# Denied Boarding due to 'faulty' passport



## m.sunny

Hi everyone - My husband was denied boarding by Aer Lingus (travelling to US) some weeks ago, because the check-in desk deemed his passport faulty (lamination was slighltly seperated from the paper) and corners a little dog-eared (passport 9 years old). The agent at the Ticket Desk (when we tried to re-organise flights) didnt see enough of a problem with the passport, but could not overide the decision of Check-in Desk. Aer Lingus explained they were not willing to risk recieving a 20k fine from US immigration should we be turned back, and i do understand this.
The upsetting part is this was actually our honeymoon, which we had saved hard for and were looking foward to after all the wedding stress. As we could not organise a new passport in time to meet our Cruise (which was departing the day after), we lost it.
Would we have any comeback on this at all? I know some people might say it was our own fault, but we have travelled on the same passport (in the same state) and nothing has ever been mentioned before of its state. 
The insurance said they wouldnt cover it either. 
Has anyone been in a similar situation and had a happy ending?
Thanks,
M.Sunny


----------



## foxylady

m.sunny said:


> Hi everyone - My husband was denied boarding by Aer Lingus (travelling to US) some weeks ago, because the check-in desk deemed his passport faulty (lamination was slighltly seperated from the paper) and corners a little dog-eared (passport 9 years old). The agent at the Ticket Desk (when we tried to re-organise flights) didnt see enough of a problem with the passport, but could not overide the decision of Check-in Desk. Aer Lingus explained they were not willing to risk recieving a 20k fine from US immigration should we be turned back, and i do understand this.
> The upsetting part is this was actually our honeymoon, which we had saved hard for and were looking foward to after all the wedding stress. As we could not organise a new passport in time to meet our Cruise (which was departing the day after), we lost it.
> Would we have any comeback on this at all? I know some people might say it was our own fault, but we have travelled on the same passport (in the same state) and nothing has ever been mentioned before of its state.
> The insurance said they wouldnt cover it either.
> Has anyone been in a similar situation and had a happy ending?
> Thanks,
> M.Sunny


 
That is an abolutely awful thing to happen , have you tried contacting the national consumer agency to see what rights you have if any. Why not ring Joe Duffy as well and tell him your story.


----------



## coldcake

Does one not need a biometric passport to trave to the US?


----------



## Papercut

coldcake said:


> Does one not need a biometric passport to trave to the US?


Only if the passport was issued after 26th October 2005.

m.sunny: Would you by any chance be covered by credit card insurance for either the flights or the cruise?


----------



## jhegarty

Unless you have insurance I don't think you have any options here. The airline have a right to deny boarding for a faulty passport.


----------



## m.sunny

Hi OP here again.

NO, we did not try any avenues yet other than ringing the Insurance Company, who swiftly said we were entitled to nothing. 

RE Credit Card insurance - It is not something we avail of on the credit card, as we don't use the Credit Card that often.

Unfortunately, in the moment itself with all the upset and shock, neither of us had the mind to stand our ground with the Check-in Supervisor. We were also the 2nd couple that morning that were refused boarding over the same matter, by the same girl!

I will try the National Consumer Agency - thanks for that tip...


----------



## Sunny

m.sunny said:


> Hi OP here again.
> 
> 
> RE Credit Card insurance - It is not something we avail of on the credit card, as we don't use the Credit Card that often.


 
Purchases are sometimes automatically covered if purchased by credit card. I don't think you will be covered but no harm trying. It's horrible but I don't think there much you can do after the fact. I don't understand why Aer Lingus wouldn't let you at least try and clear US immigration in Dublin with the passport. I didn't think the fines were that strict but I suppose we operate in new times with regard to travelling to the US


----------



## m.sunny

Sunny said:


> Purchases are sometimes automatically covered if purchased by credit card. I don't think you will be covered but no harm trying. It's horrible but I don't think there much you can do after the fact. I don't understand why Aer Lingus wouldn't let you at least try and clear US immigration in Dublin with the passport. I didn't think the fines were that strict but I suppose we operate in new times with regard to travelling to the US


 
Thanks Sunny - I know it seems to have become incredibly strict. The supervisor did indeed say we could 'chance it', but it was likely we would just be put on another plane home straight away.. they emphasised *this* as opposed to just going through US immigration in Dublin Airport. 
I've just been onto the Aviation Regulator who were quite helpful, so hopefully something may be salvageable.. and I will look into the credit card angle also, thanks for that..


