RyanAir Denied Boarding- Unlawful?

[apmf]

Hi,

To cut the story short

Myself - Indian National previously held 5 years EU Family Residence Card (married to an EU national) and after 5 years, I am issued a Permanent U.K residence Card 4years back, but no mention of 'Family Member of EU national'.
Spouse- Spanish National

We were denied boarding on Ryanair flight to Italy at Stanstead Airport even after their own staff previously signed ' Visa checked ' at the Baggage drop of area at the airport. At the final boarding gate, Ryan staff ignored the fact that:-

a) Proof of previous 5 Years EU family Residence card on my passport issued in the U.K

b) Travelling with my EU national spouse - not willing to accept our U.K Marriage Cerificate

c) EU directive 2004/38/EC - Free Movement Rights- wordings/extracts

d) My 5 year old son who holds a U.K passport and his Birth certificate stating me as the Biological father.

e) Previous Ryan Air staff member has checked and signed the boarding pass

I must say it was the first the time in past 9 years we ever had any issues like that, saying that we did not ever travel on Ryan air. It all happened so quick as the staff were in so hurry to get thier flight of the ground and they were not willing to speak to the Immigration officer or at least their supervisors.

They failed to give me anything in writing to state why I was denied boarding even after several attempts from us, we were left with no choice other than video recording the whole event for the interest of personal safety and evidences.

We were then asked to raise the complaint with their customer service team after waiting for over 1hrs to collect our checked in baggage.
Eventually we managed to get hold of the Ryan Passenger service team manager who surprisingly was already aware of what went with us at the boarding gate but repeatedly demanded that we must delete the video recording as they now realized they have made the mistake, however we politely refused to delete the video recording exercising our rights, as we have no other evidence of this unfairness and unlawful act. Infact we explained back that we are currently video recording this whole conversation with the customer team aswell.

After long winded argument, they managed to rebook a seperate flight to a nearby destination 9 hours later than previously booked.
They didnot offer even a bottle of water, anything in writing or the summary of what happened and we were advised to contact their online team which is their standard protocol. At some point they accepted that they could have avoided all this if their boarding gate team would have contacted the Immigration support or the manger but they usually prioritize the flight departure as they get hefty fines from the Airport authority and is not cost effective as their business model!!

So, based on our above situation, I have managed to read few cases where people have taken it legal on the grounds of not complying with the law- Human rights, Consumer Rights.. since Ryan air's defence would most likely argue and manipulate court that we failed to provide necessary paperworks when demanded or worst come that we were late at the check-in desk which all led to Ryan air staff making that decison of refusal as the fact remains that people wouldn't have any substantial evidence to prove their verdict and I understand video recordings may not always be admissible in the court in our case

Well, I am writing to get some advise or if you guys know of anything similar so I can approach this matter in a sensible manner.
I am prepared to take this further to small claims, not sure if I should get a solicitor involved who also understand Flight compensation laws together with Human RightsAct.

I hope what happened there must not happen with anyone of us, it truely was one of the most traumatic and patronising experiences specially when you are travelling with a 5 year old.

Thanks for taking the time to read this far. Much appreciated.

[JoeCross]

I'm sorry, I can't give you any advice, but I don't quite understand why did they refuse boarding? Do you have a visa for the country that you travel to?

[secret.simon]

I am issued a Permanent U.K residence Card 4years back, but no mention of 'Family Member of EU national'.

That is interesting. Can you upload a photo of both sides of the PR Card, redacting all personally identifable information?

When you applied for that card, did you apply for PR under the EEA Regulations, or had you applied for ILR under Long Residence or some other category in the UK? A card issued under the UK Immigration Rules does not give visa-free travel in the rest of the EU.

EU law only requires that a person holding an Article 10 or Article 20 Residence Card issued by an EEA member-state (that states "Family Member of a Union Citizen") is allowed to travel visa-free within the EU.

Also see this recent case (2018) in the UK, where Ryanair was fined for carrying a person in almost exactly the same circumstance as you, a non-EU family member of an EU citizen whose residence card did not contain the words "Family Member of a Union Citizen".

As far as they did not separate the family, I do not see how human rights are involved. You do not have a human right to board a flight.

