Maybe they should use AI to tell them what a fucking window is. If it only promises a fuselage seat then it should say fuselage seat and not window seat. Friggin scammers.

If the seat doesn't include a window then it needs to be called a wall seat. This is an open and shut case of false advertising.

This is so fucking dumb. It has that "boneless wings can contain bones" judgement energy from Ohio awhile back. 🤦🏻

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?

"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"

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?

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 Avoid SeatGuru, it's often very outdated and even when correct for seats the window positions are incorrect.

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.

I remember back when the seats actually aligned with the windows on airplanes, such that you could sit in a seat and look out the window.

Then they started shoving more rows of seats in. Over the past 20 years or so, I’ve often got a “window seat” where the nearest window is positioned directly beside the seat in front, where nobody can open or close the cover without fully reclining (ha) the seat, and there’s zero view because of the angle.

Technically still a window seat, as there IS a window nearby, but not what you’d expect coming from any other mode or era of transport.

And this is why the civil court system is just plain broken. Despite the astronomical cost of taking this upsurd stance in court, it is worth it. Thier needs to be damages assesed for the absurdity of the logic used to force something to cost more court time than it should get.

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.

Would a reasonable person assume that is what it meant? Probably not. United should lose this case.

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.

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…

Next there won't be a seat, the term "seat" just means the place you stand for the whole trip

A window seat without a window is like an isle seat that isn't on the isle.

False advertising.

Reminiscent of the lawsuit about pints of beer being less than a pint. Bars argued it was a style of glass and not a unit of volume.

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.

I prefer window seats specifically because they are up against a wall, and I know I have an armrest to myself. If that's where I end up, I am more likely to just close the window shade, particularly if I am jetlagged and need sleep.

However, I had status on United for a while and throughout that whole time did not have to pay any extra fees for that "window" seat. If the airlines are up-charging for window seats, then they better have windows, otherwise they should call them something else.

What's beside the aisle seats? Could it perchance be aisle on every single one? Hmm.

Obstructed view discount. We have the technology.

why do people even use this company? I dont think i have ever read anything positive about it.