----------



## jhegarty

Sunny said:


> . I don't understand why Aer Lingus wouldn't let you at least try and clear US immigration in Dublin with the passport.



The airline gets a very large fine for sending someone with a faulty passport. 

Not sure if that applies to immigration cleated in Dublin, but not all flights go through this.


----------



## jhegarty

m.sunny said:


> The supervisor did indeed say we could 'chance it'



I though you were denied boarding by the airline ?


----------



## Brendan Burgess

In effect, you did not have a valid passport.

I don't really understand why anyone is suggesting that you contact anyone other than the Passport Office to get a new passport? 

It does not matter that it was your honeymoon. 

As you say yourself, it was your own fault. It is not the fault of the Cruise Company. The Credit Card company should not have to compensate you for not turning up. 

Brendan


----------



## Purple

My passport was in a bad state a while ago (it took a trip through the washing machine) and the lamination was coming away from the paper. The Are Lingus check-in lady told me to go and buy some superglue and glue it back together... which I did. I've been to the USA twice since.


----------



## Papercut

Brendan said:


> It is not the fault of the Cruise Company. The Credit Card company should not have to compensate you for not turning up.
> 
> Brendan


Brendan, some credit card holders (MBNA GoldCard holders are one example) are automatically insured for certain travel mishaps provided that they have paid for their travel using their card. I'm not sure of the ins & outs of exactly what's actually covered, but if there was an 'unforeseen circumstances' clause or something like that, a cardholder might be able to claim against missing a cruise because of not being able to get to the departure point. The odds of this being the case for the OP are slim, & is grasping at straws, but I suppose there would be no harm in them looking into it, just in case.


----------



## RIAD_BSC

Brendan said:


> In effect, you did not have a valid passport.
> 
> I don't really understand why anyone is suggesting that you contact anyone other than the Passport Office to get a new passport?
> 
> It does not matter that it was your honeymoon.
> 
> As you say yourself, it was your own fault. It is not the fault of the Cruise Company. The Credit Card company should not have to compensate you for not turning up.
> 
> Brendan


 
I'm not sure it is as simple as this. Aer Lingus arbitrarily decided that the passport was faulty (is it the competent authority to decide?), but because OP had travelled on the same passport recently with no other troubles, other airlines arbitrarily decided it wasn't faulty. Which airline is right and which is wrong? Maybe it really wasn't sufficiently faulty to be deemed invalid? Maybe Aer Lingus made the wrong call (to cover its own backside) and cost the OP a honeymoon?

I once went through US immigration at Dublin airport when flying to JFK, and my passport was similarly damaged. The INS guy (an ex marine, by the look of him) pointed out the damage but let me through anyway. Go figure.

The OP could craft an argument on the basis that the passport was deemed fine by other airlines, and seek compensation on this basis.

Failing that, an earlier poster suggested contacting Joe Duffy. This is a really good idea. From a media standpoint, it is a great story: airline bureaucracy that infuriates travellers, a missed honeymoon, a bride in tears, an uncaring airline that refuses to compensate, an excuse for the media to lay into Aer Lingus....

I'm not making a value judgement on the rights or wrongs of the case, but my advice to the OP is to pursue it further, targeting the airline (not the insurance company).


----------



## Brendan Burgess

> Failing that, an earlier poster suggested contacting Joe Duffy. This is a really good idea. From a media standpoint, it is a great story: airline bureaucracy that infuriates travellers, a missed honeymoon, a bride in tears, an uncaring airline that refuses to compensate, an excuse for the media to lay into Aer Lingus....



But that is the whole point. Why on earth should the rest of us have to pay for someone's carelessness? Because he let his new bride down? 

We are not talking mindless bureaucracy here. We are talking about airline security.  This is not a topic for Joe Duffy.


----------



## hunter09

Really feel for OP especially in those circustances! Happened me once in Turkey, I used a passport that had baby oil spilt on it, the Turks weren't happy with the translucent pages (or my explanation) but after lots of pleading and a few tears, they did let me in eventually. Still I felt hugely vulnerable, you don't realise how important the thing is until question marks are raised.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

> Aer Lingus arbitrarily decided that the passport was faulty (is it the competent authority to decide?), but because OP had travelled on the same passport recently with no other troubles, other airlines arbitrarily decided it wasn't faulty. Which airline is right and which is wrong? Maybe it really wasn't sufficiently faulty to be deemed invalid?


