yulhammeryyz

Hi,

I havent been able to find a clear answer from Delta or on the forum so far:

we plan on traveling with our infant, currently under 2 as a lap infant.

the trip would begin prior to her second birthday and return after her second birthday. Is she still considered a lap child for this trip in whole or would we need to do something different?

indufan

They don't check ID. If it is that close, go for it. Or don't go for it if you can afford the other seat.

jrl767

technically, it's age on the day of travel that governs ... for domestic segments, as indufan states, it's probably not an issue

Mr. Tickets

The infant birthday must be entered in the parent's PNR, so it is possible they may check and catch it, although that would unlikely.

eyeballer

We had a trip that straddled the 2nd birthday too.. however we started buying seats for our son at around 20 months. Was way more comfortable for all of us.

yulhammeryyz

Thanks for the responses.
This will be a trip to Canada, not domestic.
I’ve entered her passport info so they should know her age.

Often1

The ticket and fare rule is based on an FAA safety rule. It has nothing to do with when you purchased the ticket or how many segments the child was <2. All that matters is age on the date of travel.

Might you get away with ticket fraud? Sure, But, this is about safety and at 2 a child needs their own seat. How will you feel if you beat the system and there is an incident and the child goes flying and is injured, injures someone else or both?

btonkid12345

Fake news (bolding mine)

exwannabe

The OP would be buying the ticket in knowledge that it is not valid for the intended use and hoping DL does not catch them, and thereby doing so to avoid paying DL what they would have owed for the service.

Maybe some lawyer can quibble, but it is fraud under the common understanding.

I find those who support KNOWINGLY doing this no different from ordinary thieves.

NOTE: This is far different than if the OP had just did so w/o realizing the age was at travel day, not initial travel day. In that case it would have been an honest mistake, though OP could still be on the hook for an expensive Day of Departure replacement ticket.

ethernal

Melodramatic much? I don't think it magically becomes materially less safe when a random baby is 1 year and 364 days old as opposed to 1 year and 365 days old.

Understand that a line has to be drawn somewhere (quite frankly I'd prefer that all babies required a seat regardless of age!) but you're being a bit ridiculous here.

OP probably needs another ticket on the return leg. That's all you needed to say.

rickg523

More like legalism.
Ticket fraud describes a criminal act and possibly charge.
May be legalistically correct, but no one is getting charged with a felony over this. Nor would any airline with a PR consultant bring civil action. It won't happen, but to connote disapproval a poster might characterize it that way.
Could a GA call them on the return, even make them buy a seat, or delay the entire family if no seat is available? Sure. A GA in a foul mood can deny boarding to anyone for mopery with intent to gawk if they want to. Plenty of such cases populate FT. But chances are pretty slim that anything like that will happen because the child is 745 days old instead of 730. Certainly not accusations of ticket fraud. By the carrier.
Maybe here on FT....

Howste

I thought that's what they wanted.

exwannabe

Delete me.Dupe.

exwannabe

Well, I would argue that it is more like being moral.

Because one would never be charged with a crime when they know they are stealing does not make it right.

But I guess some of us have different standards.

ethernal

It most be nice living in such a black and white world with such clear unambiguous moral absolutism...