compare the shipped behavior with `PRODUCT.md` and publish remaining limitations. ===== OPERATIONS.md ===== # Operations ## Before release - Validate configuration and secrets at startup. - Define backup, restore, and rollback procedures and test them. - Document logs, error tracking, health signals, and alert ownership. - Set dependency update and vulnerability review expectations. ## Incident checklist 1. Contain the issue without destroying evidence or user data. 2. Record the timeline and affected scope. 3. Rotate exposed secrets and revoke compromised sessions or credentials. 4. Restore from a verified source when needed. 5. Document the root cause, remediation, and regression test. ## Launch constraint Do not market omitted AirHelp capabilities as implemented. The v1 non-goals in `PRODUCT.md` remain user-visible limitations until they are deliberately delivered.
README.md
# AirHelp indie build ## Goal Build the smallest trustworthy replacement for the core AirHelp workflow for one developer or a tiny team. ## Scope Assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize journey facts and evidence, estimate compensation, generate draft letters, and track submission and escalation deadlines locally. ## Quick start 1. Install the documented dependencies. 2. Copy `.env.example` to `.env`. 3. Run the development command chosen during implementation. 4. Complete the acceptance checks in `BUILD_PLAN.md`. ## Honest limits This build deliberately does not replace: - AirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation - case-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions - lawyer access and funded legal action under a no-win, no-fee model - commercial flight, weather, and disruption data used to validate claims - professional support and accountability when a claim becomes contested If those capabilities are essential, use ClaimSolo instead of pretending the gap is solved.
AGENTS.md
# Agent instructions - Optimize for a working, understandable weekend build. - Prefer the fewest moving parts that satisfy the brief. - Do not invent cryptography, security guarantees, APIs, or compliance claims. - Keep secrets out of source control and logs. - Add focused tests for destructive, security-sensitive, and data-loss paths. - Run the project checks before declaring the build complete. - Record any deliberate shortcut in the README under "Tradeoffs".
BUILD_PLAN.md
# Build plan ## Original build brief Build me a local flight-compensation claim organizer to replace AirHelp for self-service claims. Requirements: - Node 22 + Express + better-sqlite3, server-rendered pages on localhost, no frontend framework; all data in one SQLite file plus a local uploads folder. - Model passengers, bookings, multi-segment journeys, disruptions (delay, cancellation, denied boarding, missed connection), claims, evidence files, and deadlines. - Deterministic EC261 and UK261 eligibility rules in one versioned rules module: given the journey facts, output eligible / not eligible / needs manual review, the compensation band (250/400/600 EUR distance tiers), and the article relied on. Show which facts triggered which rule branch. - Compute great-circle distance from airport coordinates and timezone-safe arrival delay from user-entered flight details; no commercial flight-data API. - Attach evidence (tickets, emails, receipts) as local files on a chronological claim timeline. - Generate editable draft letters to the airline and the national enforcement body from templates; never send anything automatically. - Track stages (preparing, submitted, escalated to authority or ADR, resolved) with due dates, exported as an ICS file for my calendar. - Export a whole claim as JSON and Markdown so nothing is trapped in the app. - Say plainly in the UI and README: decision support, not legal advice; verify current rules and limitation periods yourself. - Out of scope: automatic submission, airline negotiation, lawyer engagement, court filing, accounts, sync. The staff, legal funding, and accountability are the part you cannot build. - README: setup, where data lives, backup by copying the SQLite file and uploads. ## Required capabilities - Node.js 22 - modern browser - SQLite - user-entered flight, passenger, and evidence data - current official passenger-rights sources ## Delivery order 1. Scaffold the smallest runnable application and document its commands. 2. Implement the primary data model and core workflow. 3. Add validation, safe failure states, and persistence. 4. Cover the critical path with automated tests. 5. Exercise a clean install from the README and fix every missing step. ## Done when - A new user can go from clone to first successful workflow using only the README. - The core workflow works without paid infrastructure unless the brief requires it. - Tests cover the highest-risk behavior. - Known limitations are explicit rather than hidden.
.env.example
# Copy to .env and document every variable when it is introduced. # Never put real credentials in this file. APP_ENV=development # Add only values required by the selected implementation.
