Passport Rules

[dangie]

Could someone please try and put this into something I can understand. I know you need to have at least 3/6 months remaining on your passport on your due return date, but this ‘10 year rule‘ is confusing me.

Holidaymakers going to EU caught out by 10-year-passport rule

UK passports can have up to 10 years and nine months on them but EU countries won't accept them.

www.bbc.co.uk

Holidaymakers are being warned not to get caught out by the "passport 10 year rule" which can ruin EU travel plans.
UK travellers used to be able to carry up to nine months from an old passport over on to a new one. But post-Brexit, EU countries will not accept passports issued more than 10 years ago.

 

[simonw]

Passports,can be renewed before expiry and valid up to the old expiry date plus 10 years.

By way of example: If your passport was issued on 26th March 2014 then it is 10 years and a day old as of now and is not valid for travel to the EU, even if it says it's valid for longer; and may possibly be accepted in other non-eu countries

 

[KT550]

Prior to the rule change, if you renewed your passport prior to expiry, the "unused" validity was added to the new passport, to a maximum of nine months.

As an example, I renewed my passport a year early, so it runs from Dec 2015 to Sep 2026 as nine months were added.
Now the EU 10 year rule is in force, I should treat it as expiring in Dec 2025.

You should ignore any validity more than 10 years after the issue date.

 

[Tester]

Could someone please try and put this into something I can understand. I know you need to have at least 3/6 months remaining on your passport on your due return date, but this ‘10 year rule‘ is confusing me.

From the BBC:
Holidaymakers are being warned not to get caught out by the "passport 10 year rule" which can ruin EU travel plans.
UK travellers used to be able to carry up to nine months from an old passport over on to a new one. But post-Brexit, EU countries will not accept passports issued more than 10 years ago.

Holidaymakers going to EU caught out by 10-year-passport rule

UK passports can have up to 10 years and nine months on them but EU countries won't accept them.

www.bbc.co.uk

In simple terms, some countries, importantly including all the EU, require passports to have an issue date not more than 10 years before the date of entry.

In most cases this is no issue, but for example my passport was issued 12 December 2014 and expires 12 September 2025. I cannot enter the EU using it after 12 December 2024, even though that date is not mentioned in my passport.

 

[dosxuk]

It should be noted this isn't a Brexit thing with the EU "punishing" the UK - it's the same rules they apply to all non-EU nationals.

 

[Gloster]

I think, though I am not certain, that the rule also applies to your date of return. Your passport may still be valid under these rules on the date of departure, but if it should pass the ten-year date during your expected stay, you can be refused entry at the other end.

 

[87 027]

The rules are here:

Travel documents for non-EU nationals - Your Europe

Documents required by non-EU nationals to enter or travel within the EU

europa.eu

In summary:

Entry - on the day of entry, your passport must have been issued within the last 10 years

Exit - on the intended day of exit, your passport must have at least 3 months of further validity

The confusion seems to arise where some authorities incorrectly interpret the rules to mean passports with extended validity are not valid for exit after 9 years and 9 months from the date of issue.

For my most recent trip to Europe I printed out a table showing the rules as per the EU website and then tabulating all the dates accordingly to confirm my passport is still valid even though it is approaching expiry.

By way of example: If your passport was issued on 26th March 2014 then it is 10 years and a day old as of now and is not valid for travel to the EU, even if it says it's valid for longer

Correct

You should ignore any validity more than 10 years after the issue date.

Only for the date of entry test

I think, though I am not certain, that the rule also applies to your date of return. Your passport may still be valid under these rules on the date of departure, but if it should pass the ten-year date during your expected stay, you can be refused entry at the other end.

Not so. This is where people get confused because they conflate the entry and exit criteria. If a passport is valid for entry it is valid for exit if the printed expiry date is 3 months after the intended date of exit (or longer)

 

[westv]

Wasn't this a news item last year and, I'm sure the year before?
People just don't learn.

 

[Enthusiast]

Wasn't this a news item last year and, I'm sure the year before?

Yes it was - and probably the year before that.

The BBC likes to resurrect it regularly as many people are beginning to take holidays. It obviously makes them feel good. They've managed to track down another individual who has had his head buried in the sand for the past four years:

Holidaymakers going to EU caught out by 10-year-passport rule

UK passports can have up to 10 years and nine months on them but EU countries won't accept them.

www.bbc.co.uk

The real news item was at the outset when some airlines were turning passengers away in error because they (the airlines) didn't understand the rules. Hopefully that's finished now and it will all fizzle out over the next four years anyway as the passport office stopped adding on unexpired time in 2018. The BBC will have to find something else to prattle on about then.

 

[Ediswan]

The BBC article quotes Simon Calder as saying "easily a couple of hundred people a day" are being affected. Some warnings are worth repeating.

