Regulations & Safety
Airline Baggage Tag Fraud Risks and Security Measures in 2024
Explore how discarded airline baggage tags enable fraud and identity theft, impacting airlines and travelers globally in 2024.
The simple act of discarding an airline baggage tag at an airport may seem trivial, but recent warnings from industry professionals have revealed it as a significant security vulnerability. Action 9 attorney Jason Stoogenke and several airline insiders have highlighted how criminals are exploiting this oversight to commit identity theft and perpetrate fraudulent baggage claims. As air travel becomes more digitized and streamlined, the convergence of accessible personal information and high-volume airport environments has created fertile ground for fraud. This article explores the mechanics of baggage tag fraud, its financial and operational impact on Airlines and travelers, and the evolving strategies for mitigation.
Airlines are facing a surge in fraudulent claims, with Delta Air Lines reporting a notable “influx” directly linked to the misuse of discarded baggage tags. Documented cases have shown criminals successfully extracting hundreds of thousands of dollars from airlines by exploiting information found on these tags. With the airline industry spending billions annually on mishandled baggage, the implications of such fraud are both widespread and costly. Understanding the risks and implementing effective countermeasures is becoming an essential aspect of modern travel security.
This analysis draws on expert insights, industry data, and real-world examples to provide a comprehensive overview of the issue, offering practical recommendations for travelers and highlighting the broader context of travel-related fraud.
Baggage tag fraud is a sophisticated form of identity theft that leverages the routine behaviors of travelers and the operational needs of airlines. According to a Delta Air Lines baggage claims manager, criminals often position themselves in baggage claim areas, watching as passengers remove and discard their luggage tags. These tags, which typically contain a passenger’s full name, flight numbers, airline details, baggage ID numbers, and sometimes frequent flyer membership numbers, provide enough information for scammers to file convincing false claims.
The process is straightforward yet effective. Criminals collect discarded tags and use the information to create fake email addresses, generate random phone numbers and addresses, and submit detailed claims for supposedly missing or stolen items. Airlines, obligated to compensate up to $3,800 for domestic flights and about $1,750 for international flights under the Montreal Convention, can become easy targets if the claims appear legitimate and the provided information matches their records.
The systematic nature of these operations suggests organized criminal activity. Not only do criminals exploit airport environments, but similar tactics have been reported in hotels, where travelers may leave baggage tags behind in their rooms. This adaptability indicates a broader strategy targeting the travel industry at multiple points, exploiting vulnerabilities wherever personal information is left unprotected.
“Scammers have developed systematic approaches to collecting discarded tags, understanding that the information contained within these seemingly worthless pieces of paper provides everything necessary to initiate fraudulent claims against airlines.”, Delta Air Lines baggage claims manager The financial repercussions of baggage tag fraud extend well beyond individual travelers. Airlines worldwide handled 33.4 million mishandled baggage cases in 2024, incurring approximately $5 billion in related costs. While not all of this is directly due to fraud, systematic exploitation of baggage tags is a substantial contributor.
High-profile cases, such as that involving Louisiana residents Pernell Anthony Jones Jr. and Donmonick Martin, illustrate the scale of potential losses. Over several years, these individuals defrauded airlines of more than $550,000 by filing false claims using information obtained from baggage tags. Their operation, which included booking flights under false identities and submitting claims for items that were never lost, demonstrates how lucrative and persistent these schemes can be. The structure of airline compensation policies creates strong incentives for fraud. With relatively low barriers to filing claims and high potential payouts, organized criminals are increasingly targeting airline systems. Even as baggage mishandling rates improve, down to 6.3 per 1,000 passengers in 2024, fraudsters may find it easier to slip through the cracks as legitimate claims become less frequent and potentially receive less scrutiny.
Industry experts are divided on the scale but united on the seriousness of the threat. Gary Leff, a travel industry analyst, acknowledges the theoretical risk but notes that airlines’ sophisticated baggage tracking systems make it hard for criminals to claim a bag was lost if it was actually delivered. However, a more common tactic is to claim items were missing from bags that were delivered, a scenario harder for airlines to disprove.
Security professionals and travel editors, like Clint Henderson of The Points Guy, urge travelers to treat baggage tags like sensitive financial documents. The rationale is clear: the personal data on these tags can be the gateway to more significant identity theft or fraud. Cybersecurity experts further warn that the risk is not limited to physical theft; digital breaches involving travel-related services have exposed hundreds of thousands of records, demonstrating the value of travel data to criminals.
