[wruneari]

Flying Delta turned my dream vacation into a nightmare. It’s been 31 days since I’ve seen my luggage. Try taking a 12-day Mediterranean cruise with no luggage. It’s awkward, inconvenient, expensive and, without appropriate clothing, you can’t eat in the regular dining rooms. Delta afforded me no relief whatsoever and only responded with form emails. I faxed my formal lost luggage complaint when we returned home 11 days ago and have not heard a word from Delta. I called them four days after I faxed my complaint and, after being on hold for forty minutes, I was told it would take 4-6 weeks to process my complaint. Great way to do business.
I should add that we had 3 changes of itineraries before we even boarded a plane due to mechanical difficulties. One plane sat on the runway all night before they discovered a mechanical issue at 6 am the next morning. We barely made our cruise and had to add two days at the end of our trip so we didn’t go to Italy without seeing Rome,
I apologize to anyone who sees this more than once but I plan to post it anywhere I can until I get some satisfaction from Delta.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

The only "satisfaction" you're likely to get from Delta, if you get even that, are worthless travel vouchers. Want some vouchers valid for travel only on February 31st? Then, by all means, accept the vouchers. Otherwise, cash will only come at the other end of a court judgment. There's a Delta PR person who posts on here who will probably get real huffy about my "worthless" comment.

First, you need to send a "demand letter" to Delta. This says something like "You've got 30 days, from the date you receive this letter, to meet my demand of (dollar amount). After that I'm taking you to small claims court"

Your claim in court must be reasonable. That is, if you don't have a lot of receipts (or any) your claim must reflect what the value of the contents of the average traveler's luggage would be even if that means you might be taking a loss. Naturally, you can claim the full value, less depreciation, of anything you have receipts for.

File your action in a court who's jurisdiction covers an airport to which Delta has "mainline" (non-commuter) service. If the court grants you a judgment, and Delta refuses to pay, you will then have some assets to seize, though a Sheriff's/Constable's assistance, in the context of a Writ of Execution.

Remember, attorneys are not allowed at small claims proceedings. If Delta sends a "representative," make sure he/she is just that, and not an attorney. Ask the respresentative, in the presence of the judge, whether they are a licensed attorney. If they lie, that's perjury.

[justme]

To the OP: IMO you are absolutely morally entitled to monetary compensation for your missing things. I am very sorry that you had to go on vacation without all of your belongings. What you should have done though, is filed the claim when you arrived in Italy. As far as I know, you have 24 hours from the time your flight arrives to file the claim. You waited (minimum) 14 days. As far as Delta is concerned, and probably a judge, your clothes could be missing because they were stolen from you while on your cruise or at your hotel in Rome, or for any number of other reasons. As much as it stinks, I doubt you will get more than "worthless" (as Butch calls them) vouchers.

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

Remember, attorneys are not allowed at small claims proceedings. If Delta sends a "representative," make sure he/she is just that, and not an attorney. Ask the respresentative, in the presence of the judge, whether they are a licensed attorney. If they lie, that's perjury.

To Butch: Who else do you expect Delta to send to court if it did go that far. There is no one person "responsible" for luggage that goes missing, they would HAVE to send a "representative." Also, if said "representative" told the OP and the judge s/he was not an attorney but they actually were, it would, by definition, not be perjury unless they were on the stand and had sworn an oath to tell the truth. The definition of perjury is: the voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath. The fact that you are not under oath until you take the stand would mean that it wouldn't be perjury. Lying, yes, perjury, no. A parallel situation that is often misinterpreted is that if you ask a police officer if they are a LEO, and they say no, it is entrapment or they can't arrest you or testify or such. While it is popular "knowledge", it is not true. Think of when a female officer poses as a prostitute, the "John" asks if she a cop, because he thinks if she says no, he's safe from prosecution. Again, not so.

Butch, please don't take my disagreement with your assessment of the definition of the word "perjury" as me saying the OP doesn't deserve any compensation. IMO, he does. But that's because I'm not a corporation trying to make money. The fact of the matter is, he waited 14 days to file the claim. That in and of itself negates any "contract" he had with the airline since he did not hold up his end of the deal by reporting it within 24 hours of arrival.

[Jetliner]

Uh, not so fast justme. Keep in mind they were traveling international. The 24 hour limit would be for domestic (and not even then really.) Keep in mind they were on a cruise. I'm not sure about in Italy, but it's not at all unusual for the cruise line to claim your bag and take it to the port for you. You then get your bag delivered to your stateroom. So, they very well may not have even known the bag was missing until they set sail.

I haven't looked at Delta's contract of carriage, but usually there is a provision that the time limits can be extended if the passenger can show go reason for not reporting the claim in time. Being out on a boat for almost 2 weeks is absolutely a good enough reason. I've heard of Delta taking 3 or 4 months to settle a baggage claim.

