Do Marriott's T&C's allow you to forfeit points instead of cash after deadline?
Oct 29, 2018, 6:26 pm
#16
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 902
I
Irrespective of the terms, this would almost certainly be struck down in the EU under consumer protection legislation. In most developed countries, you can’t add disproportionate clauses into the small print - and a cancellation fee way above what a hotel stay would cost would clearly be an example of that. The same is obviously true of those people who have reservations made since the merger where the cancellation fee is listed as 80 trillion dollars, or whatever was written.
It would be interesting to see how place of booking vs. destination would play out in court if someone in the EU used Marriott.com from home to book a hotel somewhere like the US or the Maldives where consumer protection is less advanced.
Irrespective of the terms, this would almost certainly be struck down in the EU under consumer protection legislation. In most developed countries, you can’t add disproportionate clauses into the small print - and a cancellation fee way above what a hotel stay would cost would clearly be an example of that. The same is obviously true of those people who have reservations made since the merger where the cancellation fee is listed as 80 trillion dollars, or whatever was written.
It would be interesting to see how place of booking vs. destination would play out in court if someone in the EU used Marriott.com from home to book a hotel somewhere like the US or the Maldives where consumer protection is less advanced.
However that may be the cc company certainly would not rule on the validity of the penalty. Their only concern is whether the cc holder authorized the charge — and in this case it’s clear s/he did. They would allow the charge and tell the guest to fight it in court. As the company putting the charge on the card is probably a Maldivian company I seriously doubt you would be able to enforce an European judgment over there.
Last edited by MePlatPremier; Oct 29, 2018 at 6:33 pm
Oct 29, 2018, 6:43 pm
#17
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,994
I agree with the other poster that you'd likely have more issues with jurisdiction than winning a hypothetical case in the EU (if jurisdiction was no issue).
Oct 29, 2018, 7:00 pm
#18
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,994
Cancellation penalties on SPG properties that still use the old booking engine are based on what the SPG50 rate plan would be for the same nights. I see no way how any reasonable European court would strike this down.
However that may be the cc company certainly would not rule on the validity of the penalty. Their only concern is whether the cc holder authorized the charge — and in this case it’s clear s/he did. They would allow the charge and tell the guest to fight it in court. As the company putting the charge on the card is probably a Maldivian company I seriously doubt you would be able to enforce an European judgment over there.
However that may be the cc company certainly would not rule on the validity of the penalty. Their only concern is whether the cc holder authorized the charge — and in this case it’s clear s/he did. They would allow the charge and tell the guest to fight it in court. As the company putting the charge on the card is probably a Maldivian company I seriously doubt you would be able to enforce an European judgment over there.
A 1993 EEC council directive on unfair contracts explicitly references the following:
(d)
permitting the seller or supplier to retain sums paid by the consumer where the latter decides not to conclude or perform the contract, without providing for the consumer to receive compensation of an equivalent amount from the seller or supplier where the latter is the party cancelling the contract;
(e)
requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation
permitting the seller or supplier to retain sums paid by the consumer where the latter decides not to conclude or perform the contract, without providing for the consumer to receive compensation of an equivalent amount from the seller or supplier where the latter is the party cancelling the contract;
(e)
requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation
The $16000 cancellation fee (which is PURELY a fee - it is not paid room rate because the paid room rate is $0) would imply that the hotels would owe the guest $16,000 in the event that they are not able to provision the room (which they would not do). While it would be a very strained argument, one can argue about whether or not $16000 is disproportionate to a $0-$2000 (depending on how you value the points) booking fee - but the hotel (if they were based in the EU) could not simultaneously charge a $16000 cancel fee while not guaranteeing $16000 in the event that they could not honor the contract.
Again, agree that jurisdiction is an issue here, but you are wrong that this would not be thrown out by a court in the EU if jurisdiction was not an issue.
Oct 29, 2018, 7:12 pm
#19
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 902
Agree 100% with your issue on jurisdiction. With that said, you are completely wrong about the European court situation.
A 1993 EEC council directive on unfair contracts explicitly references the following:
The $16000 cancellation fee in lieu of points contradicts either possibly (e) or definitely (d) (and possibly both).
The $16000 cancellation fee (which is PURELY a fee - it is not paid room rate because the paid room rate is $0) would imply that the hotels would owe the guest $16,000 in the event that they are not able to provision the room (which they would not do). While it would be a very strained argument, one can argue about whether or not $16000 is disproportionate to a $0-$2000 (depending on how you value the points) booking fee - but the hotel (if they were based in the EU) could not simultaneously charge a $16000 cancel fee while not guaranteeing $16000 in the event that they could not honor the contract.
