“I feel that I have been treated pretty lousy by Delta”

You know, these kinds of cases always puzzle me, as far as the company reaction. Let’s assume, just for the sake of supposing, that Ms. Polzin’s camera was worth $250 — a mid-range for digital cameras. How much money, I wonder, has Delta since spent in deying her claim, in terms of paperwork and employee resources? Plus, if she does take them to small claims court, they’re probably going to end up buying her a new camera, anyway. Why not just cut the check and have done with it? Even if she’s lying through her teeth (which I seriously doubt), in the end, it’s costing Delta more in administrative headaches than just writing a bleeping check.

Having said that, I realize Ms. Polzin was tired and wanted nothing more than to get home. However, I probably would have insisted on getting my camera and any other valuables out of my carry-on bag before allowing it to be checked. Either that, or I’d have had a TSA-approved luggage lock to snap on the bag before I allowed it to leave my hands. These locks are small and can be carried easily.

If she had her camera in a separate bag, she could also have removed it and said, “OK. This is my carry-on.” I have a smaller camera, and I carry it in a bag, but it’s a cosmetics bag I got as a free gift at one point. It doesn’t look anything like a camera case, which is the point of the exercise. It’s sad that we have to worry about these kinds of things, but we do.

Yes, I agree that Delta owes Ms. Polzin money for the camera. Though we might not be getting all of the information, this sounds like exactly the type of case where intervention by an ombudsman could make all the difference.

What could she have done differently? One should always make a copy of his/her paperwork before it is mailed anywhere – just in case they encounter CS agents who can’t locate the originals. Also, If you are travelling with anything that is valuable to you (camera with pictures, jewelry, etc.) you MUST make sure that you bring a carry-on that can fit under your seat. Why risk something like this happening, especially since she stated “The last time I refused to give up my carry-on, I had a hard time getting it under my seat” ?!

I seems a ltitle open and shut to me. It appears by Delta’s own wording that liability is implied unless the waiver’s signed, and she didn’t sign the waiver.

There is a much better legal argument that is being missed here. The terms of Delta’s Conditions of Carriage, which is strictly construed against Delta is that the waiver is limited to the “unsuitability of such items as checked baggage and/or the inadequacy of their packaging”

What makes an item unsuitable for checked baggage. When an item is very fragile and cannot withstand being flung around like…cargo. In this case, the loss did NOT arise from the unsuitability of the camera as checked luggage or other packing issue. The loss arose from theft. As such the waiver is ineffective in this instance.

The waiver would be effective if say, the lens had broken.

I’d just file a small claims actions against Delta. Its cheap and easy.

That’s happened to me, Beth. I had to gate-check my bag a couple of times when it wouldn’t fit because the plane was an RJ. But I carried a small tote as my “personal item” and had my travel documents, camera and valuables in that. I carry one of those “wallet on a string” purses when I travel and I just pack that in my regular bag and transfer my ID and credit cards to it when I get to my acommodation. Otherwise, they stay in a documents folder that stays with me. My camera and anything remotely of value ALWAYS go in my tote, and never in my other bag–just in case I have to gate-check it. But I’m paranoid and suspcious. I’ve also never had anything stolen from my luggage.

But Delta still owes her for the camera. Denying her claim is useless and, as I noted above, costs more than the camera is worth.

I had a similar… but WORSE… situation very recently from a small flight out of Miami International Airport. American Airlines / American Eagle forced me to valet check a small carry on case (20″) by the planeside… and more than $3k worth of camera gear was stolen by one of their baggage handlers. The short flight was the only time the bag was out of my sight.

The original post outlining the situation here:
http://www.mergeweddings.com/posts/american-airlines-pilferage/

Totally unhelpful reply from AA customer relations here:
http://www.mergeweddings.com/posts/american-airlines-pilferage-followup-aa/

DOT auto response after filing a complaint here:
http://www.mergeweddings.com/posts/american-airlines-pilferage-airconsumer-acknowledgement-dot-acpd

Digital cameras are usually quite small, and can fit easily even into a woman’s pocketbook. Why did Ms. Polzin put the bag in her “carryon” luggage in the first place? Sure, Delta could make an exception to the rules and cover her loss, but they are under no obligation to do so. Suppose the item in question had been a diamond ring, would she have put it in her carry-on???