The consensus is that while not every discarded tag will lead to fraud, the risk is real and growing, especially as criminal tactics become more sophisticated and as travel resumes post-pandemic. The need for traveler awareness and improved industry practices is more pressing than ever.
“Travelers should treat baggage tags as they would bank statements or credit card receipts, shredding them at home rather than discarding them in public spaces.”, Clint Henderson, The Points Guy Baggage tag fraud is part of a larger ecosystem of travel-related scams and identity theft. The digitization of air travel, with widespread use of barcodes, RFID tags, and digital boarding passes, has increased both convenience and vulnerability. Airports, processing thousands of passengers daily, provide an ideal environment for criminals to operate with minimal risk of detection.
Internationally, responses to this threat vary. Japan, for example, has introduced secure disposal bins for baggage tags near baggage claim exits, acknowledging the security risk posed by discarded travel documents. In contrast, many Airports in other countries lack such infrastructure, leaving travelers to manage their own security.
Airlines and security professionals recommend several practical steps: retain baggage tags until you return home, shred them before disposal, and consider using privacy luggage tags that conceal personal information. Technology solutions, such as digital tracking devices (e.g., Apple AirTags), offer additional security by allowing travelers to monitor their luggage without exposing personal details.
Advanced technologies are reshaping baggage security. Digital trackers provide real-time location monitoring, reducing reliance on visible tags and minimizing exposure of personal information. Privacy-focused luggage tags, with covers or sliding panels, offer a low-tech but effective way to obscure sensitive data. On the industry side, airlines are beginning to adopt artificial intelligence and machine learning to detect suspicious claim patterns. These systems can flag potentially fraudulent claims based on unusual activity, helping to stem losses before they escalate.
Looking forward, technologies like blockchain for baggage tracking and biometric identification could further reduce vulnerabilities. However, these solutions require significant investment and coordination across airlines and airports, making widespread adoption a longer-term prospect.
The exploitation of discarded baggage tags is a clear and growing threat, with organized criminals leveraging the smallest lapses in traveler vigilance to commit large-scale fraud. As airlines and airports continue to modernize, they must balance operational efficiency with robust security measures, recognizing that even minor information leaks can have major financial and reputational consequences.
The future of travel security will likely be shaped by a combination of technological innovation, regulatory adaptation, and consumer education. As awareness grows and industry practices evolve, travelers will play a crucial role in safeguarding their own information, while airlines and regulators must work together to close the gaps that criminals continue to exploit.
Why is it risky to throw away baggage tags at the airport? What should travelers do with their baggage tags after a flight? Are there any technological solutions to prevent baggage tag fraud? How much can airlines be required to pay for lost or mishandled baggage? Is baggage tag fraud a widespread issue? Sources: Yahoo News
The Hidden Dangers of Discarded Baggage Tags: An Emerging Threat to Airline Security and Consumer Protection
Understanding the Mechanics of Baggage Tag Fraud
Financial Impact and Industry Costs
Expert Analysis and Professional Perspectives
Broader Context and Industry Responses
Technological Solutions and Future Developments
Conclusion and Future Implications
FAQ
Discarded baggage tags can contain personal information such as your name, flight details, and frequent flyer numbers, which criminals can use to file fraudulent baggage claims or commit identity theft.
Experts recommend retaining baggage tags until you return home and then shredding them to prevent unauthorized access to your personal information.
Yes, digital tracking devices and privacy-focused luggage tags can help protect your information. Some airports are also introducing secure disposal bins for travel documents.
Airlines may be required to compensate up to $3,800 for domestic flights and about $1,750 for international flights, depending on regulations and the Montreal Convention.
While not every traveler is affected, documented cases and industry warnings indicate that the risk is growing, especially as criminals adapt their tactics and exploit operational vulnerabilities.
Photo Credit: NFC Tags
Regulations & Safety
Stolen Cessna 172 Crashes into Hangar at Van Nuys Airport
A stolen Cessna 172 crashed into a hangar at Van Nuys Airport. Suspect arrested; FAA and FBI investigate security breach at busy general aviation airport.
This article summarizes reporting by NBC Los Angeles and Jonathan Lloyd.
A security breach at Van Nuys Airports (VNY) early Thursday morning resulted in the theft and subsequent crash of a single-engine aircraft. According to reporting by NBC Los Angeles, a suspect broke into a flight school facility and attempted to commandeer a Cessna 172 before crashing the plane into a nearby hangar building. Authorities have confirmed that the aircraft never successfully became airborne.
