Fredd

Same here! Mrs. Fredd and I have gone to great lengths to confirm entry requirements for some of the 76 countries we've visited but had never heard of TIMATIC.

redrob

Sorry Often1, but you're still falling into the old trap of wrongly apportioning blame....

UA didn't "screw up". True - had they noticed, it may have prevented a lot of hassle, but they were not "supposed to", therefore they didn't screw up. The passengers did.

UKtravelbear

US passport services is clear passports for <16yr olds are only for 5 years

There is an expiry date in passports. it is YOUR responsibility to check it.

You were lucky you weren't sent back to the US because of your failure to meet entry requirements.

Azamaraal

This is such an easy trap to fall into.

"Everybody knows" that India is/was a Commonwealth Nation so that Canadians don't need a visa (or if they do its a small formality to purchase visa on arrival).

Arrived at AUH flying to India and reached the airline checkin desk and was asked "Where's the visa?" What Visa?

Return to airport next night with fresh visa and much better understanding of "Read the rules - dummy!" Since we were in business there was no cost to change the flight to the next day but lost a prepaid hotel room (but got there early enough to score a breakfast and early arrival ;-) ).

Often1

You are 100% wrong. This is not about blame, it is about consequences. Who is to blame is irrelevant.

Indeed, UA did screw up. The passenger did as well. The two screw ups are not interdependent.

#1 - By failing to deny boarding, UA subjected itself to a very substantial fine. In fact, we do not know that the Germans did not impose one on UA for this particular failure.

#2 - By failing to review the clear State Dept. warning regarding 5-year validity for kid passports, OP independently subjected his child to being denied boarding. The fact that UA may have failed to follow its obligations is not relevant to the consequences which would in most circumstances have befallen OP.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

As others have pointed out there's all sorts of permutations on this as to why it might not work. Some pax book tickets and enter a passport but then get it replaced (either because of natural expiry or it is lost). Some enter one passport but will use another of a different nationality for travel. Perhaps more importantly, an airline might give a warning when you book, but the rules change in between booking and flying. Passengers might then argue the airline is liable for mot alerting them of the change.

And should an airline prevent you from flying if you haven't put a middle name in your booking when the system somewhere might know you have one?

There are reasons why an argument could be made that reservations systems pick up 'obvious' issues. But there are as many counter points. Safest is perhaps for the pax to have to 100 per cent check themselves.

redrob

Blame in this case is irrelevant? Really? Let's be honest, Isn't the real driver behind 99% of similar posts all about getting some sort of hitherto denied financial recompense from the airline concerned, with the poster looking for support from the FT community? Or am I being too cynical (no doubt due to decades in the industry!)?

Without knowing UA's internal policies and operational processes, it's impossible for us to categorically say that UA "screwed up". If they have a process that check-in agents must thoroughly verify every single permutation and nuance of passport & visa validity for every point in the passenger's immediate itinerary (rather than a more basic check, e.g. that the passport is in the passenger's name, is still valid, with appropriate visas depending on the route), and the agent has failed to do so, then yes, it could be said that they screwed up. But that screw up would be an internal matter only. There may indeed be consequences for both the airline and passenger but the airline has presumably assessed that their exposure to the risk of potential fines is low enough not to introduce more procedures that will only slow down transaction times.

As for "the fact that UA may have failed to follow its' obligations" - what exactly are its' obligations? Obligations to do what? Who is it that's obliging them to do whatever it is? Certainly not the authorities.... It can't be a fact if we don't know what these obligations are and are simply basing it on our opinion of what the airlines should be doing. Moral obligations? That's a difficult one to argue either way, but at the end of the day, the airline is only carrying out document checks for its' own protection and benefit.

I'm no apologist for UA and I have never had any association with them, but I have had two decades of experience in this particular topic and feel the need to support the airlines when unrealistic expectations are placed on them!

MaxRoadster

The traveler doesn't say if they travel frequently but the remark the daughter had been to Europe earlier suggests at least a passing familiarity with passports. Having said that last minute emergencies do occur but that doesn't relieve the traveler of being unprepared! With the constant barrage of "Border" issues being thrown at us non-stop it is surprising anyone would just throw some clothes in a suitcase, grab their passport and head to the airport. I do not see any liability on the part of the airline or travel agent. If you travel abroad do your self a favor - look at your passport, know the expiration date and plan ahead.
One year ahead of the expiration date as some renewals are currently requiring a longer processing time (First Hand Experience Here).

mhrb

Didn't see this mentioned but I'm not aware of a single country in the world that has customs before immigration ("border" not "boarder"). Seems more than one people in this thread doesn't understand the difference...

UKtravelbear

To be honest comments like this aren't very helpful to anyone.

There are many people who post on FT for whom English is not their first language (and who may have used a translation app which aren't perfect) and as long as the post is understandable - and Dougg's post is more than comprehensible - we don't get pernickety about spelling and grammar.

The poster you quoted also admitted " I might have the order wrong" and in fact many nations often have immigration staff doing a quick passport check on jetways before passengers get to the formal immigration control point which does confuse many. I've had CBP officers doing such a check on arrival at JFK for example

Often1

You continue to completely misunderstand the issue.

If you really do have two decades of experience in this topic, you then know that TIMATIC serves the purpose of permitting front line staff for carriers to conduct what would otherwise be complex legal analyses. That is why the carriers fund IATA to produce and maintain TIMATIC and did so even back when it was a paper tomb with occasional updates inserted. It has been this way for close to 50 years (much nicer now with free online access and a user-friendly interface).

The obligation to check documents is placed on the operating carrier as part of the agreement for landing rights. The failure to do so may result in fines and other consequences, but that is not the passenger's issue nor does it ever relieve the passenger of the independent obligation to produce the proper documents.

robnbrwn

More and more countries are denying entrance to anybody with less than 6 months validity remaining on their passport. And the Germans, being German, are enforcing this rule at FRA, one of the largest transition hubs in the world.

Often1 is right (above) but the real RULE is 6 months, so just don't fly with less.

Concerto

Does this apply to us Brits, despite the Brexit mess? I am in and out of Germany and don't want to get caught in this, with passport coming up for renewal in August 2010. But I have a Swiss residents permit, valid until 2023. However, that does not replace a passport or an ID card.

oliver2002

UK passport holders are currently covered by EU freedom of movement, so any valid ID is good enough...

UKtravelbear

I assume you mean 2020!

This is the latest guidance if there is no deal and we just leave - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/passport...e-after-brexit - basically need 6 months. If your existing passport had credit from your previous one (because you renewed early) then that extra time should be excluded from your expiry date calculation - so my passport expires in March 2021 but because I had credit from my previous one it is effectively ends for these purposes in August 2020 even it was valid for say the US - something to keep an eye out.

There is also a tool to check if your passport is valid post October https://www.passport.service.gov.uk/check-a-passport
and it does work out the date based on excluding my passport extension so I was OK for a trip this November but not for next March

There is now no credit from a previous passport added to a new one.