Denied Boarding due to 'faulty' passport

The point I'm making Brendan is that you're taking the view that the issue here is completely with the OP (or the husband of the OP) and that Aer Lingus don't have a case to answer. I disagree with that. I think there are obvious flaws in how Aer Lingus determine whether a passport is acceptable or not and if it takes someone to take a complaint against them then so be it, if it addresses this flaw I'd be fine with that. You say that the disagreement among Aer Lingus staff is irrelevant but to me it is very relevant. What if the OP got lucky with the Aer Lingus staff only to be turned away by Immigration in America? I'm sure most people would ensure their passport was acceptable once they knew what that meant.
 
"lamination was slighly separated from the paper"

This screams "forgery" at anyone looking at it. It's a well used 9 year old passport.

It's wrong to blame Aer Lingus. Do you think that the OP would pay the €20,000 fine imposed on Aer Lingus if they were turned back?
 
Brendan you're missing my point here (either that or we'll have to agree to disagree). I don't think anyone would risk missing out on their honeymoon (or any other trip) if they thought for a minute that they would be turned back at the gate. So I do think there is an onus on Aer Lingus (and all operators flying to the states) to make passengers more aware of the acceptable criteria in advance of reaching the airport.
I think the worst outcome is for someone to be turned away at the gate and I would expect airlines to consider the impact of this and try and come up with some ideas on how they can prevent it coming to this and not just leave the onus on passengers.
 
Well, I certainly disagree with you.

In my opinion, the onus is clearly on the intending passengers to make sure that they have a valid passport. I really don't think that they need to state the obvious - "you must have a valid passport".

We do have a tendency in Ireland to blame anyone else but ourselves for our mistakes. And it's even better if we can blame a large company or a public body.

Brendan
 
Ceist Beag said:
. So I do think there is an onus on Aer Lingus (and all operators flying to the states) to make passengers more aware of the acceptable criteria in advance of reaching the airport.
.
Click to expand...

That's ridiculous, it's the passengers responsibility to have proper documentation, Aer Lingus cannot be held responsible for advising all intending travellers of the legalities for every country in the world. I bet though on the Aer Lingus website there is somewhere that says passengers must have correct documentation. In relation to the US this means a squeaky clean passport, in relation to the UK it means a driving licence that could have passed though the washing machine.

It is well known that security to the US is exceeding strict.
 
Brendan said:
The disagreement among Aer Lingus staff is irrelevant. The final decision would be made by Immigration in America. It is too late then to say, I told you so.
Click to expand...
If the flight was going through US immigration clearance in Dublin, any 'turning back' would have been made on the ground in Dublin, before taking off. If you clear immigration in Dublin, you aren't checked again in the US.

Would Aer Lingus really be fined €20k for presenting a passenger in Dublin with a questionable passport?
 
Bronte, Brendan, I admit I'm playing devils advocate a wee bit here as I'm not exactly a frequent traveller! But is it really so ridiculous to expect an airline to make clear the requirements for entry into a country they fly into? I'm sure the airline themselves know these requirements so all I'm saying is that they publish this. Maybe this is all published on their website already, I don't know. But it does sound like there is room for improvement here.
 
Not all flights clear immigration in Dublin and this might have been one of those flights.
Brendan is right, the onus is totally on the passenger, the problem is the OP didn't think, I wouldn't take any chances at all with US immigration, if they had bothered to get a new passport there would be no issue here at all, rather than getting an extra year out of a dog-eared passport the €80 for a new passport would have been well spent.
I'm sorry this happened to the OP but it is her husbands fault no one else.
 
Brendan said:
"lamination was slighly separated from the paper"

This screams "forgery" at anyone looking at it. It's a well used 9 year old passport.

It's wrong to blame Aer Lingus. Do you think that the OP would pay the €20,000 fine imposed on Aer Lingus if they were turned back?
Click to expand...


