Do you think this is what is confussing CM and Guests?

[Linda 441]

The problem as I see it is the changing rules. The adding of the "non-transferable" terminology (in small print I might add) AFTER people make reservations and payments. After Disney people have TOLD them they can treat adult friends to a meal using adult credits. That is a problem. Same thing with adults on the plan sharing an adult meal paid for with an adult credit.

The program has ALWAYS said you must use a child credit for a child meal. Heck for $10, the children's plan is a heck of a deal anyway when you consider the cost of many of the sit down meals, or all-you-can-eats and/or character meals are around $20/kid. Why do you need to cheat?

Anyway, I know that it would be impossible to change only for people who made reservations after XXdate, but changing after the fact, to me is like telling a football team in the 3rd quarter that they now only have 3 downs instead of 4. Or that in the 6th inning, a baseball team only has 2 outs per inning, not 3.

All in all, as others have said, if you don't like the rules, don't get the plan. We'll be re-assessing and will likely have to change our plans, but that's our choice. It's still a great deal. Unfortunately, I think the adult/child loophole probably opened up the whole can of worms and got them looking at everything. I imagine that was a much bigger issue than adults paying for other adults with credits.

 

[patsal]

I sent an e-mail request because I was getting confused with all the mixed information on here. When I sent the e-mail I stated that I was willing to wait a bit longer for a response so could it please be verified by the food and beverage department. I did wait about 24 hours longer than usual for the response and the food and beverage dept. was mentioned in the response. Basically this is what I wrote (edited to make it less cumbersome for here)
For
clarification, could you check with the food and beverage department:1. Can members of the party order separately at counter service locations? 2. Is it
alright to share a meal if one member is not feeling well, or just doesn't feel like eating and pay
out of pocket for a beverage at a nonbuffet table service location? In this case I wouldn't want to
be charged dining credits for the person only ordering a beverage. 3. If all members of the party
are "adults" can the children (10 and 14) order from the children's menu if nothing else appeals to
them (of course I would expect to use the dining credit to pay)?
I just want to be sure the plan is still the way it was when I used it in December to avoid confusion and misunderstanding.


Here is the response:Thank you for contacting the Walt Disney World Resort.
We appreciate your interest.

Members of your party do not have to be together to order meals.

We are very pleased that you and your family will be vacationing with us and we appreciate your
desire to make your visit as comfortable and enjoyable as possible.

Our Food & Beverage department advises that guests may share an entree at most of our dining
locations. The exceptions to this would be buffets, plated meals and Dinner Shows. Please
understand that the cost of entertainment is included in the price of Character Meals and Dinner
Shows.

Teens may order from the children's menu, however, the credit will still be deducted from your plan.


If you have questions or need further assistance, feel free to contact us.

Please include your full name, E-Mail address, and reservation number if applicable on all
correspondence.

Thank you!

Sincerely,

 

[Linda 441]

Teens may order from the children's menu, however, the credit will still be deducted from your plan.

Interesting.....I would think you would be allowed to have teens order from the children's menu and pay for it out of pocket. I for one, would not be interested in paying for an adult meal plan and then using it for kids meals.

 

[JimMIA]

The "treating" others is a very fine print rule as I read it. It is in the bottom and says something like the creadit have no cash value and can not be transferred, blah blah blah... Not as clearly stated as the child/adult thing (imho).

I don't think "treating" is what they are talking about when they say "non-transferrable."

By saying the credits have no cash value and are non-transferrable, they are trying to prevent selling the credits or giving the whole thing to a friend for the day while you go to Universal. Or...as we saw in numerous threads back when they used coupons, "passing the Magic forward" by handing your credits to strangers as you left the parks on your last day. That's transferring, and that costs Disney big bucks.

If I have my key in my possession, and I'm physically present and dining, I don't know why they would want to prevent me from buying a buddy lunch or dinner. It's great advertising for staying onsite...and it's on my nickel, not theirs.

Disney certainly does have the right to prohibit me from doing that, and I have no right to complain if they do...unless they change the rules in the middle of the game as mentioned above. I just think it would be a lousy business decision. It is in conflict with their basic marketing strategy of trying to make it as attractive as possible for people to stay onsite.

If they prohibit "treating," I now have to make a choice whether I bring my buddy onsite for lunch or go to a more reasonably-priced restaurant offsite. If I were Disney, I'd rather have the free advertising than the tacit statement, "Let's go offsite because this place is overpriced."

As far as our personal family situation is concerned, we're fine with no treating, no sharing, and no using kids credits for adult meals. That's the way we use the plan anyway, and it works great for us.

 

[Lewisc]

We really don't know exactly what they're talking about. We certainly know we can't give our tickets to a friend who's staying a few extra days in order for them to use our remaining days on the ticket. At least in this case it's not your nickel. We're not sure how that applies to the meal plan but it could be the same principle. Disney has said, in a press release, that the meal plan is an attempt to provide a cruise and all inclusive type of dining experience to resort guests. You can't treat others in those examples.

