"US Official" bars child from Boarding LHR-LAS Flight
 

OK, with the massive caveat that it's from the UK's very own Daily Wail :oh:, I'm going to ask, slightly rhetorically: am I the only one who thinks we're not being told anything like the full and accurate story here:....


US Homeland Security BARRED boy from the US as they headed for a Las Vegas holiday | Daily Mail Online


"Martin Saunders, from Burnham-on-Crouch, Essex, was preparing to board a flight from Heathrow to New York with his son Drew when they were stopped by a man who said he was a US Homeland Security official.
Then, despite being just 20ft from the plane - and having passed through two security checks already - Mr Saunders and Drew were told they could not fly to the US." (my emphasis).

Child custody question likely

No, the mother was with them too. She was allowed to travel, but understandably chose not to.

I always wonder what happens in these cases: does the airline refund the ticket? Does travel insurance cover the resulting cancellations?

In theory it is the passenger's responsibility to have the necessary documentation to travel to the destination and/or intermediate transit points.

So it would depend on a number of things. Type of ticket, frequent flyer status, goodwill sought by the airline.

Just as it may not be the travellers fault they were not allowed to travel, nor is it the airlines.

I doubt you can insure against government stupidity either.

:mad: happens

I wonder how you can get away with not telling people why. Fine if I can't travel but have the decency to let me know why just in case, you know, you've got the wrong person. Homeland Security wouldn't exactly be infallible now.

Lots of speculation in the media that the DHS habitually haul people off flights if they are suspected of abusing the ESTA/Visa Waiver programme, ie by planning to work when they get to the States, or even relocate there.

Given that they are neither inclined nor obliged to explain their actions, I suspect that speculation is all that we're going to get here.

Sure, the US authorities ensure certain people don't board flights to the States, for all sorts of reasons. I've been involved in flights subject to delays because of this over the years so I can believe the basic circumstances behind the story - and you're right, you won't get an explanation. However what really made me raise my eyebrows was the claim that this lad was denied boarding in person by someone seemingly claiming to be a US Homeland Security Official, apparently operating in an official capacity/in a customer facing role, at LHR, at the gate........now that is news to me.

wiggy
It may have been someone representing US Homeland and the reporting is wrong but, if it was an actual US operative? I would not be in the least bit surprised at anything a UK govt did not allow a US govt to do. It makes no never mind which party is in power in either country - we are always subservient.

wiggy,
I believe that US 'Homeland Security' personnel have been working at UK/EU airports for a number of years. They are unarmed (thank goodness) and they have no official capacity other than to advise the airline/pilot that the aircraft would not be allowed into US airspace if PAX 'so-and-so' is on board. This applies both to aircraft destined to the US and those intending to overfly US airspace (i.e. Caribbean / Central America flights).

The airline obviously cooperates with the officials - what choice do they have?

Oh, this may be a secret. So don't tell anybody. Thank you.

OTOH would it have better for the passenger to have been refused entry at the arrival airport? (Or the aircraft required to fly around US airspace)?

ExXB

Obviously not.....

Anyhow interesting stuff, I was aware "Homeland" had a formal role at some airports in the EU, I wasn't aware LHR might be one of them or that they ever got involved in customer facing stuff in mainland UK.

All the "offloads"/denied boarding at the behest of our cousins I have been aware of have been performed/actioned by the local airline staff or by UK officials (e.g "Border" or Police).

oh, and yes, I promise not to tell anyone....:ok:

I am concerned about the claim that this so-called official apparently refused to identify himself, indeed turning his badge round. I find that unacceptable on the part of any representative of a foreign government on UK soil.

I find much of what the British govt does on British soil to be unacceptable. As I said, in all my adult life (I'm 58) all I have ever seen is brit govt rolling over in front of the USA. I don't know what strange hold they have but EVERY PM does the same thing.

NSA. CIA, GCHQ*? What doesn't the U.S. know about British ministers?

Normally they are unseen, they are supposed to deal with the airline not directly with the non-admisable passenger. Don't know what happened in this case.

*Ya, I know these guys are supposed to be working for their government, but their loyalties seem to be split.

It's tempting to speculate what the outcome might have been, had the passenger invited the anonymous US official (who had refused to show his ID) to go forth and multiply.

Apart from anything else, if it had then been down to Virgin to do the offloading, I suspect that a claim for denied boarding compensation might have a more realistic chance of succeeding.

Time to take your mobile phone out and, whilst pretending to make a phone call - switch on the video/audio recording. You can then hold the phone down from your face and record the exchange. Risky but well worth the risk.

Can't wait for preclearance to come to heathrow and manchester, not sure the rest of you are quite ready for that though...

Hint hint?

That was a reference to Nigella - are you suggesting he was mistaken for her?

Is Nigella the only person who's admitted to taking drugs?

I doubt it. But I still don't understand - who's hinting what, about whom?