Class action lawsuit for 30% discount?

[Dopey420]

I have been offline for a couple of weeks. Did anyone else get the notice about a class action lawsuit for people who bought a package through the WDW website? You have a choice of options but one of them is a (one time)30% discount off rack rates for any length of stay.

[MagicKingdom05]

What exactly was the class action suit for.

[KilleriMac17]

What exactly was the class action suit for.

from what I read, it was because some people complained about the vacation insurance checkbox being checked automatically, and they didnt notice it, so they complained after the fact that they purchased it, and felt 'deceived'. Of course, I unchecked it, and noticed it, but then again, I read, and I add things up to make sure it comes out right.
:Pinkbounc

[PrincessCandaceMarie]

Wow this is the first I'm hearing of this...............

[kirbsam]

Unbelievable. I feel sorry for all the victims out there. Imagine; they were expected to take responsibility for what they actually bought and paid for. Can you imagine the state this country would be in, if we actually expected people to read and be responsible? It is every Americans God-given right to be irresponsible and then sue rather than take responsibility for their actions. I say go for it. How dare anybody expect anybody to actually read. Terrible.

[MagicKingdom05]

kirbsam,

I know. I guess we are asking to much then. If they think it was difficult before, wait till they make a reservation with the new packages. I am sure they will sue because the packages are to hard to figure out.

[crazywig]

we got this is the mail today.

[mtakac]

Kirbsam, your sarcasm cracks me up. I was thinking the same thing. I just received my notice today. I feel a little wrong about taking advantage of the discount because I'm pretty sure I had the option to uncheck the box and even if I didn't I would have wanted to purchase the insurance. Does anyone else feel that it would be wrong to participate?

[MagicKingdom05]

mtakac,

It's up to you. I just have a hard time believing that there were enough people who missed this, that there was a lawsuit filed because of it.

[Leota]

Unbelievable. I feel sorry for all the victims out there. Imagine; they were expected to take responsibility for what they actually bought and paid for. Can you imagine the state this country would be in, if we actually expected people to read and be responsible? It is every Americans God-given right to be irresponsible and then sue rather than take responsibility for their actions. I say go for it. How dare anybody expect anybody to actually read. Terrible.


:cheer2: Go Kirbsham! ITA :cheer2:

[C.Ann]

Let me get this straight.. People didn't take the time to read what they signed and now they want to sue for deception?? :earseek:

Sometimes I really don't understand people.. :(

[MagicKingdom05]

C.Ann,

This is what it sounds like. I don't know if it is a new suit or something that Disney settled out of court.

I have made package reservations in the past that in the end couldn't use and was always able to except or decline the insurance, so I have no idea what they are talking about.

[cobbler]

Sounds to me like someone is just out looking to get something for nothing. I would bet that they knew the box was checked and are doing this just to hope it settles out of court just to get some $$.

Probably spent to much while at WDW and didn't feel that they should have.

[kirbsam]

Kirbsam, your sarcasm cracks me up. I was thinking the same thing. I just received my notice today. I feel a little wrong about taking advantage of the discount because I'm pretty sure I had the option to uncheck the box and even if I didn't I would have wanted to purchase the insurance. Does anyone else feel that it would be wrong to participate?


Sarcasm?????????

[Kaycee]

I got this in the mail last week and threw it away. I was the one who was careless and didn't uncheck the box. It ws my mistake, so I'm not going to take anything from Disney because of it.

[DancingBear]

My educated guess is that there is a specific disclosure statute that was violated here and which was the basis of the lawsuit, and that the suit was brought about by any of the number of law firms who specialize in turning out this sort of thing. Disney has good enough lawyers to know better.

I got no problem with this. I recently received a check for several hundred dollars because my insurance company was charging more than what was permitted under the applicable state statutes, and a lawsuit was instituted by one of these firms to force the refund. I would have had no idea that I was owed the money otherwise.

[dreamalittledream]

I got the letter today also.
Last year I booked my package over the phone and did not realize I had accepted the insurance until the confirmation letter came. I called and had a nice conversation with the CM about it because I am ususally very cautious about things like that and I did not remember agreeing to it. I figured it was not a big deal, better safe than sorry, and let it go once the CM explained it to me.
Did anyone else book over the phone and get the letter?

[KNWVIKING]

I don't mean to sound like a killjoy for all those with "awards" from the lawsuit, but is a 30% discount off rack really something worth winning ? What I mean is, does anybody pay rack rate anymore ? It almost sounds like a great marketing ploy by Disney.