This is a nine  year old passport.
It presumably has been deteriorating gradually over recent years.
It has now reached a state where it might not be acceptable to the Americans. 
If they deemed it so, Aer Lingus would have to send him back home at their expense and pay a €20,000 fine. 

Why should they take the risk? The OP's husband should have renewed their passport. 

It is not relevant that he has travelled on this before. 
It might be in worse condition now.
Do the other countries to which he has travelled also fine the airline €20,000?


----------



## Pee

I'm not trying to pour fule on the fire but I'm with Brendan on this, a passport has an expiry date but it can be replaced at any time especially if it looks tampered with in any way.

Why should we pick up the costs (becasue that's what happens when someone gets compensation) due to a fault passport being presented for boarding.


----------



## babaduck

Having watched more than my fair share of those Border Patrol & Border Security programmes on the tv, a damaged passport is a red flag to immigration & 9 times out of 10 means it's been altered in some way.  Legally it is your responsiblity to keep your passport in good order and of all countries, the US is one I'd not mess with, especially as you need permission to enter (unlike the EU states).  If you are refused entry to a country, the airline who carried you is held liable & fined heavily.  I'm really sorry for you both as a ruined honeymoon must be devastating, but legally nobody is responsible for your loss except the passport holder


----------



## RIAD_BSC

Brendan said:


> But that is the whole point. Why on earth should the rest of us have to pay for someone's carelessness? Because he let his new bride down?
> 
> We are not talking mindless bureaucracy here. We are talking about airline security. This is not a topic for Joe Duffy.


 
I said I wasn't going to make a value judgement on the rights and wrongs of the case, although you are clearly taking a different approach, which is of course your right. And I respect that.

But this is also an advice forum, and the Duffy thing is part of my advice to the OP - and I think it is good advice. Sometimes I believe we can all get too indignant with these "we'll all have to pay it" refrain. Why only judge? Should we not advise too? That's why the OP logged on to AAM, after all: for advice, not a lecture.

The OP is perfectly entitled to make a case for compensation, on the basis that Aer Lingus may have made a mistake in declaring the passport invalid. This could very well be the case. AL is not a passport authority, and an independent arbitrator might come to a different conclusion than AL's check-in staff on the validity of the passport. Or it might not, but who are we to judge?

Also, none of us here have seen the passport, so we cannot say for sure whether it is invalid. It could be fine, and the AL staff may have over-reacted. And I think the fact that other airlines saw fit to accept the passport in the recent past is perfectly relevant, and should form part of the OP's argument when seeking compensation.

But that's just my advice.


----------



## mathepac

RIAD_BSC said:


> ... AL is not a passport authority, and an independent arbitrator might come to a different conclusion than AL's check-in staff on the validity of the passport...


Airline staff are the final arbiters. They may seek input from immigration staff, local or at the destination, but only on an advisory basis; ultimately if the travel documents are not acceptable to border control staff at the destination, the airline picks up the tab.

In this day and age it is reckless and irresponsible to try to use travel documents that are not perfect.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

RIAD_BSC said:


> The OP is perfectly entitled to make a case for compensation, on the basis that Aer Lingus may have made a mistake in declaring the passport invalid. This could very well be the case. AL is not a passport authority, and an independent arbitrator might come to a different conclusion than AL's check-in staff on the validity of the passport. Or it might not, but who are we to judge?



OK, how would you advise the following 

SunnyM:



> *Aer Lingus ruined my honeymoon!*
> I checked in with Aer Lingus at Dublin Airport no problem. But when I got to America, Immigration officials refused my husband entry on the grounds that his passport looked as if it was tampered with. Aer Lingus had to fly him home on the next flight but had no space for me. They charged me €1,000 to fly home the following day and refused to put me up for the night.
> 
> Surely Aer Lingus should have stopped us at check-in?
> 
> Should I get on to Joe Duffy? That will force them to check people in properly and go ruining their holidays for them.