As to Butch's suggestion about small claims court, if you do try that let me know how that works for you. They may not be able to send a lawyer, but they can certainly send someone from the legal office, including a paralegal.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

it would, by definition, not be perjury unless they were on the stand and had sworn an oath to tell the truth.

If your best defense is that "your honor I lied, but I wasn't on the stand when I did it," I certainly hope you have a taste for prison liver. Indeed the definition you cited makes no mention, whatsoever, of where the person is when giving their testimony.

As to the oath business: My understanding is that the judge has the bailiff swear you in before you begin your presentation. Likewise the same would apply to a defendant in a small claims action.

As to the matter of the contract, I assume you mean the Contract of Carriage. The question would be whether the OP has a reasonable basis to assert that the combination of unconscionable terms and a "contract of adhesion" render the Contract of Carriage unenforceable as to the cause of action. The OP says "...we barely made our cruise..." Would the court's position be that the OP was obligated to make a high cost ship to shore phone call? That the OP "...barely..." made the cruise was the fault of Delta. Perhaps if her flight had arrived, as scheduled, the OP might have made the necessary report in a timely fashion. True, it appears the OP still had two days, according to your number, remaining after the cruise to make said report. How much hay the defendant has make out of this, and how much weight the court would give to the matter of said two days remains to be seen.

Given the less than stellar image US-based airlines have I find it hard to believe the OP would walk out of court without a dime.

[justme]

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

Indeed the definition you cited makes no mention, whatsoever, of where the person is when giving their testimony. My understanding is that the judge has the bailiff swear you in before you begin your presentation. Likewise the same would apply to a defendant in a small claims action.

I have never in my life heard of a lawyer being sworn in, unless they are testifying, or giving a deposition, in an unrelated case and just happen to be a lawyer by profession. There's no need to "swear to tell the truth" if you're not on the stand, why would a bailiff swear the lawyers in? Doesn't make sense.

As to the matter of the contract, I assume you mean the Contract of Carriage. The question would be whether the OP has a reasonable basis to assert that the combination of unconscionable terms and a "contract of adhesion" render the Contract of Carriage unenforceable as to the cause of action. The OP says "...we barely made our cruise..." Would the court's position be that the OP was obligated to make a high cost ship to shore phone call? That the OP "...barely..." made the cruise was the fault of Delta. Perhaps if her flight had arrived, as scheduled, the OP might have made the necessary report in a timely fashion. True, it appears the OP still had two days, according to your number, remaining after the cruise to make said report. How much hay the defendant has make out of this, and how much weight the court would give to the matter of said two days remains to be seen.

Given the less than stellar image US-based airlines have I find it hard to believe the OP would walk out of court without a dime.

The idea that they "barely" made their cruise could be debated. Barely to you may mean 20 min before departure, to me it may mean 5 min, to the OP it may have meant 2 hours, to a judge deciding on the case, it could be interpreted to mean 45 min. The idea is this, "barely" may or may not result in placing the blame on Delta. The COC doesn't specify how long before your departure time they will get you there. It only says that they will get you there, or make their best effort to rebook you, etc, etc. The OP said there were 3 maintenance delays before they even left. Probably an exaggeration, but none the less, even with 3 delays, they still made the cruise. As far as making an expensive phone call, there's a thing called email that's free. I guarantee the ship had internet access. Moving on, what does the "image" of an airline have to do with a court settlement? The judge isn't going to decide in favor of the airlines because they have a "less than stellar" image, he's going to decide that way because it would be the fair and legal thing to do. As much as you'd like to think myself and others are paid by the airlines to defend them, a judge most certainly is not, and could care less if Delta has to pay a fine. They would be a impartial, outside, objective decision maker.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

I misread the post of Justme. Justme did not say the OP had 14 days to report the loss or delay. Rather that the OP TOOK 14 days to make said report. Accordingly my that "...the OP still had two days...to make said report" should be disregarded.

While I don't think it's particularly fair I DO agree with Jetliner's statement which indicates Delta could send a paralegal as its representative at a small claims proceeding. The plaintiff does have the right to make a motion that the paralegal be removed as Delta's representative. That might not go anywhere, but it would be worth a try. Of course, if the motion was granted, Delta would, almost certainly, have the right to have the hearing recessed to a later date.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

The judge isn't going to decide in favor of the airlines because they have a "less than stellar" image, he's going to decide that way because it would be the fair and legal thing to do.

I've seen collection agencies take my neighbors to Court then, once in Court, the judge exercised his lawful discretion to, in effect, tell the collection agency to get lost.

The publicly-known reputation of a plaintiff, or defendant, in the community, is relevant for consideration by the Court.