Law enforcement officials, including the Los Angeles Airport Police (LAXPD) and the FBI, responded immediately to the scene. The suspect was taken into custody without incident, and no injuries were reported on the ground or in the aircraft. The incident has prompted a federal investigation into the security protocols at one of the world’s busiest general aviation airports.
The incident began in the pre-dawn hours of December 18, 2025. According to a timeline compiled from reports by NBC4 and KTLA, the suspect trespassed onto the airport grounds around 4:00 AM. The individual targeted a flight training facility located near the 7900 block of Balboa Boulevard, an area densely populated with Commercial-Aircraft academies and hangars.
After gaining access to the flight school, the suspect boarded a white single-engine Cessna 172. Around 5:00 AM, the suspect attempted to operate the aircraft. NBC Los Angeles reports that the plane was stolen directly from the flight school’s ramp.
“A small plane crashed in a building at Van Nuys Airport after it was stolen from a flight school, officials tell NBC4 Investigates.”
— NBC Los Angeles
While the suspect managed to start the engine and begin taxiing, they lost control of the aircraft before reaching a runway. The plane surged forward and impacted a hangar nose-first. Aerial video footage broadcast by KTLA showed the aircraft’s nose embedded in the metal siding of the structure, leaving a distinct hole in the exterior wall. The propeller and nose cone sustained significant damage, rendering the aircraft inoperable.
Following the crash, LAXPD officers arrested the suspect at the scene. CBS Los Angeles and other local outlets have identified the individual as 37-year-old Ceffareno Michael Logan. He was booked on suspicion of burglary and theft of an aircraft. According to verified reports from Patch and NTD News, bail for Logan has been set at $150,000. As of the latest updates, authorities have not disclosed a motive for the theft, nor have they confirmed whether the suspect possessed any prior flight training or a pilot’s license. The swift arrival of law enforcement prevented any further attempts to move the aircraft or flee the scene.
The investigation has expanded beyond local police to include federal agencies. Both the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are on-site to assist LAXPD. Their inquiry will likely focus on how the suspect breached the perimeter and accessed the aircraft keys or ignition system.
Crews were observed later in the morning extracting the damaged Cessna from the hangar wall and towing it back to the flight academy’s facility. Despite the dramatic nature of the event, airport operations at Van Nuys were not significantly disrupted, as the crash was contained within the flight school’s specific ramp area.
While commercial airports operate under the strict passenger screening protocols of the TSA, general aviation (GA) airports like Van Nuys face different security challenges. VNY is a massive facility with multiple access points for Private-Jets businesses, hangars, and flight schools. This incident highlights the vulnerability of “insider” areas where aircraft are parked.
Although rare, the theft of aircraft is a known risk in the aviation industry. In 2018, a ground service agent stole a Q400 turboprop from Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, a tragedy that ended in a fatal crash. Fortunately, in this instance at Van Nuys, the suspect failed to achieve flight, preventing a potentially catastrophic outcome over the densely populated San Fernando Valley. We anticipate this event will trigger a review of after-hours key storage and perimeter security standards for flight schools operating at VNY.
Stolen Cessna 172 Crashes into Hangar at Van Nuys Airport
Timeline of the Theft and Crash
The Break-in and Attempted Taxi
Suspect and Legal Proceedings
Investigation and Aftermath
AirPro News Analysis: General Aviation Security
Sources
Photo Credit: KTLA5
Regulations & Safety
US Government Admits Liability in 2025 Washington DC Mid-Air Collision
The U.S. government admits fault in the 2025 mid-air collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport that killed 67, citing FAA and Army errors.
This article summarizes reporting by AP News.
In a significant legal development following the deadliest United States aviation accident since 2001, the U.S. government has formally admitted liability for the mid-air collision that claimed 67 lives earlier this year. According to court filings submitted in December 2025, the Department of Justice acknowledged that negligence by both Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic controllers and U.S. Army pilots caused the tragedy.
The crash, which occurred on January 29, 2025, involved American Eagle Flight 5342 and a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter operating near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). As reported by AP News, the government’s admission comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the family of a victim, signaling a potential shift in how the remaining legal battles regarding the disaster will proceed.
