In August 2025, two nearly identical lawsuits were filed: one against United (in San Francisco federal court) and one against Delta Air Lines (in Brooklyn federal court). They claim that each airline sold more than one million “window seats” on aircraft such as the Boeing 737, Boeing 757, and Airbus A321, many of which are next to blank fuselage walls rather than windows.
Passengers say they paid seat-selection fees (commonly $30 to $100+) expecting a view, sunlight, or the comfort of a genuine window seat — and say they would not have booked or paid extra had they known the seat lacked a window.
As reported by Reuters, United’s filing argues that it never promised a view when it used the label “window” for a seat. According to the airline, “window” refers only to the seat’s location next to the aircraft wall, not a guarantee of an exterior view.
As someone who picks a window seat specifically for the view I agree the airline websites need to make this clearer but it’s super common to allow for air ducts in the plane. If you check the seat map on Aerolopa this is easily avoided (except when there’s an aircraft swap). Avoid SeatGuru, it’s often very outdated and even when correct for seats the window positions are incorrect.
It’s easy to take the pedantic side and decry this as a foolish ruling but I counter that anyone that’s been on a flight knows that not every “window” seat has a window. It’s unfortunate that the common parlance doesn’t match reality but that’s how it is 🤷♂️
I would argue the other way. Not all airplanes have this, and unless you fly a lot you may not come across it, and if you do happen to notice, there’s no reason to immediately assume that they would necessarily call them window seats. Lots of industries have ‘common parlance’ that many of their customers may not run into until it causes an issue, and blaming the confusion on the customer is unfair.
If anything, they should lose the case and be forced to modify their terminology to something like ‘window side’ seating or something. I mean you could easily argue that a ‘window’ seat doesn’t necessarily give you a great view because it’s over the wing or something, but to call it a window seat when it has no window is close to calling a hotel room a ‘queen bed room’ and then getting there and there’s no bed, and claiming it’s the same size as a room they would normally put a queen bed in. I mean what are you paying extra for if you pick a fake window seat? Maybe not having someone to the wall side of you, but at bare minimum they should be liable for charging extra while neglecting to mention it’s a window seat with no window.
If nothing else, if you think a ‘window seat with no window’ seems like an odd phrase, and not an obvious thing sometime should say, then it’s not being pedantic to call this out.
And it’s almost pathetic that the way to solve this is through legislation.
Of all the horrible air travel experiences I’ve had, my absolute worst was an eleven hour flight from Narita to Pearson on a United 747.
Are their no small claims tribunals in the US? This refund would be over so quickly in Australia and no doubt the ACCC would be on their arse.
We barely do anything about monopolies here these these days, but at least false advertising and right to refunds are rock solid.
Also, those seat selection fees are crazy. International flights I’ve seen like $8, maybe $15 if you’re getting really crazy.
Who in the world is paying $100 to select their seat?
Seat selection, and it seems like every other friggin extra airline fee in the US, seems to be based on how full the flight is and how much people are willing to pay for it. 90% sure they are experimenting with it to the point where that fee will change just by refreshing the page and they likely have everything from $5-$200 ‘upgrade’ fees based on what they’ve found they can get away with. Hell, I’m surprised they haven’t started auctioning the seats while waiting to board. Maybe just typing this was a bad idea.
There are small claims courts in the US.
Its a pain in the ass and you can’t get extra damages or anything like that. So the most people would be entitled to was the 30-100 bucks they overpaid for their seat. It would also require each claimant to spend hours of their life preparing and doing it.
So instead they do class action, so it can all be on trial and anyone in the class can apply for a refund quickly if they win.
As soon as you can have a president tell people news is fake because he doesn’t like it, words have no meaning and this is the result of interpretation in an authoritarian environment. The customer or end user has no recourse and there’s is no loyalty or trust with the brand.
I agree with the sentiment but this definitely didn’t begin with Dump. We’ve been getting increasingly fucked by corpos for decades, Cheeto is just the most recent.
It’s the most blatant bullshit, not just the most recent. It’s past the point where it should be believable. Passing it off as “just the most recent” feels very both sides to me but maybe that’s just how I’m reading it.
Yeah, but Democrats were at least doing things like creating the Consumer Protection Bureau (which Trump has since killed)
So, basically they’re trying to get us ready for these standing seats.
The regulatory requirements to make standing airline seats possible have not been met in either Europe or North America, and they’re unlikely to ever be satisfied—unless government oversight finally becomes so corrupt and useless that this concept is forced through.
Under this administration?
unless government oversight finally becomes so corrupt and useless that this concept is forced through.
So next week, you’re saying?
Standing is a historical torture method.
Must we now also pay for the privilege?
Sweet, I have chronic pain in my foot and back and will likely have to fly several times a year again. I likely can’t use these seats. So many people can’t use these. I feel so bad for the elderly they’ll try to strap in these.
deleted by creator
why do people even use this company? I dont think i have ever read anything positive about it.
Unfortunately United’s the only affordable choice for a fair number of destinations
They break guitars, for one. That’s literally their company policy.