DB: The problem I have with class action suits is tha the law firm running the suit gets the lions share of th award. How many millions did the firm get in the Blockbuster settlement ? What did te "victims" get ? Some "rent one-get one free" coupons ?

[jgmklmhem]

I have never bought a package from the Disney site only used it to price things out...and I would never sue if I made this mistake...but it does irk me that they automatically check the box. I would check it if I wanted to.

[kirbsam]

KNWVIKING: I initially thought the same thing. 30% off rack rates sounds very similar to AP codes or other codes that we all know, love and use. Sounds like a great idea, if I were a disney exec. My wife uses the same logic when she tells me how much money she saved me when she bought something for 30% off, that we wouldn't have spent in the first place if it wasn't on sale.

[rocketriter]

Yes, I agree about people taking personal responsibility. I read contracts and I don't beat up on other people if I'm careless about their contents.

But I also think that Disney as a corporation should not be in the business of tricking people into buying more than they need, even if they're only tricking those who are more careless or sloppy in their business dealings. I hate it when I deal with a corporation (or an individual) and realize that they've rigged things so that if there's any kind of mistake, the dollars roll into their pocket. That's the case with these checkboxes. Nobody makes a mistake with them that makes the individual money. Mistakes with those checkboxes only make Disney money. So I don't mind spanking Disney for publishing those insurance checkboxes in the checked state. Disney should behave at a higher standard than that.

[Dopey420]

How about some "personal responsibility" for corporations? Why should they get to rip everyone off? For example, every time I go to the grocery, I get something free because the computer scans a higher price than the shelf price advertised. Most people don't check their receipts. How much does the store make by overcharging its unsuspecting customers?

Stand up for your rights against Corporate America!!!!

[Morganpics]

kirbsam, nice to know someone thinks the same way I do.

[KNWVIKING]

***"But I also think that Disney as a corporation should not be in the business of tricking people into buying more than they need, even if they're only tricking those who are more careless or sloppy in their business dealings. "***

But ya know what ? Say the default choice was "no ins". I imagine we'd be looking at a lawsuit by all those people that had their vacation ruined by the hurricanes who thought they DID have insurance because " a box was checked".

In todays internet world, most people who are savey enough to book a vacation on-line are probably familiar with what has become industry standard. How many times have you signed up for a product or some newsletter only to be asked if you'd like a host of other assorted products. All the defaults are set to "yes". Disney isn't doing anything new.

[All Aboard]

In general, I agree with the whole "taking personal responsibility" argument. However, there is a point at which the selling company can cross a line into deception. Not sure this is it, but it DOES exist. I do hope the fervent posters in this thread at least agree with that.

[LIFERBABE]

Im not here often, but I don't like the automatic checked boxes either. If Im savvy enough to book a vacation online, Im savvy enough to check my own boxes! Yes, consumers are responsible for the contracts they enter into and there should be a level of personal responsibility, but Disney and other corporations have a responsibility also and I do think it is a form of "trickery" to automatically opt someone into anything unless they actively decline.
Why should the action be placed on the consumer for something they didnt ask for anyway?

If I go to the grocery store and the cashier adds items to my order when Im checking out and I don't catch it, does that make it right? or they have someone placing items in your basket as you go up and down the aisle?

[KNWVIKING]

***" Not sure this is it, but it DOES exist. I do hope the fervent posters in this thread at least agree with that."***

Yes, I do agree with this. But I'm also tired of people looking for someone else to be responsible for mistakes they make.

I'm bewildered how people allowed this to happen. If you book a trip at $1000.00 pp for four people, wouldn't you expect your total to be $4000.00 plus sales tax ? When your total is a few 100 bucks higher, doesn't an alarm go off in your head that says "Hmmmmm..... what the %$#$% " ?

[patsal]

I checked the box because I wanted the trip insurance, I just threw it out since I knew I didn't deserve a 30% discount--better yet I could have signed up for two since my insurance was for two adults! Talk about frivolous!

[All Aboard]

Vike, since lodging sales tax varies so widely across the country (heck, you pay 12% more in sales tax when you stay at the All Stars v. Pop Century) it might not be that obvious to someone.

I never book online, always over the phone - and have never been offered vacation insurance. Why not? Likely because it's a waste of the sales agent's time - as nearly 100% of the callers would decline.

But, since it's offered (as an opt-out) on the website, it really smells of an opportunistic tool.