I have never in my life heard of a lawyer being sworn in, unless they are testifying, or giving a deposition, in an unrelated case and just happen to be a lawyer by profession. There's no need to "swear to tell the truth" if you're not on the stand, why would a bailiff swear the lawyers in? Doesn't make sense.

No, Justme, it DOESN'T make sense. Once again: Lawyers are NOT, repeat NOT, allowed at small claims proceedings. If you think you can lie at a small claims proceeding, try it and watch what happens. So, we're supposed to believe that, because no one takes the stand at a small claims proceeding, no one will be sworn-in. For the sake of the plaintiff, I hope YOU get to be the representative for Delta. Let me know what you want in your food package while you're bunking with "Mike," who would be a female.

[jimworcs]

All lawyers are legally responsible for the truth before a court,whether they have been sworn in or not.

[Jetliner]

jim - I think you are missing something. I'm not sure how court proceedings go in the UK, but in the US, before you can testify in court you have to be sworn in. Once you are sworn in, if you lie, then it becomes perjury.

[mars6423]

jetliner said "I'm not sure about in Italy, but it's not at all unusual for the cruise line to claim your bag and take it to the port for you. You then get your bag delivered to your stateroom. So, they very well may not have even known the bag was missing until they set sail."

however, i believe that many times, depending on cruiseline and port, the passanger has to claim their luggage and than take it over to the designated desk for their cruise, so that there is no mistake in whose bag is whose, i remember that is how it worked when i went on several of my royal caribbean cruises, but it may be different in different ports/airports and cruiselines i am not sure

so according to what i just wrote, it would mean it is the airlines fault for the OP not having his suitcases and clothes. That must have been really embarrasing and uncomfortable, knowing that you couldnt eat in the restaurant/dinning hall and having non/little clothes that you did have.

It shouldnt matter if you barely made the cruise or not, the airline should be responsible for your suitcase and they should give you monotary damages, especially since a cruise is supposed to be relaxing and worry free. You definately have a good reason to have an extension for not filling out a baggage claim within 24hours, kinda hard to do much about it in the middle of the sea, and besides if people say you could have gone to the computer on the ship when you got on your cruise than they are crazy, the first thing i did (aswell as many others) was go to my room, get everyting settled such as making sure everything is clean and works, than walk around the ship to see what it has to offer, and than grab a bite to eat before a quick swim

i wish you the best on getting compensation that is suitable for the experience you went through, that can ruin a vacation

[jimworcs]

Originally Posted by Jetliner

jim - I think you are missing something. I'm not sure how court proceedings go in the UK, but in the US, before you can testify in court you have to be sworn in. Once you are sworn in, if you lie, then it becomes perjury.

Well in the UK, all lawyers are sworn officers of the Court and have a legal obligation to tell the truth in proceedings, regardless of whether they went on the witness stand or not. If however, a lawyer goes on the witness stand they must be sworn in just like any other witness. I think, as the legal system in the US is based on the UK legal system (except Louisiana), I would be surprised if the rules were any different.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

In the US, the counsel for both (or all) sides in a given case are usually NOT sworn-in. However, as Jim pointed-out is the case in the UK, the same prevails in the US: Lawyers are considered officers of the court. At best an American lawyer who is caught lying, even though he was never sworn-in, can be subject to disbarment or a lesser disciplinary sanction.

My comments about the matter of being sworn-in relate to Justme's possible suggestion that: (1) No one is administered an oath at a small claims proceeding because no one usually take the witness stand, and, (2) You can lie at a small claims proceeding and not suffer any criminal penalties.

[Jetliner]

Butch - I think you misunderstood my point to him (geeze everyone) You said that if a lawyer went thre as the rep, they would be sworn in, and have to admit they were a lawyer since they would then be under oath. He was saying that they are officers of the court and have a duty to tell the truth. So in other words anytime they speak up, it counts. What I was trying to say to jim is that in the US, before anyone testifies, they have to be sworn in, and that once you are sworn in, if you lie, then it's perjury.

The way I'm taking what jim is saying is that in the UK a lawyer wouldn't have to be sworn in if they were in a position of having to give testimony. But in the US everyone who testifies, must be sworn in first.

Also, I'm not sure how this part works in the UK, but in the US, in small claims court, YOU go in as the plaintiff directly against the defendant. No lawyers involved.


To Butch: I know what you are trying to get at as far as even trying to have a paralegal get dismissed. I hate to inform you that who ever they send, they will be very well versed in that contract of carriage, at least as it applies to this situation. Even the manager of baggage service would be more than familiar with it and the law to tear a passenger's case to shreds if the COC has not been followed. Don't fool yourself into thinking that she would be the first one to sue, and yet that COC has remained for the most part the same all these years, only changing due to changing regulations. And I'm not trying to be a jerk to her in regards to if she were to try to sue. But this is how it is. You're hoping that Delta will send some mail clerk that isn't prepared to handled a legal case. But the reality is, even if they don't send a lawyer, the person who does show up will be more than prepared to handle this.

