Research Report · June 2026 · Holiday Extras · research hub
Paying for Peace
of Mind
A new survey of 500 UK parents reveals that nearly seven in ten who paid extra to sit next to their child on a flight did so out of anxiety — not because separation was certain.
paid without certainty they'd be separated
weren't sure but paid just to be safe
were certain separation would occur
felt they had no choice but didn't understand the charge
Extras should add value, not anxiety
Family seat charges have become one of the most talked-about flash-points in the UK travel industry. Our research shows the conversation matters: when parents are paying fees they don't fully understand, something has gone wrong — not just commercially, but in the relationship between traveller and brand.
At Holiday Extras, we commissioned this survey because we believe ancillary charges should deliver genuine value and real peace of mind. That means transparent pricing, honest communication, and products that families are glad they bought — not fees paid in a moment of confusion or dread at the booking screen.
Five hundred parents who had recently paid to sit next to their child on a flight told us why they handed over that money. The results paint a clear picture: the dominant driver is not certainty of separation, but anxiety about what might happen if they didn't pay. That is a finding the travel industry cannot afford to ignore.
Extras should be a joy, not a source of confusion or dread. When parents are paying out of anxiety rather than genuine need, that's a signal the industry needs to do better — and an opportunity for brands who are willing to lead on transparency.David Norris, Chief Growth Officer — Holiday Extras
How this research was conducted
Holiday Extras commissioned an online survey of UK adults, fielded in June 2026 via the Attest platform. All 500 respondents met two strict qualifying criteria before answering the core question.
| Research platform | Attest |
| Fieldwork date | 11–12 June 2026 |
| Total sample | 500 UK adults (all qualified) |
| Qualification criterion 1 | Flown with at least one child aged 11 or under in the last two years |
| Qualification criterion 2 | Paid an additional fee to ensure seating next to their child |
| Age range | 17–99 · mean 37.1 · median 37 |
| Gender split | Female 73.2% (n=366) · Male 26.8% (n=134) |
| Geography | All UK regions represented; London (13.2%) and North West (13.0%) largest |
| Audience | United Kingdom (English-language) |
Because both qualifying conditions were mandatory, the sample is exclusively composed of parents with direct, recent experience of paying a seat fee. The survey was not designed to be nationally representative on gender — the female skew of 73.2% may reflect that mothers more commonly handle flight bookings for families, or survey recruitment patterns; readers should bear this in mind when interpreting the results.
Nearly seven in ten parents paid without certainty of separation
When asked to describe the situation in which they paid the seat fee, the majority of parents did not select the option that implied genuine, certain risk of being separated from their child. Instead, they described a state of anxiety, uncertainty, or confusion.
67.8% of parents (n=339) paid without certainty of separation — combining those who 'weren't sure, but paid just to be safe' (62.0%) with those who 'felt they had no choice even though they didn't fully understand the charge' (5.8%).
The single largest response — chosen by 62.0% (n=310) of respondents — was 'I wasn't sure, but paid just to be safe'. This makes uncertainty-driven payment the dominant motivation across the entire sample, outnumbering those who believed separation was certain by almost two to one. A further 5.8% (n=29) went further, describing a situation where they felt coerced despite not fully understanding what the charge was for.
One in three parents did believe separation was a genuine, certain risk
While the majority paid out of anxiety rather than certainty, a substantial minority — roughly one in three — did believe they would definitely be separated from their child if they did not pay. This nuance matters for how the industry responds.
32.2% (n=161) said they 'were certain we would be separated if I didn't pay.' For these parents, the fee represented a clear and understood transaction — a real risk, a real remedy. Any policy response that frames all seat-fee payers as victims of opaque pricing would overlook this group. The challenge for airlines and travel brands is to serve both cohorts honestly: confirming separation risk where it is real, and removing the anxiety where it is not.
The data therefore presents two distinct groups: those who needed clarity about what the fee actually bought them, and a smaller but meaningful group who needed clarity about whether separation was truly inevitable in the first place. Transparent, contextual communication at the point of booking could serve both.
Confusion about the charge itself affects a meaningful minority
Beyond uncertainty about separation, a distinct group of parents described a more fundamental problem: they did not fully understand what the charge was for, yet paid it anyway. This signals a transparency gap that goes beyond seat allocation policy.
5.8% (n=29) selected 'I felt I had no choice even though I didn't fully understand the charge.' While this is the smallest of the three groups, it represents nearly 30 families who handed over money at the booking stage without understanding the product they were buying. At scale across the UK aviation market, this figure is significant.
