United Airlines argues ‘window seat’ does not mean ‘seat with a window’

[AisleSeat]

In its motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit, United Airlines argues that 'window seat' refers to a seat location on the aircraft, not to an actual window.

United argues 'window seat' does not mean 'seat with a window'

United Airlines claims windows are not guaranteed in window seats as it moves to dismiss a class action lawsuit over seats with no view.

aerospaceglobalnews.com

 

[jb747]

And that’s how people would read it too. “Window seat” means located next to a window. Now a “wall seat” would mean something else entirely.

 

[Quickstatus]

UA should take a leaf out of QF's playbook - there, an airline ticket is merely just a bundle of rights.

 

[Quickstatus]

And then fish and chips don't automatically come with chips

 

[Ansett Nostalgic]

Actions like this give airlines a bad name.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I’m with the airlines on this one. Window seat = the location relative to others, being middle and aisle.

Many people like a ‘window’ seat so they can sleep up against the wall, or have undisturbed rest without someone climbing over them to use the loo. It’s not all about the view.

What’s next, people with a window seat over the wing complaining they can’t see the ground?

Airlines should, however, indicate if a seat in that position is windowless, and allow people to choose another.

 

[Quickstatus]

And of course the Berkheimer vs Rekm case of the Boneless chicken. The Ohio Supreme Court said that customers should not expect Boneless Chicken to be boneless as it describes a cooking style rather than a guarantee that the dish would be Boneless

 

[MEL_Traveller]

UA should take a leaf out of QF's playbook - there, an airline ticket is merely just a bundle of rights.

It is indeed the same for most airlines… a ticket is indeed a bundle of rights. Courts and academics have then deliberated over when a contract actually forms. I’m not sure how that’s relevant in this case though.

 

[Quickstatus]

I’m not sure how that’s relevant in this case though.

It's the expectation.

Window seat ticket holder have an expectation that they will be seated at a window

Airline ticket holders have an expectation that they will get a seat on an airplane

People who order Fish and chips have an expectation that they get Fish and chips and if boneless chicken, the chicken dish will be boneless.

The Fine print pi**es people off is also the point. If the fine print is so important make it the main print.

 

[justinbrett]

UA should take a leaf out of QF's playbook.

Yes, because QF doesn’t refer to window seats on its website. You might make an assumption the outer seats are window seats but it’s never stated by QF.

 

[Rich]

Yes, because QF doesn’t refer to window seats on its website. You might make an assumption the outer seats are window seats but it’s never stated by QF.

Fair point, although you do get to set a seating preference, aisle or window. No wall option.

 

[justinbrett]

Fair point, although you do get to set a seating preference, aisle or window. No wall option.

There’s no middle seat option either, but all of these are preferences and are not charged.

This topic came up because someone paid extra for it.