Bait & Switch: Disney changed terms from proposal to paperwork?!!?

[Brian Noble]

Should be interesting....

Very much so. Perhaps we've seen who's more willing to walk away.

 

[DisneyQueen1320]

I think that happen to me, we took a tour and was told the downpayment for 100 pts was $500 becuz of the Steve Harvey promo. But when the final paperwork came it my payments were a little higher then what he told us. My guide advise me of the promo if I brought 160 pts and this was a better deal anyway. I receive a free 160 pts to SSR or thru II to use within a year, and no dues due til June 2009. So we end up buying at AKV phase 2 w/Oct UY. My guide work it out where we only had to pay $500 total for the downpayment even with the 160 pts. I don't think the guides did this on purpose, you have to keep in mind the 100 pts contract is new and was unclear. I know $500 is $500 but in the long run your still giving your family wonderful memories that's the bottom line.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

As Dean suggested earlier, that particular guide may pay the $500.

MG

 

[lowepg]

Just a final note to the saga:

I finally caught up with the manager that had left me a message. He affirmed that the guide had erred, and said there wasnt anything he could do about it. I said I was cancelling, he offered a $100 Disney gift card, but (to me) - especially running a sales organization myself- I just cant accept them failing to honor their offer.

So, anyways- thanks to all for your opinions and feedback. Case closed.

And for those with future dealings with Disney- just becuase you get it in writing- it doesnt mean much :-(

 

[mla973]

Mistake or intentional, Disney should make things right with you. I'm sorry you have to deal with it.

 

[Goofy's apprentice]

I'm sorry that they didn't make it right for you. I too think they should have delivered what was presented. However, if there is a positive, this is one more indication that there is very little that guides can do to give someone a 'special deal'. Contrary to other types of sales positions, they can only offer the same deal to everyone. I know that Disney makes a big deal out of that. Unfortunately, in this situation, the exact requirement that is supposed to maintain the integrity of the guides does just the opposite.

On your other point, I don't think that it was a deliberate "bait and switch", just a mistake but it doesn't change the fact that they should have made it right.

Once again, sorry for your negative experience !

 

[Brian Noble]

As I suggested earlier, all we've learned is that Disney is the one willing to walk away from the deal.

Reading between the lines, it would seem that sales are still quite strong despite the current economy.

 

[disneynutz]

Sales are not strong. The problem is that you are dealing with a large bureaucratic corporation that has poor communication between departments. Profit determines their policies and budgets their actions.

The way to get the promised $500 is to go above the local management who has offered the most that they are authorized too. They don't want to take the issue higher on the OP's behalf because then they have to admit their mistakes to upper management.

 

[lugnut33]

I can't believe they would walk away from it for $400. Like they wouldn't get that back from him in 1 trip with his family!!

 

[Caskbill]

I see a couple of things here.

1. It was an offer, it was not a contract, so all those who posted about the 'contract' are incorrect in their wording. A contract is legally binding, but an offer is not.

2. It was a mistake, unintentional. It was not like a department store that mislabeled an item. In the suit example, if the store accidently posted a suit at 200% off instead of 20% off, would you expect to get it free, AND have them give you in cash the equivelent amount of the suit's retail price? The same goes if a store ad is printed incorrectly in a newspaper. If Wal*Mart has an ad saying HD TV's normally $1995 on sale for $17.95 would you argue they have to sell it to you for eighteen bucks? No, and they probably have a notice in the store somewhere stating the ad was incorrect and sorry for the inconvenience.

Even though a downpayment was made, it's still an offer only and not a legal contract. You could be purchasing anything, a car, a house, a TV set, whatever. If a mistake is made in the offer, there is no obligation of the seller to actually complete it as a contract. Just like the Wal*Mart example, DVC only needs to say that there was a mistake made in the offer and you were quoted the wrong price. Then it's up to the buyer to decide if they still want to purchase or not. You can't get the TV above for 18 bucks, but maybe the $200 off is still a good deal and you'll buy it for the $1795 the ad was meant to read.

In absolutely no way was this a "Bait and Switch".

Just .02

 

[Dean]

I can't believe they would walk away from it for $400. Like they wouldn't get that back from him in 1 trip with his family!!

The only reasons I can think of they would are that getting such an exception approved would be more important than it was worth and that if they did do it a lot of people would likely go back and complain, rightfully so. I think they should have and could have done it in such a way to not create either problem with the means at their disposal, maybe a few extra tickets or the like.

 

[z28wiz]

CASKBILL actually depending on the state if something is marked wrong in the store it has to be sold for that. I know in some counties in NY its like that But whether to walk away or not, I'm not to sure on that answer. Would have to see all the facts from both sides.

 

[lowepg]

As I read more about this situation, the more I think to myself "how in the world does the guide not understand the promotion"? Or "how can they even generate the paperwork for the offer if a certain promotion is not applicable".

I can understand a purchaser walking in and telling the guide "and I qualify for the Steve Harvey promotion - correct"? Now, the purchaser may not be aware of the terms associated with that promotion, but by golly, the salesperson who put the offer together in writing had better be.

Does anyone here believe that this purchaser was the first one this guide ever had which asked for the Steve Harvey promotion on 100 points? Again, I'm finding this very difficult to believe.

That was my feeling as well. And if the guide wasnt 100% sure (hard to believe as he said he had been there 8 yrs or something), you think he'd double check before putting it in writing...

oh well... live and learn.

 

[Quiksilvr]

I see a couple of things here.

1. It was an offer, it was not a contract, so all those who posted about the 'contract' are incorrect in their wording. A contract is legally binding, but an offer is not.