[Memaw2Wm]

I got two of the class action suit settlement notifications yesterday ... and I intend to send an objection to the settlement (address in notification) ... it's a frivolous suit ... Mr. Huber should have paid attention to what he was agreeing too ... IMO Disney's website is not deceptive or hard to navigate.

The benefits to the class action participants are insignificant (the 30% benefit is a limited to the first 100,000 claimants) ... the real winners are Mr. Huber and his attorneys.

The attorney's were awarded $300,000 by the court and they in turn are allowed to pay Mr. Huber $10,000 for his "services." He's an idiot and buys $200 worth of vacation insurance, but is going to collect $10,000 for "services" ... sheesh!

And people wonder why Disney keeps upping their prices!

[Trekker]

Just a note from the perspective of someone who does website design work for a large insurance company. W

henever a question is asked on one of our webpages that could affect the final cost of what the customer is buying, we leave both "Yes" and "No" blank and code into the page a requirement that the purchaser must select one or the other.

This is simple to do and would be a solution - it is kind of like when you buy a package on the Disney website - you must click that you have "read and agree to the terms and conditions" before you can proceed. It would be just as easy to require you to accept or decline insurance before you can continue.

[rocketriter]

Trekker is right. It's very easy to build a website that isn't predatory in its design. There's no excuse for Disney to have done otherwise. Whether or not the plaintiff deserves $10,000 for services is an interesting question. But to me the more interesting question is whether or not a large corporation should be engaging in predatory practices and, if they are, whether or not they should be spanked for it. I think they should, and I think it has nothing to do with personal responsibility. It's true that class action lawsuits do little to benefit the class of plaintiffs. But they're a very nice way to get a corporate bully to behave.

[DancingBear]

DB: The problem I have with class action suits is tha the law firm running the suit gets the lions share of th award. How many millions did the firm get in the Blockbuster settlement ? What did te "victims" get ? Some "rent one-get one free" coupons ?What we all get is companies incentivized to follow the law. Without the class action, the companies would have no real risk of being held accountable for these actions, so they would be much more likely to take the risk of acting unlawfully.

[KNWVIKING]

What law did Disney break ?

[Memaw2Wm]

But to me the more interesting question is whether or not a large corporation should be engaging in predatory practices and, if they are, whether or not they should be spanked for it. I think they should, and I think it has nothing to do with personal responsibility. It's true that class action lawsuits do little to benefit the class of plaintiffs. But they're a very nice way to get a corporate bully to behave.


Sorry, I've booked five Disney vacation online in the last two years ... I can't see how Disney can be accused of predatory practices or of being a corporate bully due to it's reservation website design ... before you book online you have to check a box stating you've read the terms and conditions and I believe the T&C gives info re: vacation insurance ... at any rate I've never found Disney website to be confusing when it comes to opting in or out of vacation insurance.

[rocketriter]

In the banking industry, pre-checking boxes that trigger extra cost services is legally defined as predatory and can get a company fined.

[DancingBear]

What law did Disney break ?I can't find information on this particular lawsuit (would be interested if someone would post the contents of the notice letter that was sent out), but it is a reasonable inference that some specific disclosure statute was violated. There are many such consumer protection statutes out there.

[WebmasterCricket]

In the banking industry, pre-checking boxes that trigger extra cost services is legally defined as predatory and can get a company fined.

That is correct.

I know there is wording in regulations something like "By default, no action may result in the burden of fiduciary responsibility being placed on the investor blah blah blah". There is special emphasis on forms and electronic transactions/commerce. If the purchase would/could be considered "insurance", they could be bound by some of the same regulations.

I know I have had to go back and uncheck the box before. It was pretty obvious to me but I can see how it would not be for others.

JC

[mrmom456]

I received my notification yesterday. When we booked the trip we took the insurance, thought it was a good idea. We actually used it when we cancelled due to a family illness and got our money refunded. If we didnt we'd have lost it all. I cant, in all good consciousness be part of the class action suit when it was my responsibility to decline the insurance and it was needed. Next thing everyone will be complaining when prices go up again for anything Disney so the lawsuit expenses can be paid. Do people really think they will get something for nothing?

[dustylaroo]

I don't mean to sound like a killjoy for all those with "awards" from the lawsuit, but is a 30% discount off rack really something worth winning ? What I mean is, does anybody pay rack rate anymore ? It almost sounds like a great marketing ploy by Disney.