PRODUCT.md
# AirHelp product brief ## Problem A useful personal organizer is buildable, but AirHelp is more than the visible intake form. A local app can assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize evidence, draft letters, and track deadlines. It cannot responsibly reproduce AirHelp's managed airline correspondence, cross-jurisdictional legal judgment, funded court action, and professional accountability in one sitting. This is a credible personal substitute for straightforward self-service claims, not a full replacement. ## Product outcome Assess EC261 and UK261 eligibility, organize journey facts and evidence, estimate compensation, generate draft letters, and track submission and escalation deadlines locally. ## Target user A serious builder who needs a maintainable product foundation rather than a one-off demo. ## Required capabilities - Node.js 22 - modern browser - SQLite - user-entered flight, passenger, and evidence data - current official passenger-rights sources ## Explicit non-goals for v1 - AirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation - case-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions - lawyer access and funded legal action under a no-win, no-fee model - commercial flight, weather, and disruption data used to validate claims - professional support and accountability when a claim becomes contested ## Success criteria - The primary workflow is measurable end to end. - Setup is reproducible in a clean environment. - Failure, recovery, and support paths are documented. - Product claims match what the implementation actually guarantees.
ARCHITECTURE.md
# Architecture ## Starting brief Build me a local flight-compensation claim organizer to replace AirHelp for self-service claims. Requirements: - Node 22 + Express + better-sqlite3, server-rendered pages on localhost, no frontend framework; all data in one SQLite file plus a local uploads folder. - Model passengers, bookings, multi-segment journeys, disruptions (delay, cancellation, denied boarding, missed connection), claims, evidence files, and deadlines. - Deterministic EC261 and UK261 eligibility rules in one versioned rules module: given the journey facts, output eligible / not eligible / needs manual review, the compensation band (250/400/600 EUR distance tiers), and the article relied on. Show which facts triggered which rule branch. - Compute great-circle distance from airport coordinates and timezone-safe arrival delay from user-entered flight details; no commercial flight-data API. - Attach evidence (tickets, emails, receipts) as local files on a chronological claim timeline. - Generate editable draft letters to the airline and the national enforcement body from templates; never send anything automatically. - Track stages (preparing, submitted, escalated to authority or ADR, resolved) with due dates, exported as an ICS file for my calendar. - Export a whole claim as JSON and Markdown so nothing is trapped in the app. - Say plainly in the UI and README: decision support, not legal advice; verify current rules and limitation periods yourself. - Out of scope: automatic submission, airline negotiation, lawyer engagement, court filing, accounts, sync. The staff, legal funding, and accountability are the part you cannot build. - README: setup, where data lives, backup by copying the SQLite file and uploads. ## Boundaries Separate the product into replaceable modules for interface, application logic, persistence, external integrations, and operational concerns. Keep domain logic independent from delivery frameworks and vendors. ## Production baseline - Configuration: validated at startup with safe local defaults where possible. - Security: least privilege, input validation, secret redaction, rate limits on abuse-prone paths, and no invented security primitives. - Data: explicit schema and migrations, transactional writes where integrity matters, backup and restore instructions. - Integrations: adapters around third-party providers, idempotent webhook or job processing, bounded retries, and timeouts. - Observability: structured logs with request or operation IDs, an error-tracking hook, and health/readiness checks where a server exists. - Quality: unit tests for domain rules, integration tests at module boundaries, and one end-to-end critical-path test. ## Decision records For each major dependency, document why it was chosen, its failure mode, and how it can be replaced. Do not introduce infrastructure until a requirement justifies it.
AGENTS.md
# Agent instructions - Read `PRODUCT.md` and `ARCHITECTURE.md` before changing code. - Implement milestone by milestone; keep each change reviewable and leave the application runnable. - Treat authentication, payments, encryption, imports, webhooks, and destructive actions as high-risk boundaries when present. - Never invent cryptography or silently weaken a requirement to make a test pass. - Use provider interfaces for external services and deterministic fakes in tests. - Add migrations and rollback or recovery notes for persistent data changes. - Log useful operational context without credentials, tokens, passwords, or personal data. - Update documentation and run all checks before completing a milestone.
