KeaneJohn

Ok so we are splitting hairs. The OP thought he’d kill 2 birds with one stone but ultimately tried to use it for travel when it does say at the time of application not to be used for travel use a private test. Therefore if someone does try to use it for travel when it says not to be used for travel even if that wasn’t the explicit reason for getting it in the first instance they shouldn’t be surprised if travel is denied.

I’m no legal expert but using the test of reasonableness which MCOL would no doubt use if it says when you apply for such test not to be used for travel and BA have info on their website that says you should not use an NHS test for travel I’d be very surprised if a court ruled it was unreasonable for BA to deny travel. I’d imagine the same with CEDR.

Given the fact that most insurance companies want to avoid paying out again I’d be very surprised if they did pay out given the scenario above but of course have not seen the policy document. If an insurance company didn’t pay out if it says when you apply for a NHS test not to be used for travel and on the BA website don’t use an NHS test for travel I’d be very surprised if the Financial Ombudsman ruled in the clients favour. Just my thoughts on the matter.

Colesmore

Apologies KARFA, I edited my post slightly as you responded, and added the word "result" after "NHS test".

They don't want floods of people booking PCRs for travel, fair enough. They instruct people the gov.uk portal is not where to get travel testing - which I read as advice as well as fact i.e. don't come looking further for day 2 and 8 tests.. they're only from private providers - here's the link..

To me I can't see why gov.uk and/or BA can't say that NHS test results are not acceptable for travel, if that's clearly the intention.

NickB

And all of that together constitutes the contract of carriage, which are the only terms issued by BA that can be binding on the passenger and these things could not be unilaterally changed ex post facto by BA. Under the contract of carriage, BA undertakes to carry the passenger to his or her destination as long as the passenger complies with the terms of this contract. BA. If BA wants to impose additional requirements that it has not included in its contract of carriage (I.e. amend the contract), it would have to get the passenger to agree to these changes.

Colesmore

BA says an NHS test should not be used for travel. I agree, they shouldn't. It's not in the best interest of the public or NHS. But should means advice or guidance. Shall is an obligation or direction. BA hasn't said something shall not be done, they've said it should not be done. Advice. And when the OP has contradicted that advice they've denied boarding.

I don't feel the OP has a chance with insurance, but rather with BA. As I say, if the explicit intention was to exclude NHS test results from being acceptable for travel they could have said so..they've had 12+ months to do so.

​​​​​​

DoctorHenryHoover91

Thank you for all the responses. I am thankful for all the advice from so many knowledgable flyers. I will read and catch up on all the replies later.

Prospero

The difficulty here is BA’s CoC says

13a3) We will not be liable to you if:
you do not have all necessary passports, visas, health certificates and other travel documents
your passport, visa, health certificates or other travel documents are invalid or out of date

When the NHS has explicitly stated its tests are not valid for travel

danielflyer

Where has the NHS stated this? They have merely stated that you cannot book a test for travel. Using results for travel should be perfectly fine. OP's NHS certificate is valid because it meets all the requirements for Mauritius. Random statements from NHS are not binding law. They can make changes to their PCR tests to make them less useful for travel (such as removing QR codes or refusing to add passport numbers), but the document OP received meets all the requirements set my Mauritius. NHS may not like this, of course, but they can't mandate that OP not use his perfectly valid PCR test to travel if he obtained it legitimately.

It's also true that many destinations do not accept NHS certificates and this is a reason to deny boarding. But Mauritius seems perfectly happy to accept it. Most likely an overzealous and undertrained BA agrent is responsible for the situation at hand.

KARFA

post 9, first quoted section (taken from NHS PCR booking page), "You cannot use a free test from the NHS."

(ctrl c + ctrl v coming in useful this evening )

NickB

Even if that could be regarded as a legal requirement binding on airlines (which it is not), all that it would mean is that the UK government does not regard the test as valid when the UK government requires a test. If the UK imposed a PCR test to exit the country, then there might be an issue. But the UK government does not require a valid test to leave the UK. Mauritius does have testing requirements to enter the country but what Mauritius regards as a valid test is a matter for Mauritius. The UK cannot determine what are the conditions of entry into Mauritius and what are the documents that are required by Mauritius to enter its territory. If the OP has put forward travel documents and certificates which are regarded as valid by Mauritius, then the traveler has satisfied the requirements of the contract of carriage and BA cannot deny him boarding.

nancypants

I personally think it’s ethically dubious to have 2 tests, the second one being completely pointless, when 1 test will accomplish the same purpose. Throughout this pandemic there has been a cycle of shortages of tests, reagents, swabs, trained pathologist hours to process tests. Wasting another whole set is just that- a waste

Gertjaars

Wow, This thread set off alerts to a bunch of i-am-not-a-lawyer's on the forums.

I always feel bad when I see how our healthcare system in the US is in shambles. And then I see threads like this where in the UK, your struggling NHS specifically mentions its not allowed for travel and folks here pull out their hearsay about how it is allowed. It really is appaling, even from the overseas.

i_concur

If the OP was given a test in the course of a hospital admission for a procedure they would not have booked it themselves through the T&T website. They would have seen none of the disclaimers about not using the test for travel.

in fact I should imagine they have very little paperwork relating to it at all.

I am keen to understand how they got a written copy of the test at all and what it said on it. Exactly what it said.

NWIFlyer

As the OP has decided to remove all of their initial post, citing “legal reasons”, none of the responses that others took the care to think about and contribute now make much sense,

Of course, nothing ever really disappears on the internet and BA may well be able to rely on waybackmachine and other tools if they feel that original post may help their defence, but FT does not restore deleted posts if the member concerned wishes them to be removed from view.

Consequently the thread is closed.

/mod