I recall their is a case pending either in Federal Appeal Court or the Supreme Court dealing with this issue. That is if an airline makes a passanger check a bag at a gate that was brought as a carry one, can the limitation on loss check luggage apply. Perhaps Chris know about this case?

It is exactly because of concerns like this that I travel with two carry-on bags when I fly – one “personal item” that is very small, a backpack, that holds my valuable electronics (laptop and SLR camera equipment). The second bag is my “carry on” bag, a rolling carry on overnight bag. Flight attendants may decide to tell me I have to check my overnight bag with my change of clothes and toiletries, but there is NO WAY they are getting that little backpack away from me.

I’ve never had to argue the point (fortunately I don’t fly routes that involve RJ aircraft, and I always board as early as possible to stake out my space) but if ever challenged I will point out that: 1) the bag contains several thousand dollars of equipment that is not covered for loss under the airline’s contract of carriage; and 2) the bag contains lithium batteries that FAA regulations require should travel in the airplane’s cabin, not the cargo hold, for safety reasons.

My Tamrac and Kata backpacks that I use for this are both small enough to fit easily in even the smallest overhead bin, and even under the seats of most jets. I highly recommend using these sorts of small bags for this equipment if you are traveling with it.

Another thing I do before flying is I check the aircraft types of my flights in advance, so I know in whether I might be forced to gate-check something last minute and I can select my carry-on sizes appropriately.

However, I travel so much that I usually only have carry-ons that fit on the smallest of planes, so my valuables are always with me. I figure that if a checked bag goes lost, I can file a claim according to the policies of the carrier’s contract of carriage.

Gate-checked bags have a gray area of liability that I am not comfortable with.

Delta is absolutely responsible. By their own contract language they needed to get a signed waiver and they did not. They lost her bag and now they refuse to compensate her. Even if she had signed the waiver I’m not sure it would have been upheld in a court of law. A person is already checked in to board a plane and the airline either says we take your bag or you don’t fly. If you resist and question, you will be arrested for a federal crime. I’m not sure how that could be legal.

Also, some keep saying how cameras will fit into a small handbag. Yea, the cheap chitty cameras might but not good ones. Good cameras and those with decent zoom capability are much larger than the pocket cameras people buy for $200 and will not fit into a small handbag. Good cameras also cost far more than that $200 price tag too.

Better idea – how about airlines be forced to honor their own baggage and carry-on allowances? The limits should be determined by available space / maximum passenger capacity. I’d happily trade a few dimensional inches for the assurance that I would never have to gate-check a properly-sized bag.

If a smaller aircraft requires a smaller carry-on allowance, that should be communicated to the passenger at the time the flight is booked. Airlines know which planes fly which routes. There would still be the occasional last-minute switch to a smaller plane, but how often does that happen, really?

Delta had a clear duty as bailor of the digital camera. But, I feel that she should have disclosed that the camera was in the bag, it might have made the gate agent try and accommodate it in the cabin. That being said, it is a reasonable assumption that your items WILL NOT get broken just by checking them.

@Jennifer- Don’t give the airlines any ideas, they may see this as a revenue stream. I agree with you, that some of the carry on rules are too frequently ignored, but I went out of my way to buy a roll-aboard that meets every major airline’s size requirements.

I see real value to the idea of gate checking. I frequently fly on a RJ or even a turboprop from home airport to a hub, and then on a much bigger plane to my final destination. I know my carry on will fit in the overhead on the larger plane, so I take it with me and gate check it. Being forced to checking the bag at my home airport, means it will be checked for both legs of the flight, and an annoying wait at baggage claim when all I want to do is get to the office or go to sleep. If I were compelled to check my bag (and pay for it) for the entire trip because of the size of the RJ, I would be far more likely to just drive the 2 1/2 hours to the hub airport.

Oh, come on, being tired does not relieve you of common sense. Take the camera OUT of the bag. Take the drugs, the electronics, take whatever you want to ENSURE ends up at the other end out of a checked bag.

