АНУ-ын Сан-Франциско хотын холбооны шүүх United Airlines компанийг эсэргүүцсэн зорчигчдын нэхэмжлэлийг хэрэгсэхгүй болгохоос татгалзсанаар тус компанийн эсрэг шүүх хурал үргэлжлэхээр боллоо.
Нэхэмжлэгч зорчигчид United Airlines болон Delta Air Lines компаниудыг нэмэлт төлбөр авч “цонхны талын суудал” гэж борлуулсан боловч бодит байдал дээр цонхгүй, зөвхөн онгоцны хана бүхий суудлаар үйлчилсэн нь үйлчлүүлэгчдийг төөрөгдүүлсэн үйлдэл гэж үзэж байгаа юм. Шүүгч Жеймс Донато “цонхны суудал” гэдэг нь зөвхөн суудлын байршлыг илтгэхээс гадна гаднах орчныг харах боломжийг баталгаажуулсан утгатай гэж тайлбарлан, компанийн гаргасан тайлбарыг хүлээн аваагүй байна.
United Airlines-ийн зүгээс цонхны суудал гэдэг нь зөвхөн онгоцны их биеийн хананы дагуух байрлалыг заасан үг бөгөөд гадна талыг харах баталгаа биш хэмээн мэтгэлцэж байв. Гэсэн хэдий ч шүүхээс зорчигчдын захиалгын систем болон тийз дээрх мэдээлэл нь цонхтой суудлын баталгаа болж байгааг онцолжээ.
Уг асуудал нь Boeing 737, 757 болон Airbus A321 загварын онгоцнуудад хамааралтай бөгөөд сая гаруй зорчигчийн эрх ашгийг хамгаалах зорилготой олон сая долларын нэхэмжлэл бүхий шүүх хурал юм. Үүсээд буй нөхцөл байдалтай холбогдуулан United Airlines компани 2025 онд суудлын сонголтын явцад илүү дэлгэрэнгүй мэдээлэл өгөх шинэчлэл хийсэн гэдгээ мэдэгдсэн бол Delta Air Lines шүүхийн маргаан үргэлжилж байгаа тул тайлбар өгөхөөс татгалзжээ.
Дэлгэрэнгүйг эх сурвалжаас харах
↓Эх сурвалжийг нээх ↓
<![CDATA[{"className":"sc-1ge0fwe-0","newsletterData":{"pianoFieldName":"receiveIndyTravelNews","regTitle":"Travel Insider","subscriptionGroup":"travel","subscriptionGroupId":"639034bf-3e24-4705-b5a0-8e0073e95aab","type":"travel","pathPrefix":"/travel","associatedAuthors":["Annabel Grossman"],"title":"Get the Travel Insider newsletter for tips, deals, and inspiration from our global travel editor","mobileTitle":"Get inspired with our free Travel Insider newsletter","imageSrc":"https://static.independent.co.uk/static-assets/images/newsletters/AnnabelGrossman1_1.png","description":"Get inspired with our free Travel Insider newsletter","label":"I would like to receive news on where to go and what to know, every Saturday by email”,”newsletterKey”:”receiveTravelWeek”,”regSourceSection”:”News & Advice”,”regSourceNewsletter”:”NSC”},”isClimate”:false}]]>
Brace for turbulence.
United Airlines must face a class-action lawsuit after a federal judge rejected the airline’s attempt to dismiss claims from passengers who say they paid extra for “window seats” that had no actual windows.
The lawsuit, which also names Delta Air Lines, alleges the airlines misled customers by failing to disclose during booking that some window seats on Boeing 737s, 757s and Airbus A321s are located beside blank cabin walls instead of windows. Judge James Donato in San Francisco rejected Chicago-based United’s argument that “window seat” refers only to a seat’s position, not a guaranteed outside view.
Donato rejected United’s argument that federal law blocked the passengers’ claims, saying the airline’s own ticketing terms, boarding passes and reservation screens promised window seats to customers who paid for them.
cookie.trim() === ‘__DEBUG__=true’)) { console.log(‘Ad logs: “mpu1”, injectedAtParagraph: 3’); }]]>
United declined to comment on the suit when contacted by The Independent, but did say: “As part of our regular review of united.com and the United App to enhance the customer experience, in 2025 we added more detail to our seat selection process, so customers can have more information about what to expect when they choose a seat.
A Delta spokesperson said the airline declines to comment on pending litigation.
The passengers filed proposed class-action lawsuits in August, suing United Airlines in federal court in San Francisco and Delta Air Lines in federal court in Brooklyn, New York.
Delta is also working to get the pending lawsuit dismissed.
In November, attorney Carter Greenbaum, at the time representing plaintiffs against United and Delta, told Reuters that United’s position was “contrary to the reasonable expectations of countless passengers who unknowingly paid extra money for windowless window seats. Consumers deserve better than empty promises and United’s word games.”
cookie.trim() === ‘__DEBUG__=true’)) { console.log(‘Ad logs: “taboola-carousel-thumbnails”, injectedAtParagraph: 6’); }]]>
United argued in court documents at the time that it never promised “window” seats would come with an outside view, despite identifying them as window seats on booking screens and boarding passes.
“The word ‘window’ identifies the position of the seat—i.e., next to the wall of the main body of the aircraft,” United said, according to Reuters. “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.”
cookie.trim() === ‘__DEBUG__=true’)) { console.log(‘Ad logs: “mpu2”, injectedAtParagraph: 8’); }]]>
The lawsuits seek millions in damages on behalf of more than 1 million passengers, with plaintiffs citing reasons such as reducing anxiety, easing motion sickness and enjoying views.
