Flt 976 diverted due to suspicious object

[jimntx]

Newark-Geneva diverted to Boston after suspicious object found in seatback pocket. Turns out to be camera left in airsick bag.


http://www.cnn.com/2...tml?hpt=hp_bn10

If they find the owner of the camera, he/she should be billed for the cost of the diversion. There is also the issue of assuming the plane was cleaned after its last arrival at EWR, shouldn't the cleaners have checked ALL the seatback pockets?

 

[FWAAA]

What rationale exists for charging the owner of the camera for the costs of the diversion? Every day, airline passengers forget cell phones, tablets and cameras (and hundreds or thousands of other valuables) onboard airplanes. And now you want to punish their forgetfulness with a bill that could reach into the tens of thousands of dollars? This was a 767 and may or may not have dumped 50k pounds of fuel (or more) prior to landing. A diversion of a 777 or 747 could exceed $100k.

If anyone should bear the costs of this diversion, it should be the doofus who made the decision to divert the plane. That person should pony up, not the poor shmuck who lost their camera. Finding a camera in an airsick bag in a seat back pocket isn't reason to spend thousands of dollars on a diversion.