Originally Posted by
Adam1222
I'm not sure this would fall into the category of deceptive marketing.
If admission to an event is "$15 including 2 drink tickets", and you get free admission, I wouldn't expect to receive the drink tickets too.
What you are "exempt" from is the obligation to pay a otherwise mandatory fee. You are thus not obligated buy the bundle of goods and services that the fee covers.
That's certainly my interpretation but I can't say the alternative is completely unreasonable. So I acknowledge the ambiguity.
Originally Posted by
billdokes
I would argue that if it states 'destination fee exempt' then you are exempted from paying the destination fee, but are still entitled to the associated benefits unless that it is also explicitly stated that they are not available to the guest under that rate.