----------



## Complainer

The nonsense bit here is that (assuming that the OP would have been clearning immigration in Dublin), there was no risk for the US authorities involved. Surely a common-sense approach should have applied, i.e. bring this person down to the US desk and see for definite whether they will accept it or not.


----------



## Capt. Beaky

Homeland Security (a branch of NTA) do not do common sense. This is removed during training.


----------



## undo

Oh my, I used to have a passport for years that I had managed to drench in paint thinner. The colors had bleached and run all over the pages. I never even considered getting that renewed before the expiry date. I am glad I did not try to travel to the US on that...


----------



## redchariot

I had a bit of trouble a few years ago clearing US Immigration as my passport was soaked wet a year earlier and caused all the stamps to leak out; they obviously copped on their computer system that I was in the US on that passport before and they wanted to know why there was no stamp recording this. When I explained what happened they were ok with it an let me through.


----------



## redchariot

My last passport also had the lamination peeling and corners dog-eared after about 8 years or so. I remember flying with Aer Lingus with it at the time to the London and they said that I really needed to replace it as Immigration in some countries (and they specificaly mentioned the US) would not let me in due to the state of it; as I was only going to the UK, it wasn't going to be a problem.


----------



## sisterlylove

Basically the moral of the story is... ALWAYS ensure you have a VALID, INTACT PASSPORT for travel. It is NOT the responsibilty of the airline/immigration but that of the passport holder. Not one of us can say how correct/wrong the airline was, as only m.sunny and her husband (on this thread) have seen how damaged the passport was. Not much more to say than that...


----------



## Bronte

The OP's tale is very sad.  

If there is one think I know about travelling it's that going to the US is no joke and they don't do kindness or sympathy.  My other half had to change his passport 3 times in one year (about 6 years ago) they were changing the rules so fast.  The OP has the obligation to ensure their passport is in order, it was most unfortunate this happened for a honeymoon, Aer Lingus have to make sure they comply with US rules so they have done nothing wrong in this case.  This is a no win situation for anyone.


----------



## galwegian44

Good advice RIAD and I'm glad to see that some posters are showing a little sympathy to the couple who had their honeymoon ruined. 

Yes, they are responsible for the state of their passports but as I read this I realised that this could easily have been me. I would never have identified this as a potential issue whilst travelling, although now that we're having a conversation about it I realise that I was very naive in not recognising that it could be an issue.

The inconsistency of application would be my big problem with this as I would be willing to bet that if you had checked in at another desk you would probably have been on the plane and off to the USA. I travel about 20 - 30 times a year (mostly to Europe but sometimes to the USA) and I see 'rules' applied inconsistently right across the board, even ones affecting people's security.

I'm really sorry to hear that your honeymoon was ruined and I do hope you get some compensation so that you can rebook a cruise and celebrate. 

Good Luck.


RIAD_BSC said:


> Also, none of us here have seen the passport, so we cannot say for sure whether it is invalid. It could be fine, and the AL staff may have over-reacted. And I think the fact that other airlines saw fit to accept the passport in the recent past is perfectly relevant, and should form part of the OP's argument when seeking compensation.
> 
> But that's just my advice.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

But this is the "compo" culture which costs us all a fortune in higher costs, higher insurance and higher taxes.

I am sorry for people who fall on the footpath when they are drunk, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.

I am sorry for people who carelessly crash their car into a tree, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.

I am sorry for someone who misses their honeymoon because they have a tattered passport, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.

Brendan


----------



## galwegian44

Brendan - I think there is a fine line here that we find ourselves on opposite sides. I'm totally against the 'compo' culture also personally I see a distinction between the drunk person injuring themselves  and the person being refused access to their dream holiday because of a passport:

- they potentially may not have been aware even had an issue (I don't believe it was 'tattered')
- that possibly would have been accepted by another check-in attendant (as we have seen from anecdotal evidence from other posters)

I don't see blatant disregard of responsibility and I see massive disappointment around an event that you hope to only do once in a lifetime. I guess I also see that this could possibly have happened to me also whereas I'm hoping that I'm more in control of my drinking and my driving.

All the best.


