Originally Posted by
N104UA
It is not false advertising as it is clearly stated in the
Contract of Carriage which you agreed to when you purchased the ticket on United, if you didn't read them that is your loss. I would also argue that I would be more upset with United if I purchased a lie flat first class seat and it was downgraded to a recliner first class seat.
Rule 4(D) "Seat assignments, regardless of class of service, are not guaranteed and are subject to change without notice. UA reserves the right to reseat a Passenger for any reason"
and
Rule 24(A)(3) "Schedules are Subject To Change Without Notice - Times shown on tickets, timetables, published schedules or elsewhere, and aircraft type and similar details reflected on tickets or UA’s schedule are not guaranteed and form no part of this contract"
I'm very familiar with the contract of carriage. And yes, I am aware that there is significant flexibility in what a carrier is allowed to do with regards to getting someone from point A to point B.
With that said, since you were being pedantic: if you want to put a lawyer hat on, be aware that FTC and courts would not let a one sided consumer facing contract override fair business practices. Systemically providing customers false information (United presenting incorrect seat maps and flight information when they know this information is incorrect - i.e., not just that it may change in the future with reasonable cause, but that it has already changed) would easily fall under misleading advertising if the information is considered relevant to consumer decision making. In this case, given the relative rarity of this event (and the fact it is probably more a delayed IT update / glitch than anything) would mean that it would not qualify as systemic, but if it was more pervasive it would definitely be considered false/misleading advertising by the FTC/courts - regardless of whether the contract of carriage would appear to absolve United of responsibility.