NEW YORK, Aug 19 (Reuters) - Delta Air Lines ( DAL ) and
United Airlines were sued on Tuesday by passengers who
claimed they paid extra money to sit in "window" seats, only to
find themselves placed in seats next to a blank wall.
Proposed class actions were filed against United in San
Francisco federal court and against Delta in Brooklyn, New York
federal court, seeking millions of dollars of damages for more
than 1 million passengers at each carrier.
The complaints say some Boeing 737, Boeing 757 and Airbus
A321 planes contain seats that would normally contain windows,
but lack them because of the placement of air conditioning
ducts, electrical conduits or other components.
Passengers said Delta and United do not flag these seats
during the booking process, unlike rivals such as Alaska
Airlines and American Airlines ( AAL ), even when
charging tens or occasionally hundreds of dollars for them.
The lawsuits say people buy window seats for several reasons
including to address fear of flying or motion sickness, keep a
child occupied, get extra light or watch the world go by.
"Had plaintiffs and the class members known that the seats
they were purchasing (were) windowless, they would not have
selected them - much less have paid extra," the United complaint
said. The Delta complaint contained similar language.
Delta is based in Atlanta, and United in Chicago. Neither
immediately responded to requests for comment.
Ancillary revenue from seat selection, baggage fees, cabin
upgrades, airport lounges and other services help carriers
generate more cash when they fly while keeping base fares lower.
The Delta lawsuit is led by Nicholas Meyer of Brooklyn, and
the United lawsuit is led by Marc Brenman of San Francisco and
Aviva Copaken of Los Angeles. Copaken said United refunded fees
for her windowless seats on two flights, but not a third.
Passengers can use websites such as SeatGuru to find pluses
and minuses of specific seats, including those lacking windows.
Carter Greenbaum, a lawyer whose firm filed the two
lawsuits, said the ability to find information from third party
websites doesn't excuse Delta's and United's conduct.
"A company can't misrepresent the nature of the products it
sells and then rely on third party reviews to say a customer
should have known that it was lying," he said in an email.
The cases are Meyer v Delta Air Lines Inc ( DAL ), U.S. District
Court, Eastern District of New York, No. 25-04608; and Brenman
et al v United Airlines Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern
District of San Francisco, No. 25-06995.