Brendan said:


> But this is the "compo" culture which costs us all a fortune in higher costs, higher insurance and higher taxes.
> 
> I am sorry for people who fall on the footpath when they are drunk, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> I am sorry for people who carelessly crash their car into a tree, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> I am sorry for someone who misses their honeymoon because they have a tattered passport, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> Brendan


----------



## TreeTiger

I am regularly amazed at how many people do not realise they can renew their passport before the expiry date.  In the last week alone I have come across two situations, one of a young man - early 20s - who was frustrated because he doesn't look anything like his passport photo at this stage, but the passport has a couple of years of validity left on it.  

The other instance is of a man in his 50s who has to go to the US soon and was frustrated because he couldn't find out how long a passport had to be valid for when entering the States.  His has three months left on it, but it apparently never crossed his mind that he should pay for a new passport before the expiry date on his current one.

There have been several times in airports where I've noticed people with tatty passports, and I'm often surprised that check in staff don't advise having them replaced before it gets to the stage that they are unacceptable.  I just dug out my own passport to see if it gives any advice and nothing is mentioned about renewing before the expiry date.  The nearest bit of advice (inside the back cover) is that if the passport is lost or damaged this should be reported to the Passport Office.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

http://www.dfa.ie/home/index.aspx?id=8493

 As with all countries, you are required to have a valid passport to enter  Thailand. Your passport is an important document and should be treated  carefully. A number of Irish citizens have been deported from Thailand back to  Ireland for attempting to enter the country on a damaged passport. The Thai  immigration authorities do not accept passports that have missing pages or have  been damaged in any way.


----------



## m.sunny

Complainer said:


> The nonsense bit here is that (assuming that the OP would have been clearning immigration in Dublin), there was no risk for the US authorities involved. Surely a common-sense approach should have applied, i.e. bring this person down to the US desk and see for definite whether they will accept it or not.


 

Hi OP here again

I would have thought, (in hindsight) the above option might have been offered us i.e. An Aer Lingus supervisor (?) bring us down and ask the US desk? The confusing part of the whole thing for us, was that 4 separate Aer Lingus staff had differing opinions about whether it was bad or not (and it honestly wasnt).. so there was a grey area about the whole thing - if it was really bad, we would accept it was our responsability. He used the same passport only 3 weeks before as his check in ID on another Aer Lingus flight (to UK though), why did no one mention it to him then?


----------



## m.sunny

Brendan said:


> But this is the "compo" culture which costs us all a fortune in higher costs, higher insurance and higher taxes.
> 
> I am sorry for people who fall on the footpath when they are drunk, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> I am sorry for people who carelessly crash their car into a tree, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> I am sorry for someone who misses their honeymoon because they have a tattered passport, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> Brendan


 

Brendan, neither i nor my husband are of the 'Compo Culture' that you mention, in fact we are probably the exact opposite and probably never vocal enough in such situations. Given the fact that it was special holiday, celebrating a special time, made the whole thing very difficult, and for once we thought to actually try and follow it up, instead of just accepting 'what we were told' - We are not querying any of this to do people out of money, or 'get claims' etc... We pay enough insurances and premiums of our own (no doubt to fund much less honest people).. it was merely on the advise of others not to be so quick to take it lying down.... your points are valid though, so I do thank you for taking the time to give us your opinions..


----------



## Ceist Beag

Brendan said:


> But this is the "compo" culture which costs us all a fortune in higher costs, higher insurance and higher taxes.
> 
> I am sorry for people who fall on the footpath when they are drunk, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> I am sorry for people who carelessly crash their car into a tree, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> I am sorry for someone who misses their honeymoon because they have a tattered passport, but I don't want to see them compensated at my expense.
> 
> Brendan



Brendan I have to admit I find your tone in this thread to be bordering on insulting. The OP did not mention a tattered passport. In fact the OP mentioned that there was even disagreement among the Aer Lingus staff as to whether the passport was acceptable. I know you're trying to stick to the facts here and ignore the fact that it was their honeymoon which is fair enough but why then ignore the facts to try and get your own point across? We only have the version given by the OP so who is to say they didn't just get unlucky with a member of staff who was a real stickler and/or having a bad day.
Personally I feel really sorry for the OP here and it does sound like there was a real lack of common sense and proper procedure on the part of Aer Lingus and I think it does require a bit more than simply one member of staffs opinion on whether the passport is valid or not to prevent someone from taking their trip. There should be clear guidelines provided as to what is acceptable and what is not and it sounds like this is not the case here.