 

[Bald Rick]

It should be noted this isn't a Brexit thing with the EU "punishing" the UK - it's the same rules they apply to all non-EU nationals.

Well, it is a Brexit thing; if we were still EU nationals then we wouldn‘t be having this conversation!

 

[43096]

The BBC article quotes Simon Calder as saying "easily a couple of hundred people a day" are being affected. Some warnings are worth repeating.

Given the number of people at airport security who are still to grasp the rules about liquids (17 years after they were introduced) and spend a considerable period rooting around in their bags for assorted liquids, lotions and potions, I'm far from convinced repeating the warnings has any effect.

I just look at the whole airport process as an idiot test.

 

[gswindale]

Thankfully our passports are all fully up-to-date and we're fortunately not flying from the world's worst airport for our Easter Break - should we go from the local airport (Heathrow) or pick one a bit further afield where the whole security process is likely to be a bit more family friendly?

 

[Harpers Tate]

It must vary by day and by airport, I think. Back in the days when DSA was still operating, despite its diminutive size, the one time I used it was by far the most "jobsworth" security screening I have ever endured. I disrespectfully called it "small airport syndrome". Sure - the queue wasn't long, but the extent of unnecessary "stripping off" they demanded far exceeded any I have experienced at LHR, MAN and at any overseas airports. And, yes, I do know what the rules are.

 

[nw1]

It should be noted this isn't a Brexit thing with the EU "punishing" the UK - it's the same rules they apply to all non-EU nationals.

It still underlines how stupid Brexit was, and is yet another sign of how Brexit makes our lives more difficult than before.

Not the worst by any means, but drip, drip, drip. Can't stay for longer than 88 full days in every 180 across the whole bloc, more restrictive than before 1973 when you could have spent, say, two weeks in each country and considerably more than 88 days in total as a result. Sky high phone charges meaning you should basically avoid using your phone while in the EU. All these small things add up. And of course, on top of that, much more seriously, the restrictions on freedom of immigration (both ways) and harm to the economy.

Well, it is a Brexit thing; if we were still EU nationals then we wouldn‘t be having this conversation!

Indeed - see my (slightly more forthright) post above.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

The power-hungry EU plans to start fingerprinting UK citizens to make us all feel like criminals for daring to leave.

 

[TheSmiths82]

The power-hungry EU plans to start fingerprinting UK citizens to make us all feel like criminals for daring to leave.

It is a security thing and it applies to all none EU nationals. They were planning to introduce it before Brexit and if were not so stupid this wouldn't have applied to UK citizens anyway.

 

[AlterEgo]

It must vary by day and by airport, I think. Back in the days when DSA was still operating, despite its diminutive size, the one time I used it was by far the most "jobsworth" security screening I have ever endured. I disrespectfully called it "small airport syndrome". Sure - the queue wasn't long, but the extent of unnecessary "stripping off" they demanded far exceeded any I have experienced at LHR, MAN and at any overseas airports. And, yes, I do know what the rules are.

Humberside also had the same attitude problem. Might have changed now though.

 

[nw1]

The power-hungry EU plans to start fingerprinting UK citizens to make us all feel like criminals for daring to leave.

On the one hand, one should really blame the Conservative Party for starting it, not the EU. They instigated both the referendum and Brexit itself, in order to win elections - and it did work for them.

On the other hand, fingerprinting people is IMO unacceptable. To me it indicates slight distrust of foreigners, and is thus basically the same type of politics as Brexit itself.

 

[Buzby]

The power-hungry EU plans to start fingerprinting UK citizens to make us all feel like criminals for daring to leave.

C’mon! The US is even worse and has been for the last 20 years or so - probably because they won the war of Independenc?

 

[AlterEgo]

On the one hand, one should really blame the Conservative Party for starting it, not the EU. They instigated both the referendum and Brexit itself, in order to win elections - and it did work for them.

On the other hand, fingerprinting people is IMO unacceptable. To me it indicates slight distrust of foreigners, and is thus basically the same type of politics as Brexit itself.

Fingerprinting is one way of minimising fraudulent entries, using other people’s passports. The same goes for capturing photos of arriving passengers. I don’t see how it indicates distrust any more than requiring someone to present their passport instead of just taking their word for it that they’re John Smith.

 

[nw1]

Fingerprinting is one way of minimising fraudulent entries, using other people’s passports. The same goes for capturing photos of arriving passengers. I don’t see how it indicates distrust any more than requiring someone to present their passport instead of just taking their word for it that they’re John Smith.

Fingerprinting is associated with charging criminals. To me, it does not make a good or welcoming impression.

Plus, it causes more delays at the border, inconveniencing passengers.

