United does not make such a distinction, nor does Delta to my knowledge. If someone at DL made this representation to you, they were wrong. If you receive a claim check for the item, it becomes checked baggage and is subject to the carrier's limitations on liability. Items carried into and remaining in the cabin (not in custody of Delta or its representatives) during the flight are the responsibility of the passenger and liability is generally waived. That's not the way their Conditions of Carriage are written and there's no way they would be able to skirt liability for such a situation. Liability limitations are generally OK and enforceable, unless unreasonably stingy, but blanket waivers are not.

At first blush, the OP will likely be stuck with the 1131 SDR Montreal Convention limitation on liability. Moreover, the United CoC specifically excludes camera equipment from the liability limitations, so to add insult to injury, the value of the photography equipment will not count toward the limit.

The lesson here is to purchase excess valuation 'insurance' when items of significant worth need to be checked (the airline is required to offer it, or may refuse to accept the item). A corollary, of course, is not to check the item in the first place, but sometimes you have to.

It's an unfortunate situation and one that occurs rather frequently in this era with seemingly dozens of gate checked items on every flight.

Again, this is correct if the item remained in the cabin the entire flight. If you gate check the item and receive a claim check from the airline, then liability limitations unequivocally apply.

Sorry it wasnt to the airline but the CC that I used to buy the camera or the 1 I used to purcahse my tkt. But I was covered since it was just recently purchased and I got the full amount back. I dont think the OP just purchased the $5k in equipment but maybe some of it they did and could be their CC will cover it like it did mine. But then Offically it was a checked bag while mine wasnt

On research, EWR764 has this this right.

From consumer travel (not the best reference) but I found other supporting evidence on the web

From Top 10 Myths on airplane luggage

"3. If you have to gate-check a carry-on bag for a flight on a regional jet, the airlines’ rules on their liability limitations don’t apply to the gate-checked bag. — That’s just a myth. If you’re flying on a regional jet or small propeller plane, make sure none of your valuables or breakables are in your gate-checked bag."

Yes you can, there is no excuse on this part, everyone do that if they were forced to gate checked their carryon bag, and I do that too, it is only about how important the stuff inside the bag to you.


Yep, you said it is $5000+ worth of equipment, but how old are they and do you have a receipt ?

Even if your items were not lost and instead of stolen, and if you go to small claim court, the judge would still calculate how many years you have that equipment (provide you still have all the receipts) to calculate depreciation value, then look online to find the median cost, what you are going to get may even less than half of what you claim to be.



+1

What should one do in such a case when they insist on gate-checking stuff that shouldn't be checked?

it really depends on a situation, doesnt it? Like everything else in life.
Going into extreme - why not give GA your personal story like the OP did here to thousands of people?
Why not explain that this is extremely expensive equipment?

Less extreme but more confrontational - take the lenses and camera out, attach them together and put it on your neck.

Try to make the bag smaller somehow.

Ask a fellow passenger to take one of your cameras past GA

Ask for supervisor, explain it all to the sup.

anything I or anyone else can answer to this question is pure fiction.

"It Depends". I would certainly not check in anything of value at the gate on a mainliner that crosses an ocean, customs, tsa, luggage handlers.

I always carry thousands of dollars of equipment with me when I travel and I always refuse to check my carry-on. I've never been forced after explaining that they will be liable for my equipment if anything happens to it.

I think you will find such liability loosely attached so I wouldnt count on it as protection.

The purpose of air travel is moving people, not expensive delicate equipment - the airline is correct to limit their liability and ask you to ship such equipment with insurance and means appropriate - not as luggage.

I think its not the fact of liability, but the threat of it.
There is nothing wrong with carrying expensive camera in a proper sized bag. Lets not go overboard here with shipping laptops or cameras just because airlines are "moving" people.
Especially since airlines also move luggage and contract to move cargo... sometimes precious - like body parts for transplantation.

Actually, that would not have worked in this case. If the item, such as a camera, is excluded from the base amount of coverage, then it's also not covered by excess coverage purchased from the carrier.

We *ARE* moving it appropriately--carrying it on the plane. If it somehow became broken that way other than due to an airplane failure (say, it got flooded) I wouldn't think the airline should be responsible.

However, when they defeat our protections due to their stupidity (if they would actually enforce the personal-item-under-the-seat rule and limit carryons appropriately there wouldn't be the problem) they should be liable.