----------



## Bronte

galwegian44 said:


> - they potentially may not have been aware even had an issue (I don't believe it was 'tattered')
> - that possibly would have been accepted by another check-in attendant (as we have seen from anecdotal evidence from other posters)
> 
> .


 
The fact that the OP was not aware there was an issue is not relevant, the OP and the rest of us have to know the rules. Ignorance is not a defence. Things such as I didn't realise my passport is out of date, I didn't realise that my passport has to last 6 months longer than my stay, I didn't realise I need a visa, I didn't realise I need a machine readable passport or in this case a passport that was not up to the specifications of the US authorities is what is relevant. 

So what if another attendant would have passed the passport, this doesn't mean the OP would have gained entry to the US. They might have been lucky and passed but if it would have resulted in a fine for Aer Lingus who was acting under orders and not out of spite well then that should be good enough for the OP.

The fact that it was a honeymoon is colouring people's opinion of this story. The OP was unlucky and it is for sure a sad story but it doens't change the fact that the Aer Lingus person had to apply the rules.

Comparing an Irish person going to the UK and and that same person going to the USA is not the same thing at all. I think you don't even need a passport for the UK any kind of ID will do.

Interesting that the insurance company doesn't cover it, I'm sure there is a clause in the policy that states it is the traveller's reasponsiblity to ensure there travel documentation is in order and they will not pay out if it isn't.


----------



## Ceist Beag

Bronte said:


> The fact that the OP was not aware there was an issue is not relevant, the OP and the rest of us have to know the rules. Ignorance is not a defence. Things such as I didn't realise my passport is out of date, I didn't realise that my passport has to last 6 months longer than my stay, I didn't realise I need a visa, I didn't realise I need a machine readable passport or in this case a passport that was not up to the specifications of the US authorities is what is relevant.
> 
> So what if another attendant would have passed the passport, this doesn't mean the OP would have gained entry to the US. They might have been lucky and passed but if it would have resulted in a fine for Aer Lingus who was acting under orders and not out of spite well then that should be good enough for the OP.



But Bronte I don't think you are comparing like with like here either. It is very easy to know if your passport is out of date or if you need a visa. It is not very easy to know if your passport is in an acceptable state to US authorities. Surely it wouldn't be hard to have clear guidelines for this? I think any system based on one persons opinion (in other words who you get at the gate) rather than being based on published guidelines is a flawed system.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Ceist Beag said:


> Brendan I have to admit I find your tone in this thread to be bordering on insulting. The OP did not mention a tattered passport. In fact the OP mentioned that there was even disagreement among the Aer Lingus staff as to whether the passport was acceptable. I know you're trying to stick to the facts here and ignore the fact that it was their honeymoon which is fair enough but why then ignore the facts to try and get your own point across?



Unfortunately, people often find the bare facts of a case to be insulting. We much prefer the "Ah, shure it will do. Put a bit of sticking plaster on it and hope for the best". 

I don't get your point at all about my not sticking to the facts. This is the OP's own description



> the check-in desk deemed his passport faulty (lamination was slighltly seperated from the paper) and corners a little dog-eared (passport 9 years old).



I think "tattered" is a good summary of that.

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. 

Complainer raised a good point about asking US Immigration in Dublin Airport to clear it. I wonder was that an option?


----------



## Ceist Beag

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.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

"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?


----------



## Ceist Beag

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.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

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


----------



## Bronte

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.
> .


 
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.


----------



## Complainer

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.


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?


----------



## Ceist Beag

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.


----------



## dereko1969

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.


----------



## RIAD_BSC

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?


 

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.


----------



## galwegian44

Brendan said:


> I think "tattered" is a good summary of that.


 
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. ?


 
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.


----------



## ontour

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.


----------



## csirl

> Not all flights clear immigration in Dublin and this might have been one of those flights.


 
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?


----------



## sisterlylove

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...


----------



## batty

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.


 
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!!


----------



## Ceist Beag

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!!



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?


----------



## redchariot

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".


----------



## Brendan Burgess

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.



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.


----------



## Slash

Brendan said:


> I don't really think Aer Lingus could do anymore.



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.


----------



## Bronte

That's very good Slash, so funny.  Put's us in a good mood for Friday.


