DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW

Airline Claims Passengers That Pay Extra for a Window Seat Aren’t Entitled to a Window

The airline argued that a window seat guarantees the seat next to the wall, not necessarily a window with a view.

After getting hit with a class action lawsuit, United Airlines has fought back, claiming that passengers who pay for a window seat are not entitled to a seat with an actual window. The airline wrote in a motion to dismiss the case on Nov. 10 that, “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.” This motion came after passengers sued United and Delta Airlines, alleging that they paid additional money for a “window” seat, but were placed in seats next to empty walls. United argued that “the word ‘window’ identifies the position of the seat—i.e., next to the wall of the main body of the aircraft,” and does not explicitly secure a seat with an exterior view, something the airline’s lawyers note is explained in United’s contract of carriage. Over half of United’s fleet is comprised of Boeing 737s, which have at least one row with an aisle that doesn’t have a window with an exterior view. While some airlines clarify which window seats do not have an actual window, United and Delta do not. Delta did not immediately respond to the Daily Beast’s request for comment, while United opted not to comment.