MILESTONES.md
# Delivery milestones ## M0 — Decisions and scaffold - Confirm the runtime, persistence model, threat boundaries, and deployment target. - Create a reproducible local environment and continuous checks. ## M1 — Core workflow - Implement the smallest end-to-end product path with validation and tests. - Keep integrations behind interfaces. ## M2 — Trust layer - Add secure failure behavior, recovery paths, audit-relevant events, and data safeguards. - Test abuse cases and destructive operations. ## M3 — Operability - Add structured logs, error reporting hooks, health signals, backup/restore documentation, and deployment configuration. ## M4 — Release gate - Run a clean-install test, critical-path end-to-end test, dependency review, and documented rollback exercise. - Compare the shipped behavior with `PRODUCT.md` and publish remaining limitations.
OPERATIONS.md
# Operations ## Before release - Validate configuration and secrets at startup. - Define backup, restore, and rollback procedures and test them. - Document logs, error tracking, health signals, and alert ownership. - Set dependency update and vulnerability review expectations. ## Incident checklist 1. Contain the issue without destroying evidence or user data. 2. Record the timeline and affected scope. 3. Rotate exposed secrets and revoke compromised sessions or credentials. 4. Restore from a verified source when needed. 5. Document the root cause, remediation, and regression test. ## Launch constraint Do not market omitted AirHelp capabilities as implemented. The v1 non-goals in `PRODUCT.md` remain user-visible limitations until they are deliberately delivered.
$ choose a build depth, inspect the files, then open the complete pack in your agent
People pay AirHelp to transfer the work, uncertainty, follow-up, and legal escalation to a specialist on a no-win, no-fee basis. A local tool can organize a straightforward self-service claim, but it does not negotiate with the airline, fund litigation, or take professional responsibility for a contested case.
xAirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation
xcase-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions
xlawyer access and funded legal action under a no-win, no-fee model
xcommercial flight, weather, and disruption data used to validate claims
xprofessional support and accountability when a claim becomes contested
share on X ↗"I just replaced AirHelp with one prompt"
AirHelp pricing
| plan | monthly | annual (per mo) | what you get |
|---|---|---|---|
| no win, no fee | custom | — | $0 upfront; AirHelp keeps 35% of successfully recovered flight compensation |
| airhelp+ single trip protection | custom | — | 1 trip, including outbound, return, and any connecting flights |
| airhelp+ lite | — | $2.88/user | 1 year of membership; the official fee list does not publish a numeric trip allowance |
| airhelp+ smart / protect 3 trips | — | $3.84/user | 3 registered trips/year; €100 disruption payout, €200 missed-connection payout, and €100 baggage payout |
| airhelp+ pro / protect 9 trips | — | $9.61/user | 9 registered trips/year; €100 disruption payout, €200 missed-connection payout, and €100 baggage payout |
| airhelp+ usa comfort | — | $15/user | 6 registered trips/year; $200 fast disruption payout plus eligible compensation claims |
| airhelp+ usa pro | — | $20.83/user | 9 registered trips/year; $200 fast disruption payout plus eligible compensation claims |
free tierEligibility and information checks cost $0; an unsuccessful compensation claim costs $0; there is no free AirHelp+ membership.
billingsuccess-fee claim service, one-time single-trip protection, or annual AirHelp+ membership; no monthly AirHelp+ plan
hidden costsSuccessful claims lose 35%; legal action adds another 15% (up to 50% total, used in about 3% of cases). Goodwill claims cost $29.99 unless recovery is below $30 or 3,000 loyalty points. Membership benefits may require registration at least 48 hours before departure; bank/FX fees can reduce payouts.
verified 2026-08-14 · source ↗
Vibecode AirHelp
Kinda. The core of AirHelp is buildable in a weekend with the prompt on this page, but there are real gaps: AirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation, case-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions. Read the honest list above before committing.
How much does AirHelp cost?
AirHelp's pricing is usage-based or varies by plan · AirHelp deducts a 35% service fee from recovered compensation. If legal action is required, it deducts an additional 15%..
What do I lose by replacing AirHelp?
Honestly: AirHelp staff handling airline correspondence and negotiation; case-specific legal judgment across jurisdictions; lawyer access and funded legal action under a no-win, no-fee model; commercial flight, weather, and disruption data used to validate claims; professional support and accountability when a claim becomes contested. If any of those are load-bearing for you, keep paying.
Is there an open-source alternative to AirHelp?
Yes: ClaimSolo (Open-source, local-first personal workspace for assessing, documenting, and tracking EC261 and UK261 flight claims.). Using prior art is also vibecoding; the prompt is for when you want it exactly your way.