 

[Elwyn]

Having worked in the Border Control business, I would say that fingerprinting is not new. The UK has been fingerprinting many visa and asylum applicants for decades, as do many other modern countries. There is a lot of passport fraud about (in the UK we seize tens of thousands of misused passports every year), and fingerprinting helps establish whether someone is the rightful holder pretty quickly. It also helps allow people enter through e-gates more easily. Anyone who has visited the US a lot will know that at many airports you can often by-pass the passport control queue waiting to see an Immigration Inspector and use their fingerprint operated gates (after your prints have been taken “manually” by an Inspector on your first entry). So fingerprinting has plenty of benefits both for passengers and for the authorities.

The UK and some other countries have been discussing whether to dispense with passports altogether for travel between those specific countries and rely on fingerprints and biographic data instead. There are lots of issues with that but what this basically involves is what is called change. Happens all the time as technology moves on. But I think you’ll find fingerprinting is here to stay (at least until the next technological step supersedes it).

 

[WestAnglian]

The BBC article quotes Simon Calder as saying "easily a couple of hundred people a day" are being affected. Some warnings are worth repeating.

There's long article about this in today's Guardian. People affected all claim they didn't know about the rule. It seems that many people live under a rock. Some blame their travel company, although Tui, one of those blamed, said they tell people by email and on their website. It seems no matter how often you tell people they won't hear until it personally and immediately affects them.

The passport office could help. Why not mailshot those with passports about to fall foul of the rules?

 

[nw1]

There's long article about this in today's Guardian. People affected all claim they didn't know about the rule. It seems that many people live under a rock. Some blame their travel company, although Tui, one of those blamed, said they tell people by email and on their website. It seems no matter how often you tell people they won't hear until it personally and immediately affects them.

The passport office could help. Why not mailshot those with passports about to fall foul of the rules?

I don't think it's a case of "living under a rock".

I was unaware of the rule until now, though it's not going to affect me personally as mine doesn't expire until 2028 and I know that the stated expiry date is 10 years after the issue date.

A printed expiry date ought to be a printed expiry date and should, IMO, be honoured.

 

[sor]

The power-hungry EU plans to start fingerprinting UK citizens to make us all feel like criminals for daring to leave.

Several countries/groups have ETA systems, including the UK.

It's worth pointing out that the EES/ETIAS only applies to the Schengen countries (ie not Ireland) and exempts all EU and EFTA citizens from the additional checks, including Irish citizens, so to say its the "EU" is a bit disingenuous. A UK citizen travelling to Ireland would be waved through just as they are now due to the CTA and long standing UK/Irish laws

 

[jfollows]

There are people who listen to announcements and there are those that don't.

I don't blame anyone for not knowing the passport rules, but they really ought to be verifying/checking their passports in advance of travel, such as when they buy tickets.

So I don't have much sympathy for people who never check these sort of things.

I do. Last year I renewed my passport early because I was going to the USA and I had a Cuban stamp in my passport, and one of Trump's parting gifts was related to this. As it happened, the ruling was subsequently rescinded before I travelled, but it really didn't harm me to get a new passport.

The passport I renewed nominally had validity JAN 14 to AUG 24, so this year it would be problematic to use it anyway.

My husband forgot to renew his US passport so it had expired, he ended up taking a day trip to the US Embassy last February to get a new one. Dual citizenship is fine but he is required to use his US passport when he visits the USA, as we did in June last year.

But we've never fallen foul of any of the bureaucratic and silly rules, we just know what they are and work with them. As most people who post here probably do as well. Since Brexit there has been almost deafening noises from the press about people who get it wrong, so I have probably re-checked that I'm OK about 4 times as well. But some people won't listen.

 

[Enthusiast]

The UK has been fingerprinting many visa and asylum applicants for decades,

Quite possibly. But not when someone arrives from France for a long weekend in London.

People affected all claim they didn't know about the rule. It seems that many people live under a rock. Some blame their travel company, although Tui, one of those blamed, said they tell people by email and on their website. It seems no matter how often you tell people they won't hear until it personally and immediately affects them.

Then they must face up to reality when they emerge from under their rock. International travel involves complying with the rules of your destination. If you cannot be bothered to look them up then you will have to face the consequences. I have travelled four or five times a year since Brexit with various carriers. On every occasion the passport rules have been emphasised to me when booking (and once or twice after that and before I set off for the airport).

 

[AlterEgo]

Fingerprinting is associated with charging criminals.

So is asking for ID, or taking photographs.

To me, it does not make a good or welcoming impression.

Neither does asking you to provide a passport so they can check you have the right to enter, instead of taking it on trust.

Secure borders are a good thing. This feels like something new to get mad at just because, to me.

 

[nw1]

Secure borders are a good thing.

This is a matter of opinion, and there are examples where they do not exist. If they are fundamentally good, why does Schengen exist at all? Why are there not hard borders between its member countries?

Plus the UK and Ireland, of course - there are very obvious reasons why a hard border does not exist.