Why Passports

[chiglet]

Heard on the radio this AM [R2] re "A Letter to The Times"
It seem that a woman was refused boarding [and subsequent travel] at STN/EGSS to PIK/EGPK. A driving licence was not enough proof of identity.
It was a Ryanair flight [NOT BASHING RYR], but is this SOP?:confused: or just a "one off"?
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

Maybe it was one of the old-fashioned driving licences, without a photograph. I still have such a licence myself. Ryanair and easyJet do clearly specify photo-ID. Not saying it's right or wrong, but that's what they say.

[redsnail]

Yep, the flight details do say photo ID. I saw a guy with a paper driver's licence and no other photo ID get knocked back for travel. They had no excuse as they had the print out with all the info on it.

:eek:

[canberra]

i read about this in the paper. it wasnt a driving licence it was a uk proof of idenity card(or something like that!) you can get these cards at a post office. it has your picture on it and the home office reccomend them but ryanair dont recognise them. apparently the lady concerned is in her 80s and doesnt see the need to get a provisional licence! and i agree with her. was it douglas bader who said"rules are made for the guidance of the wise and the blind obedience of fools"?

[chiglet]

Thanx guys
Perhaps "Now is the time for a National Identity Card" :D
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[knobbygb]

I don't agree with their policy of requiring photo ID and this is another reason I won't travel with them.

SECURITY they say! If this is the case, why do BA and BD require no photo ID for domestic flights? The real reason is that the low cost carriers don't like people passing on E-tickets they cannot use to others as this affects profit.

Wether or not they should have the right to restrict passangers in this way is one issue which has been debated many times, but using the excuse of 'security since September 11th' is just blatant manipulation of the current situation and is unfair and immoral.

[timzsta]

Actually Knobby its no good giving an e-ticket booked in your name to a mate to use to save money. Your mate wont appear on the list of persons booked on the flight. You will just be sent to pay a name change fee or completely re-book, depending on which airline it is.

Photo ID is needed for travel for more reasons than security. Ever heard of the big trade in people smuggling (movement of illegal immigrants). People will try to book with a genuine name then send the person to be smuggled to the airport. Photo ID makes it a lot harder to do this as forged ID must be produced, and believe you me airlines (well at least mine did) give the check in agents lots of training in how to spot forged passports, ID's etc.

Remember, carriage on any airlines flights is subject to that airlines terms and conditions. These are explained on internet/by call centre/travel agent. If you dont comply, you dont travel.

[reynoldsno1]

If a UK photo driving licence is an acceptable form of ID, then why do they supply you with a plastic wallet with a special compartment for the licence and a huge manuscript counterpart and tell you they must be kept together!
Why do the Brits always have to make things so difficult for themselves?

[eastern wiseguy]

Tim actually Knobby has hit the nail firmly on the head .The point about selling your ticket on is valid and of course your mate won't appear as it will be "you " who has turned up for the flight.All to do with preventing the passing on of cheap tickets and precious little to do with security I am afraid .

[knobbygb]

Tim, yes, I know it's against the T's and C's to lie about your name on check in but I bet it happens a lot and the low cost carriers must hate it. This is just a convenient way to make a few extra quid from the current situation.

People-trade and illigal immigration etc. are different matters which quite rightly need to be controlled but as we're talking only about domestic flights here, that shouldn't be an issue.

Can you imagine having to produce ID to board a train? It's the same situation when you think about it. They'd like to do this to stop people passing on unused tickets, but it wouldn't work because 'security' in rail travel isn't a big public issue which can be manipulated.

I think my original question 'Why do BA and BD require no photo ID?' sums up the situation. Are they less interested in security or simply less desperate to squeeze the extra few quid out of the customer base?

[timzsta]

Thats ok then. Lets just let any old bod turn up with any old reference and check in without any means of positive identification (ie no photo id), provided its a domestic flight. That will go down real well if there was a terrorist attack on a domestic flight.

[Memetic]

There is a letter in the 2nd of September edition of Travel Weekly from a travel agent, Graham Ecob, which outlines a similar situation for a lady that his agency booked, the jist of it follows:

On booking his staff checked if the passenger had a passport, when told no they printed out the Ryanair requirements for photo id and the passenger acknowledged these and booked.

The lady was turned away at check in and could not understand why.

On hearing of the problem the travel agent asked her to come in with all the papers so they could help her apply for a refund, she showed up and produced a green paper driving licence. When she was asked about the photocard licence she produced four passport photos.

The Ryanair Terms and conditions (http://www.ryanair.com/conditions.html) state, The only valid forms of photo-id accepted on domestic UK flights and Ireland-UK routes are a passport, driving licence with photo,


So there is no disputing the logic of the lady - especially if she has never seen a new style driving licence (Or do I mean ID card by the back door....)

Perhaps its time for Ryanair to change the wording to Photocard driving licence?

(The quote and link are correct as at the time of this post.)