Modification. The Operators may change these Terms and Conditions at any time, for any reason and without notice.

Limitation of Liability. IN NO EVENT WILL AN OPERATOR, ANY SPG PARTICIPATING HOTEL OR ANY HOTEL PARTICIPATING IN THE REWARDS PROGRAMS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, WHETHER BASED IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, WHICH ARISE OUT OF OR ARE IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE BENEFITS PROVIDED PURSUANT TO THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OR THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

Choice of Law and Venue. Any disputes arising out of or related to the benefits provided pursuant to these Terms and Conditions or these Terms and Conditions will be handled individually without any class action, and will be governed by, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, United States, without regard to its conflicts of law rules. The exclusive jurisdiction for any claim or action arising out of or relating to these Terms and Conditions may be filed only in the state or federal courts located in the State of New York, United States.

Almost every consumer facing company has similar boilerplate terms, many courts have found them not enforceable when they contradict other consumer protection laws and/or involve fradulent misrepresentation /inducement.

As you know you can’t contractually waive certain rights nor can you immunize against illegal behavior, particularly in a one-way T&C form.

Everyone wasn’t gambling with the travel packages.
We can blame Marriott or ourselves or the bloggers or each and every FT posters.
Yet, this was always going to be the outcome: some happy and some mad.
Welcome to the Loyalty Game. ��
Plus, if you feel lied to or played, best to choose another hotel chain and hope for better treatment (which likely you won’t get at some point).

The arbitrage game was stacked in Marriott’s favor. And even this temp block on certificate application and multi-step redemption pricing change hitting legacy travel package certificates holders was meant to fleece Marriotts’ customers as much as possible while giving Marriott a PC/PR angle to play to try to justify its anti-consumer moves in this regard — moves that hit the big point collectors more than the small point fish. Not that Marriott cares in this environment.

Marriott plays in an international playground, and that means class action and other litigation possibilities in the US aren’t its only potential legal exposure from this game of Marriott’s making.

Marriott is probably willing to eat the risk/cost of adverse legal/regulatory decisions in smaller national marketplaces and even the EU as a whole, as fleecing the American consumers may be seen as rewarding enough to Marriott that the risk and cost of losing a class action litigation in the US on such matter is simply business as usual in the US and worth way more to a well-insured Marriott than avoiding the risk entirely.

While the EU is more consumer friendly in ways than the US, the compensatory and punitive damage amounts in the EU tend to be a joke in the overall picture of things. There are exceptions, of course.

Marriott acts as a travel agent of sorts in the EU when selling travel packages using Marriott points, and that does open some avenues of legal challenge to Marriott moves.