Imagine arriving at Manchester Airport in your wedding suit (or wedding-mussed T-shirt) clutching a one-way ticket to paradise, only to be told you can’t board because of a smudge. That was the abrupt, soul-crushing reality for 31-year-old Josh Reekie from Barnsley, South Yorkshire, who had planned a dream £2,400 (about 105,600 baht) honeymoon in Phuket with his new wife, Eden—until Etihad Airways staff stepped in and said his passport was “too damaged.”
A honeymoon grounded by a smudge
According to Reekie, airline staff pointed to what they described as water damage on a 2019 Thailand entry stamp. “I was absolutely gutted,” he said. “They said there was a smudge on a stamp from Thailand in 2019. Who’s to say that didn’t happen when it was stamped and closed?” It’s a fair question: the passport’s photo page was reportedly immaculate, and the couple had used the same document up to 12 times in the previous year without incident.
Still, after a 30-minute wait at the check-in desk, the verdict was final: Josh would not be allowed to board the Manchester-to-Phuket flight. Eden’s passport passed muster, but that only made the scene feel stranger. “It felt surreal walking into an airport and then being told to leave without flying. We were so stressed after spending all that money,” Reekie told reporters.
When one refusal ripples through a holiday
The couple’s two-week TUI package holiday unraveled after Josh was denied the outbound flight. TUI cancelled their accommodation and return flight, leaving the newlyweds scrambling. With time and options running out, the pair paid up again for a last-minute alternative — a getaway to Cyprus — while trying to sort refunds and replacement documents.
Reekie managed to obtain a new passport within 48 hours, but, as he put it, “the damage was done.” He’s now demanding refunds from both Etihad Airways and TUI and says neither company has helped him to his satisfaction. “I was disappointed by how little empathy Etihad showed. People save all year for a trip like this, and for someone to just say ‘you’re not going’ without a second opinion—it’s soul-destroying.”
Etihad’s stance and Thailand’s rules
Etihad confirmed the refusal and said it had consulted Thai immigration authorities. The airline stated: “A passenger flying from Manchester to Phuket on October 7 was denied boarding due to visible water damage in their passport.” Thai guidance, the airline said, advised that the passport did not meet entry requirements.
It’s worth noting the official criteria Etihad quoted: British passports must be machine-readable and fully intact — no water damage, torn pages, delamination, or illegible details. For some travellers, that language sounds straightforward; for others, it reads like an invitation to endless gatehouse interpretations. Either way, when a stamp from years earlier becomes “illegible” in the eyes of officials, the consequences can ruin a holiday.
How to avoid a passport fiasco
This case is a painful reminder that small passport issues can have big consequences. Here are practical steps to reduce the risk of being turned away at check-in:
- Inspect your passport before traveling: check for watermarks, smudges, torn or loose pages, and any delamination of the cover or data page.
- Keep the most important pages dry: store your passport in a protective sleeve or ziplock while travelling to prevent water damage.
- Scan or photograph the passport: keep digital copies in cloud storage so you have a backup if anything goes wrong.
- Replace damaged passports early: if you spot damage, apply for a replacement immediately — expedited services are available for urgent travel.
- Know the entry rules of your destination: some countries are stricter than others about the physical condition of passports.
Refunds, empathy and a cautionary tale
Reekie’s frustration is understandable: couples save, plan and anticipate once-in-a-lifetime experiences, and no amount of paperwork should be allowed to wipe that smile off the honeymoon photos. While Etihad said it followed advice from Thai authorities, many feel a second opinion or a clearer explanation at the airport might’ve made a difference.
For travellers, this saga is both a cautionary tale and a nudge to double-check travel documents long before the taxi to the airport arrives. For airlines and tour operators, it’s a reminder that clear communication and customer empathy matter—especially when decisions can wreck someone’s wedding-week plans.
As for Josh and Eden, they’ll remember that first-world honeymoon hiccup for a long time—though perhaps with an amusing story to share over future anniversaries. They’re not alone in demanding refunds, and the wider travel community will be watching how Etihad and TUI handle this dispute. In the meantime: check your passport, pack a spare sense of humour, and maybe keep the smudges away from the stamps.
I can’t believe Etihad kicked me off my honeymoon flight because of a smudge on an old Thai stamp. We were in our wedding clothes and had spent £2,400 — it felt like being punished for something impossible to predict. I’m fighting for refunds and some basic human decency.
It was devastating and surreal watching him be told he couldn’t fly while I could. Our two-week holiday was cancelled and we had to scramble for alternatives.
