United Airlines Claims 'Window Seat' Doesn't Guarantee a Window

When you pay extra and book a "window seat" on a flight, it's fair to expect that you actually have a window seat when you board the airplane. However, on United Airlines, that might not necessarily be the case.

In an ongoing legal battle, United Airlines has claimed that booking a "window seat" on its aircraft does not necessarily guarantee that you will actually have a window next to your seat.

United Faces Legal Action

United Airlines is facing a potential class-action lawsuit arguing that passengers were unfairly charged for “window seats” that did not have actual windows. This comes after both United and Delta Air Lines faced similar claims in California and New York federal courts, respectively.

Attorney Carter Greenbaum is representing the plaintiffs in both complaints. In a statement issued to People Magazine, Greenbaum expressed frustration at United.

“When passengers book and pay more for a window seat, they expect their seat to have a window,” Greenbaum told People. “Customers deserve more than empty promises and United’s word games.”

“As airlines have begun charging for services that were once free, passengers should at least expect upfront disclosure of the fees and that if they pay an extra fee, they will get the product they paid for.”

The lawsuit argues that when customers purchase a window seat, they expect a window and would not pay extra for a seat that did not have a window.

“Many passengers have a fear of flying or experience anxiety, claustrophobia or motion sickness, and windows provide greater comfort in an otherwise distressing environment," the complaint says. “Whatever the motivation for buying a window, had plaintiffs and the punitive class members known that they were buying windowless window seats, they would have not selected them at all, much less paid extra for them.”

United Responds

In response to the legal action, United has asked a federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the word “window” refers to the position of the seat rather than any potential views from it.

“The use of the word ‘window’ in reference to a particular seat cannot reasonably be interpreted as a promise that the seat will have an exterior window view,” attorneys for United argue in their motion to dismiss, filed in a San Francisco federal court on Monday, Nov. 10, via People.

“Rather, the word ‘window’ identifies the position of the seat — i.e., next to the wall of the main body of the aircraft.”

In its file for dismissal, United argues that the contract of carriage, which passengers must agree to when purchasing a ticket, “does not contain any promise that seats in the window position of any aircraft will have exterior window views.”