If this is true, then no airline would ever allow either a transit visa or transit without visa if either of these options does not permit the person to leave the airport. Some countries seem to refuse to issue transit visas (because they're not required for transit in that country's airports as transit passengers never leave the airside transit area) and also won't issue a normal visa for transit passengers.

Also, there have been cases in the news where passengers have been trapped in airports overnight in IROPs due to visa issues. I remember pictures of people from India not being to leave CDG. Similar cases in the news involved flights being diverted back to the originating country where some passengers had used single entry visas.

Finally, how then to MRers on FT do single day turns in countries like Russia without getting visas? One sees a lot of discussions about which countries permit turns without every doing entry formalities. There's also discussion regarding MRs where people don't seem to get visas for all countries of connecting airports. By this reasoning, how to they apparently fly these itineraries successfully?

The requirement is pointed out on lastminute.com under "Important Information" before you get to the payment stage.

It even provides a link to details for more information where it says:

Fairly clear cut I think, so the best option would be to appeal to their better nature in the hope of paying only a change fee. If lastminute.com have to be involved however, I think this is unlikely.

If that were true, then the conclusion is that carriers in the wrong mind include each and every one of the TATL-flying carriers who are part of one of the government-favored US3 ATI JVs -- especially as they routinely transport multiple people daily who are not commonly admissible at connection points but are commonly admissible at the destination. Airside transit without a visa is allowed by most major common carriers even to many people who are not admissible to the transit country unless and until in possession of the transit country visa prior to travel.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (BB10; Touch) AppleWebKit/537.35+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/10.2.1.3442 Mobile Safari/537.35+)

More than anything else, I'm surprised a bunch of people chastise OP for not knowing the rules and then spout misinformation suggesting TWOV is against airline policy :rolleyes:

Surprised? Quite some time back, I stopped being surprised by this kind of thing on FT. This kind of thing is par for the course on FT and has become so as this board came into the spotlight of elements that are less comfortable with pro-consumer dispositions than with consumer-unfriendly, pro-industry/pro-statist dispositions.

HELP! Refused entry over 6 month rule
 

The 6 month rule is pretty standard but let's not get hung up on that.

Even having a UK passport which was valid should not have in theory helped. The OP would have no visa to enter Australia on that passport, nor are they allowed to.

Anyway my point is getting a 4 hour passport UK passport renewal probably wouldn't have helped

This one is fairly tame compared to the "Welcome to FT, you're wasting our time for not first searching the x number of threads on this topic already" response we often see

The OP mentions he is both UK and Australian citizen. Would that not imply he has a UK and an Australian passport? Are both expired/expiring?

The OP mentions that the passports are expiring within days of each other. I take it that any and all of the OP's passports from the UK and Australia have less than six months of validity left on them.

Here are the 6-month rules.

I didn't see that bit but that's one unlucky coincidence.

I agree. I appreciate the helpful and courteous responses that I see posted by members.

this 6-month rule is so absured, I can understand if it's a month or 31 days or something, but requiring 6 months AT LEAST is a bit too much, specially when most countries would only admit you for 90 days (for example, Schengen states), or Australia, etc.

I think people should be allowed travel as long as they can somehow demonstrate they would leave before passport expiry

I agree with you. And cannot fault those who are unaware of the 6-month stipulation. There was a time when I, and probably all of us, were also not yet aware of it.

The countries that have this requirement don't think it's absurd, and their opinion is really the only one that matters. Their country, their rules.