If they gave you a bag tag for it at the gate, then it was checked luggage. Sorry – you lose. Even if they give you ‘no choice’ because the overheads and other onboard storage are full. Or even if they decide to claim the overheads are full – what you going to do about it on board? Interfere with the lawful instructions of a flight crew? In New york.

It may be harsh, but thems the rules. And the rule is – anything you want to arrive with you needs to be carried BY you personally.

@ David: A bailor? A gratuitous bailor only has a minimal duty of care – which was met here. Judge Judy [and any other trier of fact] would laugh you out of court.

@Joe

Check out the contract language carefully. Even had she signed the waiver, it is only directed towards the unsuitability due to the issue of breakage, not theft. Unless Delta wants to say that cameras as unsuitable to be in checked bags because Delta employs dishonest people. :)

It didn’t used to be this way. I used to be able to check my luggage and it would appear at my destination untouched. I don’t trust any airline any longer, are they hiring thieves? I have lost a total of 3 bags and a car seat in the last three years that were never found. None of them contained real valuables but when you lose a bunch of clothes, many new with tags on them you start to wonder what is going on. On top of that the stories you hear…I just can’t help but wonder why they can’t hire people who can be trusted with people’s belongings. It’s theft and carelessness on their part, yet you have to fight for compensation.

Did she pay with American Express?
A gate agent broke my camera in Egypt
and AmEx paid to have it fixed. It is
covered in the “buyer protection” package.

Lots of good opinions floating around …

To me it is really as simple as Tanya said a few comments above. We are not talking about a simple the bag was accidentally dropped or shifted in flight damaging an item – we are talking about an airline refusing to take responsibility for the people they hire.

Let’s have a look at Delta’s Conditions of Carriage – Rule 190 C 4

4. Responsibility for Carry-On Baggage
Carry-on baggage which remains in the custody of the passenger is the sole responsibility of the passenger. Delta will not accept claims for lost, forgotten, or stolen carry-on baggage unless such baggage is tendered to Delta’s in-flight personnel for storage during flight or otherwise delivered into the custody of Delta. Storage in overhead bins or under a seat shall not be construed as delivery into Delta’s custody.

but it was surrendered at the gate …

Delta state that it is the responsibility of the passenger to identify photographic equipment in checked luggage … is that so the baggage handlers know which bags to target?

I can’t wait to see a CoC that says: “by flying xyz airlines, you indemnify the airline for the dishonesty and criminal actions of our employees.”

Just looking at Delta’s COC …

1. General Limitation of Liability For Loss of, Damage to, or Delay in Delivery of
Baggage Delta’s liability for the loss of, damage to, or delay in the delivery of a fare-paying passenger’s personal property delivered into Delta’s custody, including checked baggage and carry-on baggage tendered to Delta’s in-flight personnel for storage during flight or otherwise delivered into the custody of Delta, shall be limited to proven damage or loss. Actual value for reimbursement of lost or damaged property shall be determined by the documented original purchase price less any applicable depreciation for prior usage. Under no circumstances shall the liability for loss of, damage to, or delay in the delivery of baggage exceed $3,300 per fare-paying passenger unless the passenger elects to declare a higher value in advance and pay for excess valuation as provided below. These limitations shall also apply to baggage or personal property accepted by Delta for temporary storage at a city or airport ticket office or elsewhere before or after the passenger’s trip.

The problem here is proving it … she didn’t identify the camera, therefore can’t prove it was in there sufficiently… is that why the handlers went woohoo a free camera maybe?

@David Z

But that’s the rub. In your hypo, its one person with a good reputation who steals and surprises people. By comparison, today, we almost expect the baggage handlers to pilfer our belongings which is why no experienced traveler ever checks valuable items. Its clear the the airlines ought to figure out someway to ensure the safety of the contents of checked luggag, and they would if they were liable for for the losses.

I agree with the airline on this one. Contrary to Chris’s opening line, she did have a choice. She could have removed the camera from the bag before turning it over. I travel on “baby jets” a lot with a laptop. The laptop always joins me in the cabin because I don’t trust baggage handlers not to break it or steal it. She turned over a fragile item to gets tossed around which is not smart.

