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.

  • DJKJuicy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I mean, don’t charge extra for something then not deliver it. Seems cut and dry.

    If the aisle/middle/window in coach all cost the same price then no one would have any standing to sue. The airlines charged customers extra. They did this to themselves.

    • Bgugi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Ironically, that could be the technicality they’re banking on. They aren’t charging for the window seat - they’re charging for the ability to select your own seat which is the same regardless of where you select.

    • theolodis@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      No, I think any seat change costs the same price, no matter if you switch from window to somewhere, or from somewhere to window.