[apmf]

I'm sorry, I can't give you any advice, but I don't quite understand why did they refuse boarding? Do you have a visa for the country that you travel to?

Not sure why they did they refuse boarding initially and let me go after 8 hours on a seperate flight same day to a nearby destination and thats what my whole argument is !

I do not need a visa to travel to another EU country, please refer to the following -

''All EU citizens and their family members have the right to move and reside freely within the EU. This is set forth in Article 21 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The rules on free movement as established in Directive 2004/38''

[secret.simon]

''All EU citizens and their family members have the right to move and reside freely within the EU. This is set forth in Article 21 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The rules on free movement as established in Directive 2004/38''

Did you click through on the link about the judgment?

[apmf]

That is interesting. Can you upload a photo of both sides of the PR Card, redacting all personally identifable information?

Thanks, I am unable to upload attachment at the moment, seems i need to contact the forum board admin.
To give you an idea- The previous 5 years Residence card stated on the Type of Document- 'Residence Card of a Family Member of an EEA national' which was valid until oct 2012
If i remember correctly I had to apply for Permanent residence card using EEA4 form before Oct 2012 and I was issued Permanent residence Card valid from Dec 2012 to Dec 2022
This time it states under Remarks- "No restriction on the holder's activity in the U.K"

I did question this with UKBA at that time regarding why there is no reference to EU family member on the PR, the response I got was this is a 10 yrs Permanent residence card not a ILR and any body should be be able to interpret that it was issued based on previous 5 years EU family members Residence card !
And yes, I never ever had any issues at any EU airports with the immigration officers never even have to provide marriage certificates. Yes occasional airline ground staff they used to question but after the spoke to their supervisors they always gave me a go ahead.
I guess I was unfortunate.

[apmf]

''All EU citizens and their family members have the right to move and reside freely within the EU. This is set forth in Article 21 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The rules on free movement as established in Directive 2004/38''

Did you click through on the link about the judgment?

Many thanks, I did came across this before, i would need to read this out when I have moment.
In regards to breaching Human rights, i am with you, I am probably wrong, the only thing which annoys me is how can an airline staff has the authrority to refuse boarding without any written explanation even after several demands.
I shall come back to you once I have read the whole case.
Thanks

[apmf]

Did you click through on the link about the judgment?

Just had a read through unfortunately it doesnot seems to have much relevance to my claim.

In the above case, a non EU national was denied entry to the UK by UKBA on the grounds that he failed to provide sufficient paperworks to support that his status as a family member of an EU national, that the facts of the case tended to indicate that the non -EU national presented a residence card with additional remarks stating "Family member" at the interview with UKBA officals which was later found to be issued under domestic Austrian law rather than EU-wide statutes hence fails compliance and therby Ryanair's claim was rejected and £2k fine imposed by the UKBA was proven to be lawful.

[vinny]

I believe that 48 may be flawed.

Further, I do not think that the duty to give someone "every reasonable opportunity" to "prove by other means" that he has a right of free movement (in accordance with article 5(4) of the Directive) means that the UK Border Force must always tell a person lacking appropriate documentation that he can seek to establish a right of free movement in some other way. Perhaps there may be circumstances in which providing "every reasonable opportunity" to prove a right of free movement necessarily involves drawing the relevant individual's attention to the fact that he has that opportunity, but there is, as I see it, no general rule to that effect.

If the immigration Officer did not explain that such persons had other opportunities to "prove by other means” to establish a right of free movement, then this effectively undermines giving such persons every reasonable opportunity.

[Obie]

I agree with you, Vinny. One does not know which oath some of these so called judges took. They are meant to uphold the law, but they seem to be deliberately misinterpreting it.

I read 5(4) as meaning that the woman must be even every opportunity. If she claimed she is married, then she must be advised what documents she needs to provide. If she claims she is a dependent family member, then the officers at port, are duty bound to inform her what to bring to establish her case.

The difficulties with this case, is that it was found that this person does not have free movement rights or the documents she provided is not one that was issued under Article 10.

Whatever the UK government says, the fact remain that MRAX is still is still good law and the UK must comply with its consequence until at least the 31-10-2019 or maybe even thereafter.