We followed Thai immigration guidance and denied boarding due to visible water damage on the passport. Our priority is passenger safety and compliance with entry requirements.
Airlines are required to ensure documents meet the destination’s entry rules, but there’s room for judgement and inconsistencies at the gate. If the passport’s data page was intact, a clearer explanation should have been offered before ruining a wedding trip. Josh might have grounds to challenge the decision legally or via a formal complaint.
I appreciate the legal angle, Lawrence, but there was no empathy and no second opinion offered. We want refunds and a proper apology, not platitudes.
We’re sorry to hear about Josh and Eden’s experience; TUI cancelled their package after the outbound flight could not be taken. Please contact our support with your booking details so we can investigate.
Classic — blame the passenger and wash hands immediately. TUI could have paused the booking while the couple sought proof instead of cancelling outright.
TUI making money off cancellations is as old as the package holiday.
This is why I check passports every month before a trip, even for local breaks. Staff need empathy when someone’s about to cry on their honeymoon.
Empathy is fine but rules exist for a reason.
Sure rules exist, but humans should use judgment — a five-year-old stamp spot shouldn’t wreck a wedding. Airlines are meant to help, not traumatize.
Why are immigration rules so nitpicky about a tiny smudge? Feels like a power trip by gate agents.
It’s not about power, it’s about avoiding being stuck with someone who might be refused entry on arrival. Agents would rather be strict than have a passenger deported or stranded abroad.
Fair, but a clearer standard is needed.
From an administrative law perspective, the delegation of discretion to frontline staff is problematic when it leads to arbitrary outcomes. If Etihad claims Thai immigration guidance, that should be documented and communicated transparently. There should be an appeal or second-opinion mechanism at check-in.
Agreed — suggest Josh lodge a formal complaint and request the specific Thai guideline cited, plus a written refusal. If unsatisfied, he may pursue a chargeback for the card payment and escalate through aviation ombudsman channels.
Exactly — transparency can prevent these cascading cancellations and losses. Airlines and tour operators should have protocols for temporary holds.
Always scan passports, and if you spot any wear, renew early — it’s cheap peace of mind. Pack a protective sleeve and take photos of entry stamps. That said, airlines sometimes interpret ‘too damaged’ more strictly than necessary.
Good tips, but not everyone can get an emergency passport within 48 hours like some people did. This isn’t realistic for many travelers.
True, emergency services are uneven and can be pricey.
My heart goes out to them; this could have been handled with more compassion. If Etihad and TUI don’t refund, I’ll boycott both.
Public pressure is useful, but legal remedies may be stronger: file formal complaints, request chargebacks, and document all costs. A consumer rights complaint to the UK Civil Aviation Authority or ombudsman can also apply pressure.
Gate staff have power and sometimes wield it without training. This smudge ruling smells like incompetence rather than law.
Our teams are trained according to destination requirements and immigration guidance; decisions are never taken lightly. We regret the distress caused and encourage the customer to reach our complaints team.
That’s a PR response, not empathy — until I see a refund I remain skeptical.
Why would a tiny smudge stop you from going on a honeymoon, that’s mean.
It seems unfair, but countries do have strict entry rules for identity verification. Use a plastic sleeve and check passports earlier — simple habits can avoid big heartbreaks.
I think airlines and hotels use minor technicalities to avoid refunds and squeeze extra revenue. There’s a whole industry of loopholes where ‘damaged documents’ become excuses. People should be suspicious whenever corporate statements superficially follow rules.
Conspiracy aside, statistics about denied boardings show rare but real policy-driven refusals; it’s usually risk aversion. But greater transparency would reduce suspicion.
Risk aversion or cash grab, either way the customer loses. More regulation needed to ensure consistent, documented refusals.
From decades in the industry, safety and compliance come first, but passenger service matters too. I’ve seen cases where a minor defect led to refusal because the destination would not accept the document. Still, there should be clearer checks before a final ‘no board’ call.
As someone’s partner who has dealt with this, the emotional toll is underestimated. Training on empathy would help crews handle such incidents better.
Empathy training is cheap compared to the PR fallout.
Travel insurance might have covered the extra costs if the policy included ‘missed departure’ or ‘document problems’, but pre-existing damage might complicate claims. Read the small print — many policies exclude neglect. They should pursue claims alongside complaints to the providers.
Most policies cover unforeseen events, but not denial due to a clearly damaged passport you knew about. If they can show they didn’t know, some insurers will consider ex-gratia payments.