[mpk176]

US Airways has found a “scam” to charge more than advertised for in-lap infants. The bottom line is that when you select that you have an in-lap infant in an online ticket purchase, their online reservation system does not purchase the ticket (which should be at a rate of 10% of the current fare). I believe this charge is for international flights. You can actually verify this through their website as I have three times. In any case, here is the US Airways scam. Thinking you booked the lap-infant, at check in, when your only other choice is to skip the flight or leave your child, they charge you 10% the much inflated current rate (of course not the rate your seat was charged at). This truly looks like a scam to charge families with infants 3-5 times the rate they claim to charge and I cannot get US Airways to fix the problem. US Airways official response is: “This is the responsibility of the passenger to know the process and rules prior to travel.” The funny thing is that prior to the flight we called US Airways twice asking because we did not see a ticket for our infant; both times they said to get the ticket when we check in. This is really an unacceptable practice that US Airways has not been willing to listen to my four complaints.

[Gromit801]

I keep hoping the FAA bans lap child seating completely. I can't fathom why parents would show complete disregard for the safety of their child. All airlines hate the whole "lap child" concept. As a parent, there is no earthly way for you to hold onto your child if the plane hits sudden turbulence, you're not strong enough, or fast enough to overcome the laws of physics.

You know what flight crews call lap children? Missiles.

[mpk176]

Gromit801, what kind of logic brings a discussion from airlines having a scam to overcharge you to lap infants being dangerous. Are you such an airline sympathizer that you fail to see any wrong doing by the airlines?

Let me put it this way. For the price I paid for a lap infant, I could have purchased a seat for the infant, and had the "safer" choice (as deemed by Sir Gromit, of course without statistics, evidence, etc.).

FYI, FAA has found that in 23 years of data, three deaths would have been saved by child restraints. In any case, this is not very compelling to fathom over! What we should be worried about is the extra radiation exposure, for such a small child. By the way, what law of physics do you have to overcome to hold on to your child during turbulence? Ever law I know of does not necessarily confirm you hunch!

[jimworcs]

I do my best not to agree with airline sympathsizers, but I am afraid the seat belt debate is not as clear cut as you portray mpk...read this...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...ety-belts.html

Your baby can weigh 120ibs when the g-forces in turbulance are taken into account.

[A320FAN]

Originally Posted by mpk176

US Airways has found a “scam” to charge more than advertised for in-lap infants. The bottom line is that when you select that you have an in-lap infant in an online ticket purchase, their online reservation system does not purchase the ticket (which should be at a rate of 10% of the current fare). I believe this charge is for international flights. You can actually verify this through their website as I have three times. In any case, here is the US Airways scam. Thinking you booked the lap-infant, at check in, when your only other choice is to skip the flight or leave your child, they charge you 10% the much inflated current rate (of course not the rate your seat was charged at). This truly looks like a scam to charge families with infants 3-5 times the rate they claim to charge and I cannot get US Airways to fix the problem. US Airways official response is: “This is the responsibility of the passenger to know the process and rules prior to travel.” The funny thing is that prior to the flight we called US Airways twice asking because we did not see a ticket for our infant; both times they said to get the ticket when we check in. This is really an unacceptable practice that US Airways has not been willing to listen to my four complaints.

On international flights, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PAY THE DEPARTURE TAXES WHEN DEPARTING A FOREIGN COUNTRY BACK TO THE UNITED STATES ON INFANTS. Believe it or not, this can be found in the airline's terms and conditions. Each country sets it's own departure tax rates.

I also have to agree with Gromit you should just outright by the seat for your infant.

[mpk176]

OK, no one likes my decision to fly with an infant in my lap. Fine. This is my choice. I am not trying to argue this.

Re A320FAN, actually US Airways removed the taxes (somehow) to drop the ticket price. So I question that they are required, but I accept that. What I am complaining about is that I tried to purchase a ticket (online and calling in) 3 months prior to the flight. I was told nothing was needed. On flight day I got a 10% of the last-minute fare. Thus, what would have been a $90 fare became $500.

[Gromit801]

Originally Posted by mpk176

By the way, what law of physics do you have to overcome to hold on to your child during turbulence? Ever law I know of does not necessarily confirm you hunch!

The link that Jim provided says it quite well. The laws in question mainly concern mass, momentum, weight, and your own human reflexes.

You can hold on to a child as tight as you can, but a sudden drop of the aircraft due to an air pocket will shuck that child right out of your arms before your senses realize what happened. Child then hits ceiling, then slams to the floor or a seat.

If the laws of almost every state, and most nations require children of certain sizes to be in child-seats while in much slower cars, they sure as hell ought to be required on aircraft flying much faster, and operating around all three axis or motion.

[jimworcs]

The case the FAA uses for not mandating child seats on aircraft is not based on the safety of the child in the aircraft. In fact, they argue that if they require infants to have a seat, more families would travel by road and the death rates on the roads are much higher. This ludicrous argument could be used for not having children have a seat at any age.

Anyway, I think the thread drift is driving mpk nuts, so back to the substantive point. US Airways does appear to be bamboozling their customers for profit, but when I travelled with my infant son on them from Charlotte, NC to Gatwick the charge was 10% of the standard fare, not 10% of the fare currently advertised. Therefore, the infant charge didn't change, regardless of when you booked. If that is still the same rule, mpk was not effectively charged more.

[mpk176]

Jim, you are right. The standard for international flights is 10% of the current standard fare plus (as A320FAN mentioned) taxes. But, on a fully booked flight, the standard fare fluctuates to a high value. In our case, because we complained about this, US Airways was somehow able to drop the taxes and/or fees, but could not drop the fare to the rate when we purchased. Oddly, I would have thought only the opposite possible.

I got a call from a customer rep from US Airways last night. Apparently, their online purchasing works this way (where you select an in-lap infant but never book it) because of previous fraudulent activity. It sure would be nice if the system made this clear. Perhaps it comes down to a lack of incentive.

[jimworcs]

US Airways are full of it. What kind of fraud can you perpitrate by booking a lap child. Do they think you are going to try and sit a 23 year old on your lap?