----------



## elcato

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.


----------



## RIAD_BSC

This thread is full of smoke and mirrors, red herrings and whatever other cliches you want to apply to it. But it is all boils down to couple of simple issues.

*1) - Was the OP's husband's passport invalid?* The answer (despite all the noise coming from Brendan and others) is that we don't know, because it was never viewed by a competent passport authority. If Aer Lingus deems itself to be a competent authority to decide what is valid and what isn't, then it should tell people what the criteria are for a valid passport (which it didn't do). Many people (including the OP's husband) might not realise that a dog-ear and mildly damaged lamination make a passport invalid - I'm still not even sure that this is the case.

*2) - Did Aer Lingus act appropriately?* It is possible to argue 'No' to this question. Other Aer Lingus staff on the day saw no problem with the passport (which had also been used recently to fly with other airlines). It seems that a single member of AL staff was at the centre of this (she also refused another couple the same morning for the same issue). She may have been over-the-top in her judgement. She should have checked with the American INS desk in Dublin airport, and she didn't. (The OP could not have checked, because this desk is airside). The AL member of staff's actions appear to me to have been rash, arbitrary and just plain wrong, considering what was at stake for the OP. We don't know if €20,000 was at stake for AL, because we don't know the OP's destination. If it was JFK, then immigration would have been cleared in Dublin, and AL would not have been on the hook for any fine, no matter what the INS decided in relation to the passport.

*3 - Should the OP pursue Aer Lingus for compensation?* Despite the howls of righteous indignation on this thread from those who think "they shouldn't have to pay for it" (whatever that means), of course the OP should pursue it. What does the OP and her husband have to lose? They might win something, they might not. But they are perfectly entitled to fight their corner.


----------



## Bronte

This has gone mad.  I've googled and found this so far from 3 different websites.  Some people have never heard of personal responsibility.  We are talking about passports for entry to the USA.  It's taken exceedingly seriously in the US.

*Condition of Passports*

Passports must be in good condition. Continental may not accept passengers for international travel and may deny boarding if a passport is damaged beyond normal wear and tear and/or there is evidence of intentional or material alterations or mutilations. Examples of conditions of passports that may result in denied boarding include passports with significant tears, holes, or stains, as well as any changes, obliterations, or alterations, or any other damage which affect the integrity of the passport and/or the identification of the holder, such as the name, date of birth, citizenship and document number. For example, a passport with faded data, missing or severely torn, cut, or chewed pages or cover, missing picture, picture which can be removed from under the laminate or one which requires tape or staples to hold it together, or which has been substantially damaged by liquids, chemicals, or fire, may result in denied boarding. To ensure your travel plans are not interrupted, please make sure your passport is in good condition before you leave. For more information about U.S. passports, please visit the U.S. Department of State website: 


Is not damaged, defaced or excessively worn (any one of these can mean your passport is invalid for travel)  New Zealand


To be valid, it cannot be mutilated, altered, or damaged in any way.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

elcato said:


> Slash's post and this little treasure earlier from ontour cheers me up no end.



+1 

I thought you were serious first - it wasn't until I got to Homeland Security that I realised, maybe you are not serious.

brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess

From the Aer Lingus website itself which I have quoted in aprevious thread. 



> 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



People have to take personal responsibility. 

Don't blame someone else for any losses you sustain due to your own errors.

Brendan


----------



## elcato

> This thread is full of smoke and mirrors, red herrings and whatever other cliches you want to apply to it.


So going forward let's prune a bit of low hanging fruit.


> If Aer Lingus deems itself to be a competent authority to decide what is valid and what isn't, then it should tell people what the criteria are for a valid passport (which it didn't do).


They obviously are and exercised this to the OP.


> She should have checked with the American INS desk in Dublin airport, and she didn't.


Why ? So lets hold up everybody else and do this for everyone ? Make sure you get to the check-in desk five days before departure then.


> Other Aer Lingus staff on the day saw no problem with the passport (which had also been used recently to fly with other airlines).


This reminds me of when I worked in the bars in an earlier life. An old chestnut. Let someone bar a person and disappear and then all the other staff say 'You look fine to me mate and I'd serve you but I'll get sacked if I do'. So only one guy is the baddy and the rest are his buddy. Still has to leave.


----------