If you want everything in your bag covered against loss, be ready for the airline to require that they inventory your bag when you give it to them. Anyone up for having their things rummaged through by the airline? How about you bag dumped at check in?

The fact is even if you take it to court, you’d have to prove that the camera was in there when you turned it over. You can’t. You’d have to prove that the airline violated your contract with them (actually you failed to comply with the terms of the contract).

I think this is a lesson learned for everyone. Don’t give the airlines anything valuable. They state in their contracts they don’t want it.

@Joe

I respectfully disagree. The exclusionary language states that they will accept the camera is the passenger waivers loss due to damage (paraphrasing). Since there is no loss due to damage, the waiver is irrelevent.

I would then argue that even if the waiver applied, the fact that gate checking is an exception to common expectations. At regular check-in the airline discloses the rules very carefully. You know what size, weight, contents, etc. are appropriate and can plan accordingly.

Gate checked luggage is an accomodation for the airline, not the passenger. It happens quickly, without notice, and is basically an inconvenience to the passenger. Consequently, the airlines’s normal rules should be strictly construed against the airlines.

But that’s the rub.

Indeed, and it’s arguably easy to tell others what to do despite the understandable frustration. But what if they’re called out to it if found not capable of “walking the talk”? (although that shouldn’t necessarily be an issue, maybe…)

The other Jennifer brings up a possible dilemma: baggage handlers’ wages. Delta could increase them to try discouraging the “need” to pilfer baggage, but…they might pass on that increase to consumers somehow. (and I’m sure we can imagine a whole bunch of other undesirable scenarios, yeesh…)

Anyway, the main point here is Ms. Polzin wants Delta to do something about what happened. A catch with letting someone else handle this, though, is one is potentially leaving themselves at their mercy and come out more frustrated if nothing “productive” happens.

Rather than that, we might as well take it upon ourselves to do everything humanly possible to ensure things like this don’t happen. But…we’re all human.

@ Carver: I don’t disagree with the idea that DL has been behaving badly and it is likely that their own employees pilfered the bag, but here is the provision quoted with my comments and explanations:

Cameras, lenses, flash bulbs, projectors, video cameras, and other photographic or cinematographic equipment … may be accepted [as checked luggage] upon the condition

[Delta agrees to take checked luggage containing foregoing items if the passenger]

that the passenger agree in advance and in writing to release the carrier of liability for loss or damage resulting from the unsuitability of such items as checked baggage and/or the inadequacy of their packaging, in a Limited Liability Release form to be provided by Delta.

[passenger needs to declare the items are in the bag as a condition of DL accepting the bag - if the passenger fails to disclose it then DL would not have accepted the bag. The only way that DL accepts these items is if the passenger waives the risk of loss [i.e., theft] and damage.]

A gate check is covered by this policy. Even though it seems it may not be given the common rushing around which occurs at gate check bag time, you need to pay attention to what is in your bag. DL will argue that its flight attendants and gate agents lack the authority to modify the contract. And the contract probably says so,

This is the simple common sense rule nothing should go in checked luggage that you need or want to see again . . .

@joe

The reason I have to disagree is because when the airlines set up the rules to put the passenger in a catch-22, judges frown on that.

Consider, the very common scenario. On a given trip, I am likely to pack the following items in my carry-on. Computer with power cord, headphones, Ipod, spare set of prescription eyeglass, several bottles of medications which must be taken daily. And a couple data devices, e.g. thumb drives, Data DVD’s, etc. This all fits nicely in my carry-on which is compliant with all airlines.

I am not in a position to lose any of these items. That is why they are not checked into baggage. I followed the rules. Now, these items are not packed to withstand being thrown around by baggage handlers, not does my carryon have a lock, as I reasonably don’t expect it to be out of my immediate possession at any point.

Now, at the gate, the GA, TA, or anyone else, orders me to Gate check. I’m screwed. Bend over, hold my ankles screwed.

None of those items are appropriate for regular checked luggage for reasons that I don’t think are in dispute. But the airline, unilaterally, placed my items at risk, solely for its own convenience. My choices, comply or don’t fly.

And this indeed happened to me. I had to gate check those items. I was nervous to say the least.

I don’t think a state court judge would be very happy about that situation. IF then the airlines tried to deny the claim.