Wow, tough crowd here.

I feel bad for the OP. While more research/clarification beforehand may have helped the situation, it's also fair to assume that at the first point of travel, the first airport that you check in and fly from that airport to your connecting airport, onwards to international travel, that they wouldn't require a passport, as it's strictly domestic travel.

All this could have been easily avoided if TA/GA's at DCA/IAD would have sent ANC the passport information. It's not that hard, especially considering it's a minor. A note could have been added to the PNR, asking that the actual passport be checked at ORD/WAS. If you asked about the UM fees, etc, over the phone, wouldn't the res agent have noticed there was a connection and explained the UM policy of no connections? There could have been more done to salvage this situation, and it's unfortunate that UA did the bare minimum, and even so, screwed over the OP. I must decree, UA dropped the ball here.

I believe compensation is due. Then again, that's my opinion, and the airline may disagree. But, tough crowd, indeed.

It seems that you didn't read any of the above analyses which discuss United's liabilities with regard to (a) invalid documents, (b) the baggage check issue, and (c) how this was probably ticketed. Checking ID later in DC doesn't deal with the baggage check issue.

It's not fair to "assume" anything and then expect the vendor to pay for your invalid assumptions. It's actually sort of ridiculous.

Sure I agree that w/o checking a bag the kid might have slipped thru. But the chances are he did have at least 1 checked bag, and yes I can be 100% wrong about that. And lets not forget the kid was traveling as an UM, for that alone Im not so sure they would have let the kid fly w/o a PP in hand

But as I said up thread my bro almost missed our fathers funeral (which was Overseas) since his PP was expired and PMCO Refused to allow him to fly into EWR get a new PP in NYC (he had a 10 hr layover and I set up everything for an on the spot new PP to be issued) XXX-EWR & EWR-YYY were not the same flight #s so it was a domestic flight connecting to an Intl. Difference is he didnt have a valid PP to input the info. Pt is PMCO saw the awhole PNR as an Intl PNR nad thusly needed a valid PP to board at XXX. No checked bag/s as he was going to be on the ground Overseas for all of 11 hrs. The Unknown would be would PMCO had let him fly XXX-EWR if his PP was in NY and his PP was valid and in the record. But PMCO refused to let him leave XXX w/o a PP in hand. He did get it in the end in and had to take a different flight into EWR

Slightly off topic, but are the rules for checking IDs of UMs different from any "regular" passenger traveling a domestic connection to an International flight?

I ask because I rarely have my passport checked at my origin airport (SNA or LAX) when starting a first domestic flight that later connects to an International flight from another gateway city (ORD, IAD, EWR, etc.). I never check bags, so I rarely see a ticket counter. When I'm allowed to check in online (about 3/4 of the time), I get my boarding passes and proceed directly to the gate.

If I get the message saying that I must check in at the airport, then yes, I have to go to the counter, where I present my passport and receive my boarding passes, but I am frequently able to avoid this.

If the UM was able to check in online and didn't check a bag, I could imagine a scenario in which they might have been able to get to ORD to pick up their passport. But if OLCI was not possible, then all bets are off.

UNLESS there is some additional rule that all UMs must check in at the counter, regardless of whether they are checking bags or not. In that case, I can imagine that everything that subsequently occurred makes total sense.

I believe that the UM must be presented at a check-in counter or some other counter before going thru TSA, which is done with an airline rep with them. A parent can accompany them by getting a pass and go to the Gate if they so chose. But the signing over of said UM is done before Security, I dont know of any case (not saying it hasnt happened) where a UM signs themselves over or simply shows up at the Gate by themselves, its possible but I believe its not suppose to occur. Im not even sure once you designate the traveller as a UM if they can in fact do OLCI and print a BP, imo they shouldnt be able to since all sorts of paperwork needs to be filled out and the Adult must sign and hand over the UM

You are correct. The guardian is also required to stay at the gate until the plane takes off.

You can drop the bag argument, at least with me. I already conceded that if he needed to check a bag, he was stuck. So let it go -- we agree!

But beyond that (and possibly the declaration of being a UM), it's not a 'might slip through' -- it's a 'he would be fine'. As others have also posted, the passport check is not done at the initial station, but rather as you board the international flight.

As for the UM declaration -- yes, that raises another point. I have no first hand experience there. But I can imagine that if you have to interact with the counter agents, they may well ask for the passport. And no passport = no travel, even on the domestic sector.

Do you see how my entire argument is predicated upon avoiding the check-in counter? Any scenario you dream up that involves talking with an agent is likely to tank the plan -- I agree. The idea is for the kid to hand his BP to the GA, hear the BEEP, and board the plane. If he does that, it's all good. Anything else, and, well, you end up with this thread!

As for the UM issue -- a couple years ago we were standing at the gate in ORD. A kid comes up asking about the status of the flight. It was pretty clear to us that he was 8, maybe 10 at the most. And by himself. The GA asked where his parents were. He said he was flying by himself to see his mom. She asked his age. Without any hesitation, he puffed out his chest, and boldly stated that he was THIRTEEN. It was fairly obvious to everyone that the kid had been coached -- and had practiced -- how to answer this question. But the GA shrugged, and went about her business. The kid boarded the flight.

