To think that if 16 year olds need a letter of consent to travel overseas without parents, then this should be publicised?

[MrsSchadenfreude]

DD1, who is a few months short of 17, recently went on a walking holiday in Turkey with a friend and her family. I checked the gov.uk website before she left, and also that of the airline, and neither mentioned the need for a letter of consent from parents to travel (the airline said it was needed for under 16s).

DD1 was held up by the airline, who called Immigration, who gave her the nth degree questioning, finally letting her board, when she showed them an email from me, giving details of her travel insurance. On return to UK, she got held up for even longer, being questioned about where she had been, what she had done, with the IO telling her that she should have a letter from her parents giving permission to travel, and that she "would exceptionally land her on this occasion, but next time to remember that she needed a letter." DD1 was quite upset by the whole experience.

Is this a new thing, and if so, where is it publicised, that you need a letter? What if I had let DD1 get married - would she have needed a parental letter to go on her honeymoon with her new husband? I understand that they are feeling a bit sore after the recent "jihadi brides" going to Syria, but DD1 in no way fits this profile, was wearing all her walking gear to travel, and was going nowhere near the border with Syria.

SoupDragon she was stopped both ways from what I read. "DD1 was held up by the airline, who called Immigration, who gave her the nth degree questioning, finally letting her board, when she showed them an email from me, giving details of her travel insurance. On return to UK, she got held up for even longer,"

I think it is important to interview people returning from areas that might be an issue. Imagine if she had gone to be trained and come back and killed someone. Bet everyone would be screaming that IO should have checked where she had been, what she had been doing.

If kids aren't able to deal with officials then don't let them travel alone. I have been to middle east and had issues with IO in Arab countries who were suspicious of why I was there. I wouldn't complain about it, they were doing their job although the female officer who searched me on one occasion came close to being accused of a sexual assault. I wouldn't risk a 16 year old going through that unless I was sure they were up to it.

3littlefrogs, sorry I was talking about the OP which was about Turkey and questions both ways.

I think sometimes it is about intelligence they have received. The trip when I had big issues was back in the 80s when there was a spate of Palestinian plane hijackings. The day I was travelling another plane was hijacked and I think they knew something was on the cards for that day, when we landed (we had a stop over) armed policemen and military came on the plane and dragged young men off at gun point. It all seemed bizarre then we saw the news that night and put two and two together.

The problem is that you are looking for information via UK immigration/boarder and air carrier regulations – there are no such restrictions/requirements; hence being able to leave the UK without anyone questioning the relationships between children and adults with different surnames.
However, the country you are leaving when returning to the UK do/may have different immigration/boarder regulations and even at places such as Calais, where the majority if not all staff on the border control gates are UK citizens, they are working to French regulations.

My DS (12) has a different surname to me and since I split with his dad 10 years ago have had to carry a permission to travel letter from his father when travelling abroad with DS – never had to produce it to get out of the UK but been required to show it when returning from Germany, France, Spain and Cyprus.

Last week when we came back from France, the Border control guy at Calais said he was very relieved to see that I had all the required paperwork in place as it saved him a lot of time and hassle by not having to ask DS 50 questions to establish his relationship with me as per French border control regulations. He also said he couldn't believe the number of times he’d had to do just that with several other families that morning.

This has been in place for at least a decade that I’m aware of , so nothing to do with ISSI per se, but I can see how regulations could be tighter and seem Jobs worthy now.

SoupDragon she was stopped both ways from what I read

And yet they let her out of the country. They would not accept the same proof coming back in. They would not accept that she was entering the UK with her UK passport with the same proof and with an actual parent waiting in arrivals who could have sorted it immediately.

ratspeaker I'm trying to find it and I think you raise a interesting point with the Scotland difference. I do know I had to have such a letter years ago and have had to provide a letter for DS who was travelling on a youth programme.

SoupDragon I don't think it is unreasonable to check both ways. Would probably have been a different IO so he won't know what was said, if someone had been waved through by someone less conscientious than him. If they had missed something when she was leaving they might have picked it up on the way back.

I knew nothing about this law when we took our neighbour's 15 year old daughter away with us to France. Nobody stopped us to ask for a permission letter at all and it was a long time afterwards ( ie months later) that I realised we had inadvertently broken the law.

The problem here seems to be ridiculously heavy handed behaviour at UK immigration on return to the UK.

Given press hysteria I don't think it's surprising that the airline asked for proof of permission on the way out. But the letter business on returning is totally ridiculous. For a start if UK immigration services are that bothered, what about doing proper immigration checks on outbound passengers at airports? Other countries manage to find the budget to do this and it would most likely have prevented those teenage girls from getting to Syria.

This whole thing is all about shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted and is absolutely typical of the shambles that is the UK home office.

Of course you're not being unreasonable to want any requirements about parental letters to be stated clearly in advance.

DD1 is 16 and has flown without us four or five times since she was 15. Each time I've given her a letter in multiple copies stating exactly when she's flying and to where, who will be the responsible adult during that period (with that person's nationality and passport number), confirming that this adult has the right to make emergency (eg medical) decisions on our behalf if we can't be contacted in time, with a signed and dated photocopy of both our passports, and contact numbers for both of us. She has this letter in English and whatever the local language is of where she's flown. It's never been needed, but a useful precaution.

There is UK border control information re travelling with children here

"You may be asked at the border to prove the relationship between yourself and any children travelling with you, if you don’t seem to be the parent, eg if you have a different surname.