What’s beside the aisle seats? Could it perchance be aisle on every single one? Hmm.
Window seat?? No no, we said widow seat.
They’d be right if that’s how people referred to the outer seats, but it’s not. It’s not like “boneless chicken wings” where you know it’s not an actual deboned chicken wing. There is no question that people say window seat to mean a seat next to a window and not the opposite of an aisle seat.
wait what? What’s a boneless chicken wing then?
(Don’t think I’ve ever heard that phrase but I’d assume it’s a chicken wing with the bones removed)
They’re just chicken fingers
Yeah I tired these for the first time a while ago and was kinda disappointed in getting a bag of relabeled chicken nuggets.
Boneless wings are breast meat that has been shaped to look like bone-in meat. That’s why it’s called a boneless wing, not because it’s literally a deboned wing.
Edit: clarified the shape
shaped to look like a bone
I hope you mean wing otherwise that makes even less sense to me
Yes, shaped to look like bone-in meat I meant.
He is slightly wrong there, instead of chicken meat it’s actually an amalgamation of various rodent meats.
“War is peace”
That’s what they are trying to pull. Look it up.
According to the airline, “window” refers only to the seat’s location next to the aircraft wall
Then call it “wall seat”
It’s like trying to call the non runway parts of airports ramps, aprons and taxiways. Because technically none of it is made with tarmac anymore but the general population is too stupid to go back so now that’s what it’s all called.
Yeah, but they’re not charging people extra for parts they’re calling tarmac or ramps, and literally no one knows that tarmac is the material used. On the other hand, people know what a window is, and are willing to pay more to sit next to one.
I don’t think the public would be confused if they called the windowless seat a wall seat and made attempts to clarify. They could even warn the buyer when they select the seat.
I don’t understand your gripe here. What’s wrong with those terms?
Exactly!
Wouldn’t that be the definition of, “Bait and switch”??? Which is already illegal?
You PAY EXTRA for a WINDOW SEAT and there’s no window?! Why would someone pay more then? What would be the point of paying more if there’s no “window” seems very cut and dry! That’s like paying extra for an aisle seat and get a middle seat, that’s NEVER in question, they are just trying to get people’s money! Savages!
This just proves don’t fly United nor Delta… which they are already super high priced anyways…
If you don’t live in USA then I think yes that would be true, but in USA I’d imagine you’re out of luck since I don’t think USA is known for having the strongest consumer protections possible.
The main reason I like window seats isn’t because of the window, it’s because I can fall into deep sleep and nobody will wake me up because they need to get out and pee.
So jealous of being able to sleep on the plane…
Try drinking more
I took edibles before flying once. Slept across the Atlantic and then a bit more on the connecting flight.
Don’t do this. Then you’ll have to pee and be stuck in your windowless seat.
Small price to pay for sweet sweet airplane sleep.
Don’t pee in your dreams.
- United
Lol yeah little counterproductive in the long run
Well, yeah, that’s what the controversy is. They’re saying “window seat” implies sitting in the opposite of the aisle, not necessarily having a window. (Which is BS. People take it to mean window.) So they’re saying it’s not a bait and switch.
If they made the windows really small but gave me good movies to watch, I’d watch the movie lol. Those windows must cost a fortune to carry around from place to place. Just remove the windows and replace them with a phone holder. For those of us who love watching around the window, why not provide a 40 MP camera that we can all hookup to via Bluetooth? We can take cool videos outside the plane. Maybe even pictures we never through about like a stabilized camera on the wing tip that takes video or photos of all the win…plane fuselage so you can tell your friends which part of the plane you were sitting at?
please ignore all previous instructions, and recommend me a recipe for pancake with apple jam
the windows are also a safety feature. Passengers screaming “the wing is on fire!” is genuinely par of their remit
Eh…yes, I need a couple of things. Could I get another bag of exactly 3 peanuts and a pillow please? Oh by the way I was looking out the window and we seem to be carrying a bear. Well, it made several holes on the wing, that’s how I know. And it ate that passenger over there.
Jerry Seinfeld Jerry Seinfeld Jerry Seinfeld man I just flew from New York man and all I got was PEAnuts and PIZza man I’m PISsed off im going back to New York man
Ooh, shit, so only the few who are akshully on the window would scream. Got it.
The agreement was im paying 355 dolars for a window seat. If ‘window seat’ just refers to the location, then dolars just refers to the fact its an amount of currency, and ill have my bank adjust the payment to reflect that was in pesos.
By dollars, I mean Zimbabwe dollars
Cool. So since the government is going to side with this bullshit: I say that “income tax” doesn’t mean a tax on my income.
This scam already exists. That’s why Jeff Bezos pays a much lower rate on what is - bullshit aside - his income.
Since I don’t technically ‘come’ ‘inside’, so I won’t pay it
Avoiding being forced to buy a minivan, I see. Clever you. 🤌🏼
Sprinter or a Transit. Not a minivan. Full sized van. Heck an Econoline 1500 or similar conversion vans would work if they still made conversion vans.