The lawsuit, filed by the family of passenger Casey Crafton, alleges that failures in communication and protocol led directly to the catastrophe. In a move that legal experts describe as unusually swift for complex aviation litigation, the government did not contest its role in the accident.
In the filing, the government stated that it:
“owed a duty of care to plaintiffs, which it breached.”
, U.S. Department of Justice filing, via AP News
By admitting liability, the government effectively removes the need for a trial to determine fault regarding its own agents (the FAA and the Army). The legal focus will likely shift toward determining the amount of damages owed to the families of the 64 people on the regional jet and the three crew members on the helicopter.
The collision occurred at night while the American Eagle CRJ700, operated by PSA Airlines, was on approach to DCA from Wichita, Kansas. The Black Hawk helicopter was conducting a training mission involving night vision goggles. Investigations cited by AP News and preliminary NTSB data highlight two primary causes for the disaster: air traffic control errors and pilot deviations. According to the reports, the FAA controller at DCA utilized “visual separation” procedures, asking the helicopter pilots if they had the incoming jet in sight. Once the pilots confirmed they did, the controller transferred the responsibility for maintaining safe distance to the helicopter crew. Following the incident, the FAA has reportedly restricted the use of visual separation for helicopters operating in this congested airspace.
The government’s admission also encompasses errors made by the Army flight crew. Investigators found that the helicopter was flying significantly higher than permitted for its specific route. While the limit for “Route 4” was 200 feet, the Black Hawk was operating between 278 and 300 feet, approximately 78 feet above the ceiling for that corridor.
Furthermore, technical discrepancies were noted in the helicopter’s equipment. The investigation revealed that the barometric altimeter may have displayed an altitude 80 to 100 feet lower than the aircraft’s actual position, potentially misleading the pilots. The use of night vision goggles was also cited as a factor that may have limited the crew’s peripheral vision and depth perception.
The speed at which the U.S. government admitted liability, less than a year after the incident, is notable. In many aviation disasters involving state actors, litigation can drag on for years over jurisdictional and immunity claims. We assess that this early admission is likely a strategic decision to limit the scope of discovery. By conceding fault now, the government may prevent a prolonged public trial that would expose granular, potentially sensitive details regarding military training operations and air traffic control systemic vulnerabilities in the nation’s capital.
While the government has accepted its share of the blame, the legal battle continues for the private carriers involved. American Airlines and its regional subsidiary, PSA Airlines, are also named defendants in the lawsuit. Both airlines have filed motions to dismiss the complaints against them, arguing that the sole responsibility lies with the government entities that controlled the airspace and the military aircraft.
Attorneys for the victims’ families, however, argue that the airlines failed to mitigate known risks associated with flying into the highly congested airspace around Washington, D.C. The outcome of these motions will determine whether the airlines must also pay damages or if the U.S. taxpayers will bear the full financial burden of the settlements.
When is the final NTSB report expected? What safety changes have been made since the crash? How many people died in the accident?
US Government Admits Liability in Fatal Collision Between American Eagle Jet and Army Helicopter
Government Concedes Negligence in Court Filing
Operational Failures Behind the Crash
FAA Controller Errors
Army Pilot Deviations
AirPro News Analysis
Ongoing Legal Disputes with Airlines
Frequently Asked Questions
The National Transportation Safety Board is expected to release its final report on the probable cause of the accident in early 2026.
The FAA has permanently closed the specific helicopter route (Route 4) involved in the crash. Additionally, regulators have prohibited the simultaneous use of certain runways at DCA during urgent helicopter missions and restricted visual separation procedures for helicopters.
The crash resulted in 67 total fatalities: 60 passengers and 4 crew members on the regional jet, and 3 crew members on the Army helicopter.
Sources
Photo Credit: NBC News
Regulations & Safety
Why Proper Maintenance of Aircraft Wheel Bearings Is Critical for Safety
Airbus technical data shows aircraft wheel bearing failures result mainly from maintenance errors. Proper torque, cleaning, and lubrication are essential for safety.
This article is based on technical guidance and safety publications from Airbus and additional industry safety reports.
Aircraft wheel bearings are among the most stressed components in aviation. Despite supporting loads of up to 500 tons and enduring temperature shifts from sub-zero cruising altitudes to the intense heat of braking, they remain largely hidden from view. According to a technical safety publication by Airbus, the failure of these components is rarely due to design flaws but is almost exclusively the result of improper maintenance.