2. It was a mistake, unintentional. It was not like a department store that mislabeled an item. In the suit example, if the store accidently posted a suit at 200% off instead of 20% off, would you expect to get it free, AND have them give you in cash the equivelent amount of the suit's retail price? The same goes if a store ad is printed incorrectly in a newspaper. If Wal*Mart has an ad saying HD TV's normally $1995 on sale for $17.95 would you argue they have to sell it to you for eighteen bucks? No, and they probably have a notice in the store somewhere stating the ad was incorrect and sorry for the inconvenience.

Even though a downpayment was made, it's still an offer only and not a legal contract. You could be purchasing anything, a car, a house, a TV set, whatever. If a mistake is made in the offer, there is no obligation of the seller to actually complete it as a contract. Just like the Wal*Mart example, DVC only needs to say that there was a mistake made in the offer and you were quoted the wrong price. Then it's up to the buyer to decide if they still want to purchase or not. You can't get the TV above for 18 bucks, but maybe the $200 off is still a good deal and you'll buy it for the $1795 the ad was meant to read.

In absolutely no way was this a "Bait and Switch".

Just .02

Brief (very general) tutorial on contract law. Basic contract law requires that there be an offer and acceptance between the two parties plus consideration for the contract. The offeror makes the offer to the offeree and the offeree has the option to accept the offer. Once the offer is accepted, there is a contract (assuming that the offer is accepted in a timely manner and in the fashion required by the offer). It doesn't matter if everything has been memorialized in the final document; once the offer has been accepted there is a binding agreement. The offeror has the ability to change the offer, but must do so before the offeree accepts the original offer. The offeree also has the ability to make a counteroffer if the terms of the original offer are not acceptable to the offeree.

Assuming the OP accepted the offer there was a binding agreement. The consideration for the agreement was the deposit and the purchase price (or more specifically, the promise to pay the purchase price).

Now, I assume that Disney has the offer worded in such a way that "acceptance" of Disney's offer must be executed in a very specific manner. If this is the case, it is possible that the OP did not accept the offer. IIRC, the OP asked for written confirmation of the offer and he received the offer with the disputed term. He tried to accept the offer as written on the offer sheet and Disney said there was a mistake. If this was a bar exam question, I could argue both sides (this is a pretty basic contract problem actually). I would also argue that Disney's mistake does not change the validity of the acceptance (assuming Disney did not validly revoke the offer). Contract law is generally unforgiving to those who make "mistakes" intentional or no. The reason for that is that you're contracting property rights; the law feels that you should take enough care of your own business that "mistakes" aren't made. There are very specific situations in which "mistake" is a permitted reason to back out of a contract. Also, there are very specific rules for whether you have validly revoked an offer or made a counteroffer (irrespective of whether the offeror believes they made a mistake). I don't know enough of the facts to make comment on those.

So, Caskbill, I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of the situation. There are some nuances to the "Wal-Mart TV" example you gave that differentiate it from an offer to purchase a real estate interest but I don't really have the time to go into it (and I doubt anyone really has the inclination to read it). I just don't think the issue is as cut-and-dried as you do. It's all moot at this point anyway because the OP cancelled.

 

[JimMIA]

As I read more about this situation, the more I think to myself "how in the world does the guide not understand the promotion"?

Regardless of all the legal nuances, this is the thought that keeps nagging at me. I find it VERY hard to believe that this was an isolated innocent mistake.

My favorite fraud cliche is: "Fraud looks a lot like stupid." It's been my experience that when someone tries a sly trick and gets called on it, they play stupid.

Like OP, I would have walked away from this in a heartbeat.

 

[disneynutz]

The more time that I spend talking to Guides, DVC Management, and Disney Management, I am convinced that a lot of problems are created and mistakes made due to ignorance. Disney is notorious for not getting the word out to their people before information is released to the public. They also have a training problem. Updates and changes are memoed to the Cast Members but often information is missing or incorrect. I have been sent back and forth between departments several times because they didn't have the current info.

Some examples:
$2500 Disney Chase no interest for 6 months offer, Guides were told that program was discontinued and info was removed from their cheat sheet. Program is still active.

AKV Founders Tapestry, no body knows anything about the program. It was assigned to DVD staff who screwed the program up so badly that the cut off date had to be changed because not all Guides were told about the program. The mailings were so poorly written that the information provided by us Members is considered useless. We were instructed that we would be contacted to verify our information prior to the tapestry being printed, we never were. Now I am told that the whole program has been turned over to a outside contractor. A contact at DVD told me that they needed someone outside the company to blame when the names are printed incorrectly.

Osboerne Lights, dates were posted on the Disney website, we made our plains, booked our rooms, bought our airfare. A day or two latter the dates were moved to the end of November. WDW Management when asked, hinted that the attendance forecast has been lowered due to economic factors. When asked about the rest of the holiday decorations, they would only say that the MK should have most of their decorations up in time for the MVMCP events.

I could go on but I'm getting depressed.

 

[Brian Noble]

My favorite fraud cliche is: "Fraud looks a lot like stupid." It's been my experience that when someone tries a sly trick and gets called on it, they play stupid.

On the other hand, Seneca urges us to "never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."

 

[Mama of Indybride]

This has been very enlightening.

MY DH and I are going to DL in two weeks, and have TRIED to make an appt with DVC. Have not received a confirmation yet.

I am so much more knowledgeable than I would have been had it not been for this thread.

Thank you all for your input. I think I can make a much more informed decision now!

I think that I am of two minds.

People can make mistakes....if that was the case, then the change should have been verbally communicated to the buyer, rather than just a random unexpected change in the contract.

I think if that simple courtesy had been made, then the buyer would not have been caught by surprise and thought they were being given the shaft, and the seller might still have a sale.

Just my own .02.