It didn't scream forgery to the other airlines that accepted it without question when the OP flew with it in the recent past, or to the other staff at the Aer Lingus ticket desk who didn't see a problem with it either (on the same day). My passport (mildly damaged in a similar fashion to the OP's, which was accepted by US immigration that last time I flew to new York) obviously didn't scream forgery either.

None of us have seen the passport, so we don't know if it was tattered, or even invalid. Empathy and advice (which both seem to be in short supply on this particular AAM thread) are free. Unfortunately, so is ill-informed opprobrium.
 
Brendan said:
I think "tattered" is a good summary of that.
Click to expand...

Definition of tattered is "Torn into shreds; ragged". I'm trying not to be semantic here Brendan but the primary issue here is that nobody seems to be aware of the rules around the standard/quality of a passport required to travel and whether there is actually a difference when travelling to the USA versus Europe. It's not the same as forgetting to get a visa or attempting to travel on an expired passport.

Brendan said:
The disagreement among Aer Lingus staff is irrelevant. The final decision would be made by Immigration in America. It is too late then to say, I told you so. ?
Click to expand...

The disagreement among Aer Lingus staff is absolutely relevant as it was a member of Aer Lingus staff that refused them passage. From the OP's response it seems that they were unlucky and would have been granted passage if one of the other staff members were on duty. Now, whether they would have passed immigration is another question and one which we will never know the answer.

This is an area that should be defined by the passport office, DAA, airlines or whoever has input to what is an "acceptable" standard. I would like to see that standard so that I could argue my case if I was ever in the same position.
 
It is impossible to try to make this situation black and white unless you do not allow for any 'wear and tear' on a passport. If that was the case we would all have sealed boxes to store our passport and request that all persons handling it do so with care and white gloves. If you do allow some wear and tear then you make it a judgment call and in this case the check in agent decided that the condition of the passport was unacceptable. I haven't seen the passport so who is to know if it was a reasonable assessment or not. My passport is fairly beaten up with limited space for stamps left but I have not had any problem with Aer Lingus or US immigration...luck, charm, fear....who knows!

Given that the couple were going on their honeymoon I would have hoped that the airline would have made an effort, on behalf of the passenger, such as requesting the US immigration staff at the airport to check the passport. Rules are rules but it is a sad world where customers' who make genuine mistakes are not helped. I blame Michael O'Leary for making it all about money and not about people.
 
Not all flights clear immigration in Dublin and this might have been one of those flights.
Click to expand...

Which AL flights dont clear immigration in Ireland? I thought they all did.

Turning back at immigration in US and fine for AL is irrelevent if the immigration is done in Dublin. I would have thought that on such flights, AL would have left it up to US immigration in Dublin. It doesnt make sense that a member of the AL staff would make the judgement when there is a more qualified person in situ to do it.

Maybe the OP can give more information, but it has occurred to me that the passport may have been damaged enough that AL did not think it could be used as an identification document to board the flight - security guidelines rather than US immigration rules?
 
Its obvious that this thread is getting frustrating for a lot of posters...Everyone is entitled to an opinion... I'm heading to the Usa in February and i travel to both the uk and Europe a good few times. I myself, about 4 weeks ago decided to ask IMMIGRATION at an Irish airport their advice as to whether or not my passport would cause problems getting into the states. They advised me it is still readable for travel here ( same situation as op - slightly tearing at bottom and up to photo - nothing too big ) and they advised me that I would be as well getting a new passport because it is a lot stricter in The USA than here and I may be refused entry but couldn't tell me for sure. I took their advice and have now received my new passport and I am looking forward to my travels with a bit of ease. Basically it's not just Aer Lingus or the other Airlines that cant make a decision on it, there are guidelines that aren't crystal clear but ultimately the passport holder has to hold responsibilty for their documentations including the state of their passport... As already said by a few posters not all US bound flights clear US Immigration here and it is unreasonable to expect Aer Lingus staff to verify all questionable passports especially as Us Border staff may not be on duty. Im unsure if this was the case on the day, however all factors need to be considered. So ultimately all blame lies with the passport holder. One thing i hope will come from this is anyone reading this and intending on travel to please ensure your passport and other documentation is in order...
 