Again, agree that jurisdiction is an issue here, but you are wrong that this would not be thrown out by a court in the EU if jurisdiction was not an issue.
A 1993 EEC council directive on unfair contracts explicitly references the following:
The $16000 cancellation fee in lieu of points contradicts either possibly (e) or definitely (d) (and possibly both).
The $16000 cancellation fee (which is PURELY a fee - it is not paid room rate because the paid room rate is $0) would imply that the hotels would owe the guest $16,000 in the event that they are not able to provision the room (which they would not do). While it would be a very strained argument, one can argue about whether or not $16000 is disproportionate to a $0-$2000 (depending on how you value the points) booking fee - but the hotel (if they were based in the EU) could not simultaneously charge a $16000 cancel fee while not guaranteeing $16000 in the event that they could not honor the contract.
Again, agree that jurisdiction is an issue here, but you are wrong that this would not be thrown out by a court in the EU if jurisdiction was not an issue.
Oct 29, 2018, 7:27 pm
#21
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: SFO/YYZ
Programs: AC 25K, AS MVP Gold, BA Bronze, UA Silver, Marriott Titanium, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 2,469
If you're going to forfeit the points you should just put someone else's name as a guest and donate them the reservation 
Oct 29, 2018, 7:48 pm
#22
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,994
In addition, you ignored my main point. Even if you want to say that the penalty is proportionate (it's not), in the context of EU law* the hotel would have to give OP $16,000 if they were unable to honor the reservation as this is 100% a fee and not a collection of a deposit. The hotel would obviously never do this and, as such, the contract term would be considered unfair.
* again, jurisdiction (which you pointed out) is the bigger issue here
Oct 29, 2018, 10:34 pm
#23
formerly known as daveland
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: NY, NY, USA
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Marriott LTP, Delta Platinum, Hilton Honors Diamond, Wyndham Diamond
Posts: 2,969
I’m confused, are you saying it’s Marriott’s fault that a (former SPG) hotel is trying to charge a cash penalty for an award cancellation?
Doing a quick search it does appear there were many complaints about this on the old SPG forum, but maybe that was before they changed the policy.
There were a couple similar threads on the Marriott forum but unless I missed it no one actually said they were charged what it said the cash penalty was. Here is one of the longer ones (which I did not read all of) - Cancellation Fee is Dollars on a Reward Stay?
On Pre merger SPG reservations it was well documented that one could opt to forfeit points rather than pay a usurious cancellation penalty.
This is my first in this situation at an ex- SPG property post merger. I’m not here complaining that something happened. Rather I’m being proactive and trying to find out if Marriott policy has incorporated SPG policy here. I’m still outside the cancellation window at this time.
The implication on the cost of travel insurance is insane - to the tune of an extra $1,000 just to insure this one booking against unforeseen circumstances.
i may email the property directly to ask about the policy since they are used to the SPG policy. If they confirm the option in writing then I’m all set.
I’ve also reached out privately to William aka Starwood Lurker who is attempting to get an answer from the appropriate people and that answer will likely be posted here when he knows more.
Oct 29, 2018, 10:41 pm
#24
formerly known as daveland
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: NY, NY, USA
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Marriott LTP, Delta Platinum, Hilton Honors Diamond, Wyndham Diamond
Posts: 2,969
Actually based on another poster mentioning the confirmation email, I checked it. And the terms DO still state the option. Based on that as a part of the contract I would say I’m all set for these bookings.
I don’t know what would appear ona similar ex-Marriott booking but for now the SPG ones seem unchanged.
Oct 29, 2018, 10:54 pm
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Programs: MR/SPG LT Titanium, AA LT PLT, UA SLV, Avis PreferredPlus
Posts: 31,008
The follow-up to this is much more meaningful than the I-stayed-at-a-Holidy-Inn-last-night lawyer wannabe posturing.
Oct 30, 2018, 2:14 am
#26
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the air
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Bonvoy LT Plat, Hilton Gold, GHA Tit, BA Gold, Turkish Elite
Posts: 8,720
However that may be the cc company certainly would not rule on the validity of the penalty. Their only concern is whether the cc holder authorized the charge — and in this case it’s clear s/he did. They would allow the charge and tell the guest to fight it in court. As the company putting the charge on the card is probably a Maldivian company I seriously doubt you would be able to enforce an European judgment over there.
Oct 30, 2018, 3:30 am
#27
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 902
Well yes, but surely what you'd obviously do in that circumstances is put a hold on your card before you executed the cancellation in the first place so that Marriott has to chase you for $20,000 for a hotel stay which actually cost nothing as opposed to the other way around.