[jimworcs]

Jetliner... you say..

Originally Posted by Jetliner

The way I'm taking what jim is saying is that in the UK a lawyer wouldn't have to be sworn in if they were in a position of having to give testimony. But in the US everyone who testifies, must be sworn in first.

How did you interpret it this way? I said..

If however, a lawyer goes on the witness stand they must be sworn in just like any other witness

Anyway, without getting too technical... in the UK, a solicitor (but not a barrister, a distinction which does not apply in the US) CAN attend a small claims court. However, the proceedings remain informal.

As in the US, anyone who lies under oath has committed perjury. Lawyers who mislead the court, whether sworn in or not, are in breach of their duty as officers of the court and potentially subject to sanctions, which I believe can include contempt of court proceedings and professional disbarrment.

[Jetliner]

I got it from this.

Originally Posted by jimworcs

All lawyers are legally responsible for the truth before a court,whether they have been sworn in or not.

[jimworcs]

Sorry, that is not what I meant!

A lawyer has a legal responsibility in the UK to the court to be truthful... they could not for example introduce evidence that they know to be false or present evidence intended to mislead.

They would not typically give evidence, but if they did, they would have to be sworn in, nothwithstanding their existing obligations. This is a procedural requirement for all witnesses.

[Jetliner]

I'm sorry - I thought you meant if they were going to testify they would not have to be sworn in since they are officers of the court.

[Jetliner]

Well, I just found out something interesting. Seems Butch was quite wrong about lawyers in small claims court. Maybe there's some local law or state law where he is, but I had occasion to come across that subject elsewhere, and there is NO prohibition against lawyers representing someone in small claims court. In fact, as it turns out, there are small claims lawyers you can hire. Kind of makes me wonder about some of the other legal advice he has dispensed on this site.

[AirlinesMustPay]

I have only just seen this thread. Ralph Warner has written a book "Everybody's Guide to Small Claims Court" a work of about 500 pages which I have only browsed through. But it would be a "must read" for anyone bringing a suit in a small claims court in the United States. It is available for free reading on the internet. Some states do allow representation by lawyers and some don't.

But what I have been told by Attorneys in New York is that Judges themselves usually discourage Attorneys from appearing except where a litigant is under some disability which prevents him from adequately setting out his side of the story. Judges prefer to have an informal hearing in these cases, although if the case turns on a point of law, the parties should acquaint themselves with the relevant point of law. In the case where a body corporate such as an airline is a party, some human person must appear for the company and it is usual for an Attorney to represent the company. The Attorney must give advance notice to the Court and to the other side, that he has been retained to appear. The other side can then decide if he also should have an Attorney present.

[AirlinesMustPay]

Regarding the substantive complaint by the OP, if he is still following, he may be interested in knowing that if this was international carriage the Montreal Convention would apply. Under Article 19 the carrier is liable for damages due to delay. Under Article 31(2) the passenger must complain to the carrier about the delay within 21 days of the date when his bags have been given to him. He appears to have complied with this requirement as the bags were not even given to him when he complained.

[mars6423]

usually when there is a small claims case including a large business they would accept (even advise) small claims lawyers for the protection, but that depends on situations, and airlinesmustpay is correct about that he said in this instance

[Jetliner]

Right, but:

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

Remember, attorneys are not allowed at small claims proceedings. If Delta sends a "representative," make sure he/she is just that, and not an attorney. Ask the respresentative, in the presence of the judge, whether they are a licensed attorney. If they lie, that's perjury.

This statement is not true. Lawyers ARE allowed in small claims court. NY might discourage it, or limit it, but not in all states. It's a very long story, but what I ended up finding out is that in some states they actually have small claims court lawyers. Generally you still have to show up, but saying that a lawyer is not allowed is wrong.

As I said, maybe there is some local or state thing where he is that flat out says no lawyers, but I doubt it.

[PHXFlyer]

It does indeed vary by state. Some states do not allow representation by an attorney in the court itself but one is permitted to consult with one prior. Some states allow attorneys as long as both sides are represented by attorneys. Some states do not allow attorneys for the small claims proceeding but then do allow attorneys to be involved if there is an appeal. One needs to check the laws of his/her own state. There is no "blanket" law across the US prohibiting representation by an attorney in small claims court.

[AirlinesMustPay]

I spent some time in Los Angeles some time ago, and was involved in a small claims case. I went to an Attorney to ask him to retain me. He was willing to give me some advice but said he was not allowed to appear in a small claims court. I checked with the court and true enough, they said that representation by Attorneys was not allowed.