At AirPro News, we have reviewed the latest guidance from Airbus’s “Safety First” initiative, alongside broader industry data, to understand why these small components continue to pose significant risks to flight safety. The consensus across manufacturers and regulators is clear: strict adherence to maintenance protocols is the only barrier against catastrophic failure.
The primary cause of bearing failure, as identified by Airbus and industry data, is maintenance error. Specifically, the issues revolve around incorrect torque application, contamination, and inadequate lubrication. Aircraft use “tapered roller bearings” designed to handle both the weight of the aircraft (radial loads) and side-to-side movement (axial loads). When these bearings are mistreated, the consequences are severe.
One of the most critical and frequently misunderstood aspects of wheel installation is the torque procedure. According to Airbus technical guidelines, a specific “double-torque” method is required to ensure the bearings are seated correctly without being overtightened.
The process generally involves three distinct steps:
The risk lies in the details. If a technician skips rotating the wheel during the initial torque application, the rollers may not align, leading to a false torque reading. This can result in loose bearings that vibrate and wear prematurely, or tight bearings that overheat and seize.
The failure of a wheel bearing is not merely a maintenance inconvenience; it is a direct threat to the structural integrity of the aircraft. When a bearing seizes, it can generate enough friction to weld components together or shear axles, leading to wheel separation.
In one notable case study highlighted by Airbus, an A330 aircraft lost a wheel during takeoff. The investigation revealed that a seized bearing destroyed the axle nut, allowing the wheel to eject from the landing gear. This is not an isolated event. Data from the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) underscores the prevalence of this issue. “A study revealed 67 occurrences of nosewheel bearing failures on A319/A320/A321 aircraft worldwide between 1989 and 2004.”
— TSB Canada Data
While the Airbus “Safety First” article focuses on their fleet, the physics of bearing failure applies universally. Reports from the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) detail an incident involving a Boeing 737-800 where a seized bearing generated sufficient heat to compromise the chrome plating and base metal of the axle, causing it to fracture.
Similarly, an investigation into an Embraer EMB-145 (registration G-EMBP) found that moisture contamination due to improper seal installation led to severe overheating and subsequent axle failure. These incidents confirm that regardless of the airframe manufacturer, the root causes, contamination and torque errors, remain consistent.
To mitigate these risks, manufacturers and technical organizations like Timken have established “gold standard” maintenance manuals. The following practices are considered non-negotiable for airworthiness:
The Human Factor in Maintenance
While the technical steps are well-documented, we believe the persistence of these failures points to a human factors challenge. Wheel bearings are “hidden” components; unlike a tire that shows visible tread wear, a bearing often looks pristine until the moment it fails catastrophically. This lack of visual feedback places an immense burden on the maintenance process itself.
In high-pressure line maintenance environments, the requirement to rotate a wheel while torquing it, a process that relies on “feel” and patience, can be a trap for technicians rushing to clear an aircraft for departure. The data suggests that safety in this domain relies less on new technology and more on a disciplined adherence to the basics: cleaning, inspecting, and respecting the torque procedure.
Regulators continue to monitor these risks closely. The FAA has previously issued Airworthiness Directives, such as AD 2012-10-09 for Cessna 560XL aircraft, following reports of brake failure linked to loose bearing components. Furthermore, the FAA Safety Team (FAASTeam) frequently issues alerts reminding operators that “grease is not just grease,” warning that using unapproved substitutes constitutes a violation of FAR Part 43.
Whether operating a General Aviation aircraft or a commercial airliner, the message from the industry is uniform: take care of the wheel bearings, and they will carry the load.
The Hidden Danger in the Gear: Why Wheel Bearing Maintenance Cannot Be Rushed
The Mechanics of Failure
The “Double-Torque” Procedure
Real-World Consequences
Airbus and TSB Canada Data
Cross-Fleet Vulnerabilities
Industry Best Practices
AirPro News Analysis
Regulatory Context
Sources
Photo Credit: Airbus
-
Commercial Aviation6 days agoVietnam Grounds 28 Aircraft Amid Pratt & Whitney Engine Shortage
-
Business Aviation3 days agoGreg Biffle and Family Die in North Carolina Plane Crash
-
Defense & Military4 days agoFinland Unveils First F-35A Lightning II under HX Fighter Program
-
Business Aviation2 days agoBombardier Global 8000 Gains FAA Certification as Fastest Business Jet
-
Business Aviation4 days agoBombardier Launches Smart Router for Next-Gen Aircraft Connectivity