Subject:
|
Re: Carryon vs. checked (Re: WTB: 6557 (really, really badly) and 6861
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Sun, 7 Mar 1999 19:07:54 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
CJC@avoidspamNEWSGUY.COM
|
Viewed:
|
554 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote:
> As for checked... I HATE it when I have to check something. I know that
> at best, I am in for a delay. Sometimes a substantial delay to the tune
> of having to come back the next day. I know that my luggage is going to
> get tossed around unfeelingly. Anything inside is much more likey to be
> damaged. The luggage itself is more likely to come back wet, dirty,
> scuffed, or even damaged. If I ask for gentle handling, I get no
> satisfaction. All I get to do is sign a waiver.
I don't fly much, actually never when I can avoid it, so I don't know
much about it. But isn't the airline responsible for any damage they
might cause to your luggage?
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Meet more LEGO fans in your area through LUGNET
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Carryon vs. checked (Re: WTB: 6557 (really, really badly) and 6861
|
| (...) Yes, but dirt, wet, straps torn off, scratches, or rips in the material are all "normal wear and tear", so, **essentially**, no. (26 years ago, 7-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
Message is in Reply To:
90 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