Disney might care. Your buddy might pay cash for his meal. You might end up not using all your credits or you might wind up using the credits you would have used to treat your buddy at a less expensive restaurant. Le Cellier might prefer your buddy pays cash for his meal and you use your extra credits at WCC.

I don't think "treating" is what they are talking about when they say "non-transferrable."

By saying the credits have no cash value and are non-transferrable, they are trying to prevent selling the credits or giving the whole thing to a friend for the day while you go to Universal. Or...as we saw in numerous threads back when they used coupons, "passing the Magic forward" by handing your credits to strangers as you left the parks on your last day. That's transferring, and that costs Disney big bucks.

If I have my key in my possession, and I'm physically present and dining, I don't know why they would want to prevent me from buying a buddy lunch or dinner. It's great advertising for staying onsite...and it's on my nickel, not theirs.

Disney certainly does have the right to prohibit me from doing that, and I have no right to complain if they do...unless they change the rules in the middle of the game as mentioned above. I just think it would be a lousy business decision. It is in conflict with their basic marketing strategy of trying to make it as attractive as possible for people to stay onsite.

If they prohibit "treating," I now have to make a choice whether I bring my buddy onsite for lunch or go to a more reasonably-priced restaurant offsite. If I were Disney, I'd rather have the free advertising than the tacit statement, "Let's go offsite because this place is overpriced."

As far as our personal family situation is concerned, we're fine with no treating, no sharing, and no using kids credits for adult meals. That's the way we use the plan anyway, and it works great for us.

 

[wright1baby]

[/QUOTE]Here is the response:Thank you for contacting the Walt Disney World Resort.
We appreciate your interest.

Members of your party do not have to be together to order meals.

We are very pleased that you and your family will be vacationing with us and we appreciate your
desire to make your visit as comfortable and enjoyable as possible.

Our Food & Beverage department advises that guests may share an entree at most of our dining
locations. The exceptions to this would be buffets, plated meals and Dinner Shows. Please
understand that the cost of entertainment is included in the price of Character Meals and Dinner
Shows.

Teens may order from the children's menu, however, the credit will still be deducted from your plan.


If you have questions or need further assistance, feel free to contact us.

Please include your full name, E-Mail address, and reservation number if applicable on all
correspondence.

Thank you!

That seems pretty darn clear to me!!

 

[jonimce]

I don't think "treating" is what they are talking about when they say "non-transferrable."

By saying the credits have no cash value and are non-transferrable, they are trying to prevent selling the credits or giving the whole thing to a friend for the day while you go to Universal. Or...as we saw in numerous threads back when they used coupons, "passing the Magic forward" by handing your credits to strangers as you left the parks on your last day. That's transferring, and that costs Disney big bucks.

If I have my key in my possession, and I'm physically present and dining, I don't know why they would want to prevent me from buying a buddy lunch or dinner. It's great advertising for staying onsite...and it's on my nickel, not theirs.

Disney certainly does have the right to prohibit me from doing that, and I have no right to complain if they do...unless they change the rules in the middle of the game as mentioned above. I just think it would be a lousy business decision. It is in conflict with their basic marketing strategy of trying to make it as attractive as possible for people to stay onsite.

If they prohibit "treating," I now have to make a choice whether I bring my buddy onsite for lunch or go to a more reasonably-priced restaurant offsite. If I were Disney, I'd rather have the free advertising than the tacit statement, "Let's go offsite because this place is overpriced."

As far as our personal family situation is concerned, we're fine with no treating, no sharing, and no using kids credits for adult meals. That's the way we use the plan anyway, and it works great for us.

This is the way I also interpet it. We have been using the plan for years now and have shared meals and treated other family members not on the plan. All with the OK from resort CM's and Disney dinning. Too many people interpet things differntly. I am also going to email Disney. I will post their reply.

 

[Sammie]

They not only didn't do a good job preventing loopholes they actually had the vast majority of thier employees that have contact with the customers encouraging it. This wasn't the case of some "secret" loophole that only savy WDW visitors got from the Internet. It wasn't the case of a few rouge CM's encouraging people to behave poorly or sprinkle pixie dust. This was a case where thier front line employees were offering this up as unsolicited advice. A simple change to the FAQ clears up the policy intention. Hopefully they will train thier CM's properly as well

And what proof do we have that this was the case. Surely you would not base that on anything read from Net forums.

 

[JimMIA]

When you purchase the Dining Plan, you're purchasing the agreement that Disney can set whatever rules they wish. It says so right there in the brochure.

I went back and re-read the brochure and I don't find that "agreement" in there...unless you're talking about the standard boilerplate language about the rules of the plan may be changed at any time without notice.

My point on the "treating" question is that I think that IS one of many areas where the brochure is either silent or vague. And I doubt if that is by accident. I'm sure Disney left it vague and silent to make the plan more marketable and to allow themselves flexibility.