DB: The problem I have with class action suits is tha the law firm running the suit gets the lions share of th award. How many millions did the firm get in the Blockbuster settlement ? What did te "victims" get ? Some "rent one-get one free" coupons ?
My 2 cents: I couldn't agree more, there's only one winner in a 'class action' lawsuit, and it isn't you or I.

I often wonder why some people feel that some-one else is responsible for their actions. Did you sign your DVC agreement without reading 'the fine print'?

And, Disney is NOT in the financial industry, which I might add certainly needs regulating.

[raidermatt]

In the banking industry, pre-checking boxes that trigger extra cost services is legally defined as predatory and can get a company fined.
True, as WMCricket said.

In fact, I am VERY familiar with a company who got in quite a bit of trouble for this, and other similar practices. In fact, several years later they are still operating under a Consent Order from the Feds.

I'm not sure what regulations applied to Disney, since they are in a less regulated industry. However, they were selling insurance, which has many regulations similar to financial institutions.

I doubt that its black and white whether Disney broke any laws. If it were, they would likely have the Feds on their back. But its probably a grey area of some kind, hence the lawsuit and settlement.

Regardless, rest assured that somebody within Disney made the decision to pre-check the box so that some folks would purchase the insurance who wouldn't otherwise want it. Companies do this type of thing all the time with all sorts of products, but it gets much more tricky with things like insurance and financial products.

That said, I'm another one who's all for personal responsibility and requiring people to read what they sign. But I also have no doubt in my mind that this was not an honest mistake on Disney's part, but was truly an attempt to get people to spend money on something they didn't want.

Does that make them any worse than many other companies? Unfortunately, no.

[KNWVIKING]

Its been awhile.

[doubletrouble_vb]

I think its easy to jump on people for missing a box on a web page when a lot of people don't routinely stare at web pages and may not notice if one little area (a very small area) doesn't look as it should or may not notice one line on a page that's full of writing, itty bitty logos and moving objects. I also think Disney and other corporations count on that and frequently create pre-checked boxes with what I would consider to be negative ramifications for the consumer. The simplest example of this is check boxes that grant permission to send spam to the user...Disney obviously took this one step further and took the opportunity to siphon money from the pocket of the consumer.

I don't know what would be a fair settlement however. I've never bought a package from Disney so I don't know if the insurance is a percentage of the price or what.

[Bugsmom73]

I debated whether to reply or not, I too got a letter and I did apply for the discount. When we booked the trip, we did not know about the insurance if we knew we had it we may have ended up cancelling and replanning at another date due to alot of extraneous circumstances that had occurred. Maybe we would have been more cognizant of it if we had not been so sleep deprived with our 8 mos DD who was sleeping no more than 2 hours a stretch at that time. I honestly did not know about the insurance if I did, we probably would have used it. Secondly, it was hard enough for me to focus on daily life and bill paying if it was about what we had expected, iti did not warrant a second glance.

[raidermatt]

Good to hear from you Matt...

Thanks, Vike.

[superbird]

Unbelievable. I feel sorry for all the victims out there. Imagine; they were expected to take responsibility for what they actually bought and paid for. Can you imagine the state this country would be in, if we actually expected people to read and be responsible? It is every Americans God-given right to be irresponsible and then sue rather than take responsibility for their actions. I say go for it. How dare anybody expect anybody to actually read. Terrible.



I like your style!! I know what you really mean and it is true!! :Pinkbounc

[dreamalittledream]

Dose anyone have an update on the status of this topic? Just curious... and nothing better to do at 1 am!

[Rhys'Gamps]

The lawyers were to meet 3/8/2005 at 8:30AM, in California and finalize the settlement. The people who had agreed to the settlement were to be notifed within 60 days of the results of the final agreement and how to redeem the benefits i.e. the 30% discount. I have not heard of anyone receiving any notification yet. The 3/8/2005 meetings was open to the public I wonder if any of our DIS members chose to sit in on them. :confused3

[orangeblossom]

I got it and promptly threw it away...I'm a Florida resident anyway so 30% off the rack rate is not a discount.

[joshsmom]

I got one of these and if I'm not mistaken, I ignored it. Don't know if I threw it away or not because it seems like it was sometime after Christmas/January that I got it and there was a lot going on then. Anyway, I would like to know what happened--I never heard anything else about it until I just saw this post. Hmmmmmm . . . .