The point is that there are rules, policies, and procedures -- and there is reality. I live in reality.

I feel it's totally appropriate to blame United for the OP's situation because United doesn't make it straightforward for someone to *actually* know the rules. I'm a pretty seasoned international traveler, but even I couldn't find any information about needing the passport at the first boarding location.

I asked Alex:
She said:
No mention of a passport in her response. So followed the "Travel Information Needed to Get on a Plane" page. Absolutely no mention of a passport. Shocker.

Alex provided a couple of "Here's more..." links for reference which linked to another answer with more links (not especially helpful, imho). But one of these "more" links seemed spot on: International travel documentation. But nowhere on this page does it say anything about needing the passport at check-in.

Another useful place to share information about what is needed for traveling when would be the E-Ticket confirmation. But I just looked at my last two recent overseas confirmations and there was no mention of needing the passport at the first boarding point. In the email, the closest link is a "photo identification" link. Instead of actually taking you to a page with information, it takes you to a page with links. On this page there are yet more links, one of them being "International travel document requirements" which takes you to a page with more links, including yet another link "International Travel Document Requirements" which does finally take you to the page about passports. But again, no mention of when you need it.

I would argue that it is quite reasonable for the *average* person to think that they'd only need a passport when boarding a flight that's leaving the country. And nothing in my search has said otherwise.

United is excellent at including lots of minutiae and fine print in their eTicket Itinerary and Receipt emails. But how about providing some nice clear information about what a traveler needs to know?

Of course, the email does include one of my pet peeve favorite misrepresentations of fact by United:
Oh well....I digress

To me, it's not at all clear that the UM would have been checking a bag through from ANC to LHR. I'm not sure how long he would have been in Chicago or DC on this trip. In fact, I suspect that the ticket had a stopover rather than a connection where he was to meet his father as it would have been wise to allow for lots of extra time in case there had been a delay on the UM's flights before meeting father for the TATL segment.

If the ticket had been written with a stopover rather than a connection, then I don't see when not having travel documents for the portion after the stopover would be a necessary logical requirement. In fact, on DL, I've noticed that my travel documents are checked after the stopover in such cases, even when I've had a stopover in Asia before proceeding to a destination requiring a visa.

From the UA website in clear & concise English. Provisions such as this are "notice" provisions. In other words, rather than tying oneself into a knot and reading through what would be hundreds of pages of different permutations, they put the customer on notice that there is a generalized requirement and that the customer will need to confirm the specifics of what is required for the specific journey at hand.

U.S. law requires all customers, regardless of citizenship, age or destination, to hold a secure document to depart the United States by air (one-way or roundtrip itinerary). A secure document is a passport, U.S. permanent resident card, Refugee or Stateless travel document, Re-Entry Permit, NEXUS card, U.S Merchant Mariner Card, military ID or emergency travel document issued by an embassy or consulate.

In regards to the UM you ran into, was that their 1st flight or was it a connection they were doing? a very big difference. Ive read on most every Carriers forum how a UM was sent off and no body was at the gate to meet them to usher them to their connecting flight.

My pt remains, Im not so sure a UM can do what you have proposed, if in fact they must check-in before going thru security. Im not so sure if security would let them thru alone either , better said is that TSA shouldnt allow a person that looks to be a UM thru alone. BTW if they can get thru TSA alone what ID can they show besides a PP? I just dont see TSA letting a kid w/o any pic ID thru with only a BP in hand, can it happen yep if everyone isnt doing their job, chances of it Id say very slim. It can happen in those States that issue DLs to say 14+s but w/o looking at post #1 isnt this kid 8?I just dont see how it can be pulled off

Yes...another good point in the OP's favor. He was going to fulfill this notice, as he had his son's passport in hand for the flight departing the U.S.

So, in your attempt to prove that United doesn't tell folks that they need a passport on the domestic leg of an international itinerary, you assume the "reasonableness standard" is that the "average" person will disregard common sense and not travel with their secure documents on certain segments? Wow....

I would also add that there is a difference between the credentials check and just seeing the passport.

The credentials check insures that the pax has valid entrance into the destination. That means VISA, whatever. Not just passport.

Airlines generally implement this check at the start of journey, not at the gate. It would be a real pain if GA were validating VISAs.

Does this apply to the OP's case? Yes. Unless UA knew otherwise, how could they know the kid could enter the UK? Thus, is they allowed the kid to start the journey, then some GA would have to validate he was legit to travel to the UK.

OK, this might seam like nonsense. But what if we had the exact same story and the kid was some nationality the UK did not accept w/o a VISA? Where would that be verified?

Maybe to try a different spin on this, accepting that checking at the beginning of a journey is best for the airline and prevents may downstream issues, could not -- in this type of case -- for there to be away -- on an exception basis -- for the child to have travel to the meeting point (ORD) and then continued on with parent and passport?

Earlier I think there was a suggestion of only issuing a BP for the ANC-ORD leg and not issuing additionally BP. Hence requiring further BPs to be issued only after passports / travel documents where are properly presented.

Why could not this alternative been allowed on an exception?

Is this the case of a rigid inflexible system?
Is this a case of lack of employee empowerment?
Is this a case of lack of employee / company interested in customer service?
Os this the partial release of BPs just not possible (IME I believe it is but ..)