And Marriott would not chase you for anything, as Marriott is not the one charging your card or collecting the money. When allerted by the property that you’re stiffing them, Marriott would just kick you out of the loyalty program and maybe blacklist you (your email address) from using their platform again.
Oct 30, 2018, 3:32 am
#28
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 902
In the context of OP's agreement with the hotel, the hotel has already accepted the 340K points - valued anywhere from $0-$2000 depending on interpretation - as payment for the stay. The supposed or advertised value of services rendered is irrelevant in the context of the contract. This is because that value is arbitrary. If you want to get into "valuation" of things then you are right back to valuing points and, therefore, again showing that it is disproportionate.
In addition, you ignored my main point. Even if you want to say that the penalty is proportionate (it's not), in the context of EU law* the hotel would have to give OP $16,000 if they were unable to honor the reservation as this is 100% a fee and not a collection of a deposit. The hotel would obviously never do this and, as such, the contract term would be considered unfair.
* again, jurisdiction (which you pointed out) is the bigger issue here
In addition, you ignored my main point. Even if you want to say that the penalty is proportionate (it's not), in the context of EU law* the hotel would have to give OP $16,000 if they were unable to honor the reservation as this is 100% a fee and not a collection of a deposit. The hotel would obviously never do this and, as such, the contract term would be considered unfair.
* again, jurisdiction (which you pointed out) is the bigger issue here
Oct 30, 2018, 7:25 am
#29
Join Date: Feb 2017
Programs: DL DM, UA Gold, Alaska MVP, Bonvoy (lol) Ambassador
Posts: 2,994
And I just hope you don't do consumer contract law in the EU. If you do transactional law in the US then your experience with what makes a valid contract is not relevant to the ridiculousness that exists in the EU as it relates to consumer protections. I am not an attorney but I have worked on setting up pricing and conditions for this exact issue (cancellation fees, deposit collection, etc) for a non-hotel industry with an EU client and spent countless hours with legal deciding what we could and could not do.
I completely agree that the contract terms would probably stand in the US with the far fewer restrictions on consumer contracts (and who knows what would happen in Maldives), but you made the comment that "no competent European court" would strike it down.
You can argue until your face is blue about proportionality, but for a pure fee (which is what the $16000 cancellation fee is - it is not a collection of an existing deposit) must be balanced in EU law for consumer contracts. All one would need to find is an example of where the hotel did not honor a reservation and did not pay a comparable fee, or show that they would not have in the event that they could not honor a reservation, and you have proven that it is an unbalanced cancellation fee. That's enough to strike it down per Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts.
Given that it is almost universal that hotels merely refund any deposits and extinguish future payment obligations in the event that they cannot honor a reservation (e.g., change in hotel ownership, closing for renos), it would be easy to prove / find examples the customer would not have been paid the fee in the event of cancellation (especially since the burden of proof is on the hotel as there is likely nothing in the contract stating as such to begin with).
I completely agree that the contract terms would probably stand in the US with the far fewer restrictions on consumer contracts (and who knows what would happen in Maldives), but you made the comment that "no competent European court" would strike it down.
You can argue until your face is blue about proportionality, but for a pure fee (which is what the $16000 cancellation fee is - it is not a collection of an existing deposit) must be balanced in EU law for consumer contracts. All one would need to find is an example of where the hotel did not honor a reservation and did not pay a comparable fee, or show that they would not have in the event that they could not honor a reservation, and you have proven that it is an unbalanced cancellation fee. That's enough to strike it down per Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts.
Given that it is almost universal that hotels merely refund any deposits and extinguish future payment obligations in the event that they cannot honor a reservation (e.g., change in hotel ownership, closing for renos), it would be easy to prove / find examples the customer would not have been paid the fee in the event of cancellation (especially since the burden of proof is on the hotel as there is likely nothing in the contract stating as such to begin with).
Oct 30, 2018, 8:37 am
#30
formerly known as daveland
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: NY, NY, USA
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Marriott LTP, Delta Platinum, Hilton Honors Diamond, Wyndham Diamond
Posts: 2,969
I love how everyone here skipped right by my screenshot from the confirmation showing that it does not appear to be an issue
But still will be good to know the Marriott policy going forward as I doubt this policy would be written in to an ex-Marriott property cancellation terms. Since the W Maldives is ex-SPG it seems to have kept those terms (for now).
But still will be good to know the Marriott policy going forward as I doubt this policy would be written in to an ex-Marriott property cancellation terms. Since the W Maldives is ex-SPG it seems to have kept those terms (for now).