Dr. HFH

Completely agree.


I agree that it's not an inconsequential problem for Marriott, but I think that the takeaway here is that Marriott, for whatever reason, has decided not to release the information yet. Any statements by employees concerning embargoed, non-public information could well be (is likely to be) considered employee misconduct, potentially subjecting the employee to some type of internal discipline.

The CSRs are not "agents" in the legal sense of the word. I doubt that there are a lot of frontline, customer facing employees (or phone agents) who have legal authority to bind the corporation.

Here are the Ts & Cs. See, in particular, paragraph 5 under General Membership. Marriott can pretty much do what it wants. Also note that employees may participate in the Rewards program.

OssianBlue

All employees are agents of the principal who employs them.

Happy

Seems the on extension is among the latest rules which are communicated to the public via the SPG social media team member started the very thread you posted on.

I believe the stay must be completed by the expiration date of the cert. In other words, the last day you can check out is the date of the expiration date, in order for the cert remains valid to cover your stay.

Dr. HFH

In common parlance, sure. In the legal sense, and specifically addressing the question of whether all employees have the ability to bind their employers legally, no, not even close. The law of agency is much more complex and nuanced than that.

khlay

I suggest you call it today. If the agent say no, don't argue just HUCA. Today might be your last chance. You can also pm Lurker with your info.

OssianBlue

The ability to bind the principal is complex and nuanced--but it is black letter law that an employee is, legally, an agent.

rny321

If a reasonable person would believe that an employee had apparent authority, even if the employee didn't have actual authority, the principal can still be bound by its agents actions. Where apparent authority exists isn't something that we are all likely to agree on.

OssianBlue

Yep. Of such confusion lawsuits are made.

Dr. HFH

You're simply incorrect. But unless you can cite some authority for what you suggest, I'm not going to argue with you any more. All employees do not have the authority to bind their employers. In fact, relatively few do. An employee can only bind his/her employer if the employee has actual or apparent authority to do so, thus creating an agency relationship. That's why, when determining whether or not an agency relationship exists, one must first determine whether or not the employee was acting within the scope of his/her authority. The status of simply being an employee, without more, does not create an agency relationship. Does the person pumping gas into your car at a corporate-owned Exxon station have the legal authority to bind Exxon Mobil Corporation simply because s/he is an employee of the corporation? I suggest that s/he does not.

In this case (Marriott CSA sharing confidential information about Travel Packages with a customer and [allegedly] making promises to a customer about how the Packages would be treated in the future), it's extremely unlikely that the employee was acting within the scope of his/her authority.

My opinion is based on my 30 years as a litigator (30 this year!!). Yours? In any case, if you want the last word, it's all yours. This conversation seems to have gone as far as it can, without, as I mentioned above, citation to some authority to support your position.


The belief of a "reasonable person" is certainly a major contributing factor in determining whether apparent authority exists, and, if so, its limitations. The determination of whether or not apparent authority exists in any situation is an art, not a science. Compare to actual authority, where it's usually much easier to make that determination.

OssianBlue

Smith and Roberson’s Business Law

By Richard A. Mann, Barry S. Roberts

https://books.google.com/books?id=ld...agents&f=false

I have more cites if you want.

Dr. HFH

Thank you, -- now we're getting somewhere. Did you read the text, or just search for the highlighted words? If you read the text at your link to the Smith and Roberson book, you would have seen this:The point we've been discussing, of course, is not a theoretical, academic discussion of the legal doctrine of agency, it's whether or not what a CSR tells you is of any consequence and creates an obligation on the part of Marriott, the CSR's employer.

Or, put slightly differently, it doesn't matter whether or not the CSR is an "agent" of Marriott. What matters is whether or not a CSR's statements create a legal, enforceable obligation for Marriott. As you can see from the source you quoted, they do not.

Starwood Lurker IV

Members,

For members with existing Travel Packages (booked prior to today and not yet attached to a reservation), today we are able to share how they will convert within the newly unified program. Please see the full chart below.

No existing Travel Package certificate is losing value in terms of points and, with the new Free Night Award Chart that goes live today, 70% of our hotels either stayed at the same redemption rate threshold or moved down. As we structured the conversion chart, we considered the introduction of peak and off-peak redemption rates, which will be introduced in early 2019. This means that if you have an existing Category 9 certificate, which converts to Category 6 starting today, holders will still be able to attach the certificate to a stay when redemption rates within that category are at their highest.

Please let us know if you have any questions and we’ll do our best to answer.



Best regards,

Carrie H.
Social Media Specialist
Starwood Hotels & Resorts LLC

[email protected]

zachary

Wow. Just wow.

So Marriott knew exactly what they were going to do and didn't announce it before. And the excuse for that is . . .

The people who upgraded in the last few days (especially from 1-5 to 6, or from 7 to 8) are certainly entitled to a chance to downgrade/upgrade.

elsaball

How is the Cat 8 not going down in value, when peak pricing is not being introduced until 2019? The vast majority of formerly Cat 8 hotels can no longer be redeemed with the Cat 8 certificate. This frustrates me a great deal because I called in yesterday to upgrade my certificate to a Cat 9 several times, and was told that your systems were down so they couldnt process the upgrade.

callmedtop

Edited