This group is distinct from those who understood the fee but were uncertain whether it was strictly necessary. For them, the problem is not anxiety about separation — it is a lack of basic product comprehension at the point of sale. Clear, jargon-free descriptions of what a seat reservation fee includes, when it applies, and what the alternative outcome would actually be, are the minimum standard this group deserves.
Nearly 30 families in our sample paid a fee they didn't even understand. Multiply that across the millions of family flight bookings made each year, and you have an industry-wide transparency problem that deserves a proper answer.David Norris, Chief Growth Officer — Holiday Extras
Anxiety around seat fees spans all income levels and UK regions
Seat-fee anxiety is not a niche concern confined to lower-income or younger families. The survey sample spans a wide income range and all UK regions, suggesting the issue is broadly felt across the travelling public.
| Demographic | Group | Share of sample |
|---|---|---|
| Income: lowest bracket | Less than £15,000 | 13.6% |
| Income: highest bracket | £100,000 and above | 10.9% |
| Region: largest | London | 13.2% |
| Region: second largest | North West | 13.0% |
| Region: smallest | Northern Ireland | 1.0% |
| Children under 18 in household | 1+ children at home | 69.6% |
| No children currently at home | None / not pregnant | 23.3% |
| Age | Mean 37.1 · Median 37 · Range 17–99 | — |
The income distribution of respondents spans both extremes: the single largest income bracket is 'Less than £15,000' (13.6%), while 10.9% earn £100,000 or above. This confirms that the anxiety driving unnecessary seat-fee payment is not primarily a financial literacy or income issue — it is a communication and transparency issue that affects families regardless of their means.
Regionally, London and the North West together account for over a quarter of the sample. Northern Ireland's low representation (1.0%, n=5) means findings should be interpreted cautiously for that nation. The broad regional spread otherwise supports the view that seat-fee anxiety is a UK-wide phenomenon, not a product of any single region's booking culture.
The mean respondent age is 37.1 years (range 17–99), confirming a predominantly working-age sample consistent with parents of young children — and a group actively booking family travel right now.
What the industry should do next
The findings point to concrete, actionable steps that airlines, OTAs, and travel ancillary brands can take to replace anxiety with genuine, informed peace of mind.
Explain what happens if you don't pay
The majority of parents paid because they didn't know what would happen without the fee. Airlines and booking platforms should clearly state, at the point of purchase, the realistic probability and policy around family seating — including that many airlines are required to seat young children near their guardian free of charge.
Write product descriptions families can actually understand
Nearly 6% paid without understanding the charge at all. Seat reservation fees should be described in plain English: what the fee covers, what it does not cover, and what the alternative outcome actually looks like. Jargon and vague terms undermine trust.
Treat transparency as a commercial advantage
Brands that proactively clarify seat policies — rather than relying on passenger anxiety to drive uptake — will build stronger long-term loyalty. Informed customers who choose to pay are far more satisfied than anxious ones who felt they had no choice.
Design extras that earn their price tag
The benchmark for any ancillary product should be that a well-informed family, presented with full information, would still choose to buy it. If a product only sells because of information asymmetry, its long-term commercial viability is fragile.
Serve the one-in-three who do face genuine risk
32.2% believed separation was certain without payment. For this group, a clear, honest seat guarantee is a genuinely valuable product. The industry should not throw out the product — it should fix the communication around it so the right people buy it for the right reasons.
Recognise the breadth of the affected audience
Seat-fee anxiety spans all income levels, all major UK regions, and a wide age range. Solutions should be universal, not targeted only at lower-income travellers — and booking platforms should audit their UX for families across all demographic groups.
About Holiday Extras
Holiday Extras is the UK's leading provider of airport travel extras, including airport hotels, lounges, parking, and travel insurance. The company has been helping travellers make more of their journeys since 1983.
This research was commissioned by Holiday Extras to better understand the experience of UK parents when booking seat fees on family flights, and to inform the wider industry conversation about transparency in ancillary travel charges.
For press enquiries, please contact [email protected]
Research note
This report is based on original survey research conducted via the Attest platform in June 2026. The sample of 500 UK adults was pre-qualified to include only those who had flown with a child aged 11 or under in the last two years and had paid an additional seat fee. All figures are based on the complete dataset of 500 respondents unless otherwise stated.
© Holiday Extras 2026. All rights reserved.