[dreamalittledream]

just an update for everyone. I received a certificate of redemption today for the 30% off the regular non discounted rate on one room. There are black out dates and a special number to call. It looks really good for my plans though. Did anyone else get one and call yet? Can you get the MYW dining on it?

[Bronte]

Yes ... we recieved ours today as well and we called on it right away. We booked CBR for March 31 through April 9th (spring break for us.) We did get the 30% off full rack rate which came to $121 per night for the standard room.

:Pinkbounc :bounce:

[dreamalittledream]

great! When you called did they say they have a limit the rooms that are available? Did you ask about the dining?
I am going to call but I know they don't have the rates out yet for when I want to go. I need to wait until June. this was a great mail day. :goodvibes

[Bronte]

Sorry ... I did not ask about the dinning option. The letter said the 30% was for room only and that was fine with us because we usually buy our tickets separate anyways. I also did not ask if there was a set number of rooms for this but I would think there would be ... that is why we called right away. With a shortage of general codes lately I am happy that I am getting this discount (if something's else comes up that is better I will just cancel and loose nothing.)
When are you going ??? I was surprised that the 2006 rates came out today for the value and moderate hotels ... now we just have to buy out park tickets (will do that this summer) and start watching for a good rate on airline tickets (have to wait till Sept. for that.)
Hope this helps ... Good Luck

[TheLeonhardts]

Just wanted to let folks know. We called and applied the discount to an existing reservation with a whopper of an upgrade (ASMovies to AKL-Concierge). It was no problem, we kept the same reservation number. Our park hopper tickets, magical express reservations, and dining plan stayed intact and the discount was properly applied. The cast member was great and I've had no problem double checking the reservation through the standard WDW number. Now, I've seen on the resorts boards that not all folks have had this flawless experience, so it may relate to the experience of the cast member. Also, the information listed under My Vacations on the WDW site isn't entirely correct (room listed as standard, vacation protection plan not accepted, dining not mentioned, magical express information wrong and flights not listed)-- but I called and verified that the information in the WDW computer is correct. I'll also be able to check my verification documents when they arrive, and I'll be able to double check with the concierge staff via email. Can you tell I'm a stickler for details? :rolleyes1

Judy

[Bronte]

Judy ...
You were able to apply the 30% off to a package that included passes as well as dinning. I thought the 30% off was for the room only. I did book room only for March 31 through April 9. I was going to buy my passes seprately this summer and was not going to add on the dinning opition but perhaps I should if it is possible and at such as savings ... Should I just change what I have or make new reservations?
Bronte

[dreamalittledream]

Just wanted to let folks know. We called and applied the discount to an existing reservation with a whopper of an upgrade (ASMovies to AKL-Concierge). It was no problem, we kept the same reservation number.
Judy

Wow! great news. who did you call to make the first change, the number on the letter or the regualr WDW number?
I have not called yet, I'm holding out for the June rates!

[TheLeonhardts]

Bronte & Dreamalittledream:

I just got the discount on the rack room rate -- my park hoppers and dining plan were not discounted. I called the number on the certificate to make the reservation, asked to just update my current reservation, and gave the CM the reservation number and the certificate number. I was on hold for awhile -- either the computers were slow that day or the CM was going to a fair amount of trouble. However, my reservation number did stay the same.

I just called the usual 407-WDW-DISNEY number to check the reservation after I made it. I believe both numbers answered as the "WDW Travel Company".

It sounds like my savings were roughly commensurate with what AP savings (about $130 off of $435 a night) can be, if they have them. However, it's a fairly short trip (5 days) and the dining plan is a significant savings for us, so it works out to be far more economical than having an annual pass.

Judy

[pattyivtoo]

Vike, since lodging sales tax varies so widely across the country (heck, you pay 12% more in sales tax when you stay at the All Stars v. Pop Century) it might not be that obvious to someone.

I never book online, always over the phone - and have never been offered vacation insurance. Why not? Likely because it's a waste of the sales agent's time - as nearly 100% of the callers would decline.

But, since it's offered (as an opt-out) on the website, it really smells of an opportunistic tool.

If you are booking a room only the agents cannot offer insurance. If you are booking a package the agents are supposed to assumptively sell the insurance. That means they check the box and give the quote saying this includes vaca prot insurance

[dreamalittledream]

Sorry to drag out an old thread but I have not seen anyone posting about this lately, has anyone used it to make their ressies?
I am very curious if anyone had success with paying for the dining plan and adding it to the rooms reserved at the special rate.
thanks!