Ceist Beag said:
Bronte, Brendan, I admit I'm playing devils advocate a wee bit here as I'm not exactly a frequent traveller! But is it really so ridiculous to expect an airline to make clear the requirements for entry into a country they fly into? I'm sure the airline themselves know these requirements so all I'm saying is that they publish this. Maybe this is all published on their website already, I don't know. But it does sound like there is room for improvement here.
Click to expand...

I've travelled to some more unusual destinations - surely it's up to me to ensure that I have the necessary documentation in the correct order to ensure my entry into a country?

Is saying that airlines should publish requirements the same as saying the taxi company bringing me to a function should notify me of dress code!!
 
batty said:
Is saying that airlines should publish requirements the same as saying the taxi company bringing me to a function should notify me of dress code!!
Click to expand...

ehhh batty apples and oranges spring to mind! Would a taxi company refuse to bring you if you weren't wearing the right dress code? :rolleyes:
 
I have to take the side of Brendan in this discussion.

At this stage, every man and his dog knows that the USA has some of the strictest immigration requirements. Our old style passports (over 5-6 years old), to be honest, were easily forgeable by anybody with a bit of "know how" (as opposed to our new style passports which are next to impossible to forge) and you could not blame one thinking a possible forgery when the lamination is peeling off.

You could hardly blame Aer Lingus for not allowing a passenger to board if their passport is not in order, Honeymoon or no Honeymoon. A $20000 fine and also you would have the pleasure of wearing a nice orange suit and a pair of bracelets to match.

The onus is on the person travelling to ensure that they comply with all immigration requirements of the country they are visiting. As another poster stated "Ignorance of the law is no defence".
 
I went to book a flight to America, just to see what is actually said.

The overall problem is that there are so many warnings, terms and conditions, privacy statements, US immigration privacy statements, etc, that I don't think that Aer Lingus would be justified in introducing another big headline

"Make sure that your passport is not damaged"

They do say the following:

Please ensure you read our Passport/Visa Information
Passports & Visas

Important Information

Your passport is a valuable document, without it you may be prevented from travelling to another country. It is each passenger's personal responsibility to ensure that they have valid documentation, which meets the requirements of Aer Lingus, immigration and other government authorities at each destination/departure Airport.
To check general passport, visa and health requirements visit the IATA Travel Centre.
Click to expand...

My only criticism of this is that the IATA Travel Centre requires you to log in.

Could Aer Lingus specify the conditions of passports for entering America?
I don't think so. If someone gets turned back in America, they will claim that they met Aer Lingus's requirements and Aer Lingus is at fault.

I don't really think Aer Lingus could do anymore.
 
Brendan said:
I don't really think Aer Lingus could do anymore.
Click to expand...

Of course Aer Lingus could have done more.

The very least the check-in person could have done was leave her station, leaving the other passengers standing in the queue, accompany the intending passenger to the Immigration Clearance area and ask the U.S. Immigration person if the passport would be accepted. If that person said “No”, then ask them to speak to their supervisor. If the supervisor said “No”, then ask them to ring their supervisor in America. If that supervisor said “No”, then ask them to speak to the Secretary of Homeland Security in America. If the Secretary of Homeland Security said “No”, then ask them to ring, I don’t know, President Obama, and see what he says. He’d probably say “Can you enter the U.S with a non-valid Passport? No, you can’t!!”

This would be perfectly reasonable. After all, it is their ho-o-oneymoon we’re talking about, which is the most important thing in the world, next to a we-e-e-ding, or having a ba-a-a-by. It’s not like they were, like, terrorists or anything. I mean, like, come o-o-on.
 
Slash's post and this little treasure earlier from ontour cheers me up no end.
I blame Michael O'Leary for making it all about money and not about people.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top