How to Get around ridiculous UK Travel quarantine rules

28 replies

Taylor

Singapore Airlines - The PPS Club

Member since 19 Mar 2016

Total posts 52

In the most respective way possible, I don't at this stage of time see any difference between "getting around the rules" and breaking the law. No difference what so ever.

If it was a FF hack, yes but this for what its worth in my opinion this isn't the time nor place for such commentary/question.

521303

Member since 03 Jan 2012

Total posts 60

Further to my original post. whilst folks may feel that I owe others some kind of "duty of care" for breathing, no such duty actually exists. I maintain that the risk of Covid 19, as originally modelled by Ferguson et al that led to lock down in the first place was that around 3.6% of the population would die. WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. Evidence of actual deaths from both the UK and USA is clearly shlowing that real deaths (rather than modelled ones) are about 0.1 - 0.2% overall and around 0.002 for anyone aged under 45. They're incredibly low for anyone under 65 (working age population). Lockdown was a massive mistake and the quicker we get the economy going and people travelling again the better. There are far easier and more effective ways of protecting the elderly than locking every citizen up for months and years. Why should I suffer because you all accepted a mistaken Policy decision by our respective Governments in the UK, USA and Australia (and even worse in NZ)? Bad rules deserve no respect. One more comment, the actual risk for anyone under 24 years old in the UK and USA is around 1 death for every 3,500,000 residents in that age band. By comparison, 1 person in 700,000 wil die from lightning strike. The risk is so ridiculously small it is unbelievable that grown adults are actually complying with "the rules".

rckjiang

Member since 16 Jun 2017

Total posts 36

This is the worst case of “your rules don't apply to me because I'm somehow privileged” type of attitude.... pull your head out of it....

snapperhead

Member since 17 Feb 2020

Total posts 2

I suggest you see what's occurring in the USA this week, especially with the new diagnosed cases of people under 45. If you don't like the decisions of certain governments, then maybe you would be better off living in Brazil, where you poor attitude would be more acceptable.

AnthonyConstantinou

Member since 26 Jun 2020

Total posts 1

As far as mortality's concern, it would be good if we follow the quarantine rule.

patrickk

Qantas

Member since 19 Apr 2012

Total posts 508

Originally Posted by 521303

Further to my original post. whilst folks may feel that I owe others some kind of "duty of care" for breathing, no such duty actually exists. I maintain that the risk of Covid 19, as originally modelled by Ferguson et al that led to lock down in the first place was that around 3.6% of the population would die. WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. Evidence of actual deaths from both the UK and USA is clearly shlowing that real deaths (rather than modelled ones) are about 0.1 - 0.2% overall and around 0.002 for anyone aged under 45. They're incredibly low for anyone under 65 (working age population). Lockdown was a massive mistake and the quicker we get the economy going and people travelling again the better. There are far easier and more effective ways of protecting the elderly than locking every citizen up for months and years. Why should I suffer because you all accepted a mistaken Policy decision by our respective Governments in the UK, USA and Australia (and even worse in NZ)? Bad rules deserve no respect. One more comment, the actual risk for anyone under 24 years old in the UK and USA is around 1 death for every 3,500,000 residents in that age band. By comparison, 1 person in 700,000 wil die from lightning strike. The risk is so ridiculously small it is unbelievable that grown adults are actually complying with "the rules".

521303 it is not deaths that is the issue it is hospital beds and around 10% of those under 40 who get it end up in a hospital bed and the system without any other public health measures (as you suggest) soon clogs up as New York, Spain, and Italy soon found. Note all of the places you cite Sweden with a partial lockdown has around .5% infection rate. That means 5000 extra hospital beds. With no lockdown it would far many more.

pb2492

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 31 May 2019

Total posts 8

The rules state that there is a 'common travel area' of the UK and Republic of Ireland, however if you land in Dublin and fill in your entry card nominating an address in England, you will not be asked for that card or to fill in a new one on your arrival in England. Some people have therefore concluded this is a loophole to entering the UK without adhering to the 14 day isolation. It is worth considering that they plan to do random checks at addresses nominated, the fines are around £1000, and a violation may get you prohibited from entry to the UK in future. There is also talk that regional lockdowns may be implemented where infection rates spike, which would forcefully prohibit domestic travel in/through those regions (i.e. no loopholes... the police will just take you away).

XWu

Member since 09 May 2020

Total posts 5

Originally Posted by pb2492

The rules state that there is a 'common travel area' of the UK and Republic of Ireland, however if you land in Dublin and fill in your entry card nominating an address in England, you will not be asked for that card or to fill in a new one on your arrival in England. Some people have therefore concluded this is a loophole to entering the UK without adhering to the 14 day isolation. It is worth considering that they plan to do random checks at addresses nominated, the fines are around £1000, and a violation may get you prohibited from entry to the UK in future. There is also talk that regional lockdowns may be implemented where infection rates spike, which would forcefully prohibit domestic travel in/through those regions (i.e. no loopholes... the police will just take you away).

I was wondering about that since the Brexit EU negotiations involved this backdoor as well but I think the ability to police the checks would really depend on the volume of people using this


Clancy

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 31 Jan 2016

Total posts 62

521303

It's a sad indictment when Nick Kyrgios is the sound option.

patrickk

Qantas

Member since 19 Apr 2012

Total posts 508

Originally Posted by Clancy

521303

It's a sad indictment when Nick Kyrgios is the sound option.

Indeed Clancy who would've thought Nic the voice of reason.

P

Member since 17 Jan 2018

Total posts 11

Believe (EU) and by default the UK (until they leave of course) has seen the light and recognised the need to open up their economies to/visitors from low risk countries. Problem solved! On the other hand A,NZ can continue to isolate themselves for as long as the politicians want (and public opinion supports) but the island mentality does not work in a Global economy for countries with small populations and limited influence. A,NZ will pay a disproportionate price as a result.

patrickk

Qantas

Member since 19 Apr 2012

Total posts 508

P a quick check will show most countries of the world currently require a 14 day quarantine, so we are not alone.

J Wilmore

Air France - Flying Blue

Member since 10 Nov 2017

Total posts 3

A bit of a moot point now that the UK has allowed arrivals from Australia without quarantine, but the OP could have flown to Dublin and advised the Republic of Ireland border control that they were staying 14 days in Belfast, exit the terminal then re enter the terminal later in the day and taken a flight to the UK mainland.

rnickey mouse

Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer

Member since 13 Jan 2018

Total posts 5

What an entertaining thread. Loving it. 521303, please post more.

Hi Guest, join in the discussion on How to Get around ridiculous UK Travel quarantine rules

Attach Files