Government reverses new ETA requirement for Heathrow transit passengers

That’s great news. The visa requirement was mentioned last night during the Zoom RS Travel show presentation, and I thought it could be an issue of a flight change caused a stop through Heathrow that hadn’t been planned originally.

It is not, and never was, a visa, but glad they've made the change for pax that are just connecting.

Has anyone seen what happens if your connecting flight is cancelled? Our unexpected 3-day stay in 2023 meant we had to find lodging outside the terminal, so this scenario is still pretty fresh for us. Is it better then to be safe and apply anyway? Or are they still working on that issue?

Hi Laurel - would you please consider revising the title to your post to mention "UK ETA" rather than "visa"?

People looking for information about the UK ETA might well miss your update when looking through the Forum

The subject line is a direct quote of The Independent article title. Fine points of ETA vs Visa (same issue with ETIAS) are apparently lost on the general public.

Good news.
I think if I were just transiting I would get one in place anyway before traveling.
You never know what might delay you and cause an unexpected UK stay.

Per the other thread on the same subject which was updated last night it seems that the information on the news wires is incorrect - this is intended to apply also to Manchester, but additionally has to go to Parliament for approval.
Until that happens next week we simply don't know the fine details. Anything suggested now could be amended or refused in Parliament.

I don't doubt the subject line is a direct quote from a UK newspaper. It's a bit impenetrable though at first glance for a non-UK audience (most of which the Forum is, and the totality of whom the ETA applies to). I just think someone scrolling through is likely to miss this, was suggesting to give the post more visibility for those wondering about the ETA.

There are so, so many transit passengers that requirieng each to get the ETA visa was sort of nutz. This claimed it lost them 90.000 transit passengers .... but this might be a little politically biased. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/aug/12/heathrow-transfer-passengers-fee-eta-scheme

It appears the article has been corrected, as the headline now reads “Government reverses new ETA requirement . . . “

Calling ETA or ETIAS a visa is confusing and can lead to all kinds of issues. In the other ETA thread there is already a post from someone who assumed she/he could cancel their visa application and simply get an ETA instead.

Transit passengers from certain nationalities actually do require a visa to transit in the UK and they will continue to need one even when an ETA is no longer required to transit.

I do think it's less confusing to call it an ETA, although I understand what you are saying, Laurel. That said, I'm not sure if this changed after you copied the link, but when I clicked on it just now, the website is stating it is an ETA in the title: Government reverses new ETA requirement for Heathrow transit passengers.

I edited the subject line. It was 100% changed after the fact. I checked the title specifically when Kim made the suggestion and it was still visa at that time. Guess the source got some feedback, too.