Originally Posted by
arlflyer
No, it really doesn't. Please read again:
The "text" is pretty "plain" in that you have to stay in the room.
If that's your interpretation, you should have posted that portion in addition to the portion (with bolding added, no less) that you actually did post.
And for how much of a stay do I have to stay in the room? 8 hours out of every 24? 12? 24 hours out of every 24?
Uh, well, there's this little bit that all program members agree to. But sure, go for it.
Doubtful that would hold water. If the company's interpretations of a contract are grossly out of line with the plain text of said contract, I'm skeptical that courts would allow that clause and grossly flawed interpretations made by Marriott to stand.
Perhaps the Marriott interpretation of the specific T&C in question isn't grossly flawed and contradictory with other terms. But 9.10 doesn't give them complete and total
carte blanche if their interpretation
is grossly flawed and contradictory.
I cannot unilaterally "interpret" a contract to sell you something for $1000 to really mean that you owe me $2500 even if my attorneys do slide in a clause giving me the sole power to interpret our contract.