You can prove this with:

a birth or adoption certificate showing your relationship with the child
divorce or marriage certificates if you’re the parent but have a different surname from the child
a letter from the child’s parent giving permission for the child to travel with you and providing contact details, if you’re not the parent"

Given that at age 16 she can consent to medical treatment in her own right, and make her own choice of doctor, that she can order her own passport, that she can be legally married and have children, and that she can join the armed forces, I think YANBU.

I believed that 16 and over you were able to travel unaccompanied and without parental permission.

the outbound checks have been starting in april to be rolled out to anyone leaving the country...

spookyevents, that seems to cover it then. Thanks for clearing it up.

That is fine spookyevents, but what happens if a 17 year old is travelling alone? If you look at the Eurostar website, I think teenagers can travel alone from at least the age of 15.

What if you haven't got parents/family/legal guardian?
If a 17 year old is married - as they could be, quite legally, and has no parents, do they need a letter from their spouse in order to have a weekend in Paris?

"She repeatedly said that her parents were just the other side of the barrier"

This might be the problem, if they were asking her, as you say, about the nature of the trip. It's surely a red flag when someone repeatedly doesn't answer what they are actually being asked.

"She was stopped coming home. Rather too late to check if she was off to join ISIS don't you think?"

It might be too late for her as an individual, but it's far from too late for the well being of those people who might otherwise be attacked by terrorists who have been trained abroad. And those who do not answer questions about what they have done whilst abroad, but fixate on one thing, may well look as if there is something they are trying to divert attention from.

I saw on the news today that a 14 year old has been arrested on suspicion of terrorism related offences. I can see why a 17 year old who doesn't answer the questions she's actually being asked would look very suspicious.

I think it is important to interview people returning from areas that might be an issue. Imagine if she had gone to be trained and come back and killed someone

And an interview is going to establish that how? How many trained ISIS assassins happily 'fess up when asked whether they've come back to kill people? And how difficult is it for them to produce the required letter?

I don’t think it’s travelling unaccompanied that causes the problem as such; it’s a minor (under 18 if from England) travelling with adults with a different surname to them – the relationship has to be proven and where the child is not with the person(s) with PR, then a permission letter from them is required.

spooky - if you read my post, I mentioned that my 17 year old Dd was subjected to a very intimidating and bullying experience when returning from a short visit to France on her own.
She answered all the questions she was asked calmly and politely.
I don't know what else she could have done TBH.
She was treated very badly IMO.

Going to a dr on your own is far away from travelling alone abroad at 16 it isnt the same imo the dd could be going somewhere that she didnt want to with the adults she was with she could have been a runaway they may have been looking for a missing 16yr old girl and were checking, its not a very friendly experience but they really were doing their job.

Frogs – if she was travelling with P&O then this is probably why.

TsnCs – section 8 states:

“8. Your responsibilities
i. Travel documentation for each individual passenger (including children and infants), valid beyond the date of return, is required for all trips to and from the United Kingdom. All members of the European Union, irrespective of age, must have valid photographic travel documentation to travel into the UK. Photographic identification must be carried and shown when required for all trips between Dublin and Liverpool. It is your responsibility to ensure that you have all documentation needed to comply with the requirements of immigration, customs, health and other relevant regulations. We reserve the right to check and record details of such documentation and to refuse you permission to board if such documentation is not produced to our satisfaction. You will be required to reimburse us in full for any fines, repatriation or other removal costs, detention costs and all related expenses, which we may bear or incur by reason of your failure to produce such documentation to the relevant authorities. Children under 16 must be accompanied by a responsible adult i.e. over 18 years of age, whilst children of 16-17 may travel unaccompanied only with written authority from a parent or guardian to do so. The absence of such authority will lead to the refusal of embarkation. All children travelling abroad without their Parent or Legal Guardian but with another adult must have a letter of consent; otherwise permission to travel may be refused. Children must have photographic travel documentation in their own name. Travel will not be permitted where the child is included on a Parent or Guardian's travel documentation and the Parent /Guardian is not present.

Seems really heavy handed for 17 year olds but seems that thems the rules I’m afraid.

Sorry, just seen that you mentioned Eurostar and their T’s & C’s don’t say that unaccompanied minors over the age of 15 require any permission to travel so guess she had the misfortune to come into contact with a “jobs worth” on her journey.

If the letter is required for under 16s then it's not required for 16 year olds is it now? Ffs.

And if the claim is that this is part of safeguarding, to identify and support children at risk of harm, just how does "scare the shit out of them about a letter they didn't need anyway, then send them on their way anyway" contribute to safeguarding and support? UKBA need to make their mind up: if it's about safeguarding children, they should be interviewed as children (including things like appropriate adult support). If it's about scaring the shit out of miscreants, they should at least be honest about it.

Still, at least the children involved will learn the vital lesson that you should never say anything you don't have to to anyone in uniform, they're not there for your benefit. Shame it has to be that way, and one wonders quite why UKBA are wanting to teach it.

Weebirdie its not different at all. If you are traveling without parents you need consent from both even if one parent is present. The letter needs to be notorized which is very easy to do here in the US.

When following regulations 'may' really means 'you need to do this or have a very good reason this hasn't been done' and it doesn't mean it's optional. It should be clearer on the website and I have no idea why the immigration officer didn't call the OP. If I were the OP I would be writing a letter to inform the home office that their rules need to be clearer and also send the letter to your local MP.