 

[JimMIA]

I am also going to email Disney. I will post their reply.

Just a thought on emailing.

As someone posted earlier (possibly in another related thread), if you like the answers you get when you actually use the plan, it might not be a great idea to bring the issue to their attention. If they get too many questions on a particular point, they may decide they need to "fine-tune" a little, and the benefit you've been enjoying could go away.

 

[frndofpooh]

Of course anyone can make any argument they wish. To make it a valid argument, however, it needs to be based on valid foundations. When you purchase the Dining Plan, you're purchasing the agreement that Disney can set whatever rules they wish. It says so right there in the brochure. There is no way to avoid that fact.

This basically means that there is no merit in the argument that you can "spend those credits any way [you] please." It would be very attractive to have that right, but we don't.

If you pay $37.99 per adult for dining, you can spend those credits any way the brochure explicitly says you can, and for things that the brochure is vague or silent about, you can spend those credits any way Disney allows you to.

I agree that Disney has the right, if they choose to exercise it, to set the rules and change the rules. They recently did so by adding the FAQ regarding child meal entitlements, although as far as I can tell there is still no such thing as a "child credit" and an "adult credit." I also agree that we can only use the credits according to the rules of the plan. Having said that, I don't quite agree with two parts of this post.

First, when the brochure states that "components and terms are subject to change without notice," this does not mean that Disney may modify the rules on a whim without ever telling us what the rules are. I agree that they are free to change the rules anytime for any reason without informing us in advance that a change is coming. Once the rules are changed, however, they must notify us what those new rules are in order for them to apply. It takes two sides to make an agreement, and if you have a condition in your mind but fail to tell me about it, then it's not part of the agreement.

Second, if the brochure is vague or silent about something, that becomes Disney's problem, not ours. A very basic part of contract law is a doctrine called contra proferentum, which essentially means that any ambiguity in an agreement is construed against the party who selected the language. In this case, Disney is in complete control of the rules, the brochure stating the rules, and all other parts of explaining how the plan is to be used. As a result, if there is anything vague at all about the rules of the plan written by Disney, then that vagueness would be resolved against Disney.

Having said that, I want nothing more than to know the rules so that I can decide whether purchasing the plan is right for my family. If I buy the plan, I will use it according to the rules. If I don't know what the rules are for sharing, however, it becomes harder for me to decide what to do. With the new FAQ about "child meal entitlements," it now seems that Disney does not intend to allow a child and an adult to share one adult meal. Other than that, everything I see in the brochure tells me that two adults sharing one adult meal at a TS restaurant (except buffets and character meals) is perfectly OK. If Disney wants to prevent this, then they should just say so. Until they state clearly that this is not allowed, then it is allowed. It is allowed because the rest of the brochure tells me how flexible the plan is and how the meals may be used in any order, in any amount, and whenever I want until they are gone. The rest of the brochure tells me that I get a pooled group of meals to be used whenever I want during my stay, unless another part of the brochure makes an exception to this general flexibility.

If Disney published a new brochure tomorrow stating that there is no sharing of any kind and 1 credit will be deducted for each person present at a table regardless of whether they eat anything at all, that would be fine with me. I then may or may not choose to use the plan, but at least I would be able to make an informed decision. Until they put that in the brochure or otherwise communicate it as one of the rules, then it's not one of the rules.

The confusion surrounding the plan seems to be the result of some people using the plan as Disney did not intend, combined with Disney's failure to spell things out clearly and tell people exactly what they do intend. I am strongly in favor of following the rules and treating everyone fairly (no matter if they are a little guy or a massive world-dominating corporation), but I do not agree that Disney can make up the rules as they go along and require us to honor the rules even if we were never told about them. If they tell me the rules, I'll follow them. If they reserve the right to change the rules, then they can change them if they want to. Until they tell me that they have changed them, however, then they have not changed them.

 

[frayedend]

It all seems very clear. Kids can order off the kids menu only. Adults can order off of either menu (but will be charged a credit) Maybe you can pay out of pocket in this instance. Why not, if you got your own table they wouldn't know you even had the dining plan.

Now the only argument left seems to be about bringing in Mr. Smith and Conchita. But the arguments here make no sense that I will save money by treating Mr. Smith and Conchita to dinner at Le Cellier (sp?) and then having Chick Fil A or whatever the next night. The reason is simple. If I don't bring them to Disney for dinner then I will probably eat at Le Cellier 2 nights in a row. I am certainly not going to eat at a cheaper place with my credits. (hypothetically speaking, because I have kids and won't be at the most expensive places myself). And I brought Mr. Smith and Conchita on property and now Mr. Smith is buying a Mickey Sweatshirt and Conchita is buying a Sombrero in Mexico. They all get frozen Margarita's then take a ride in Norway with the Vikings. Soon enough I have used all my snack credits to buy things for Smith and Conchita and I have to pay OOP for the rest of my snacks. Then after a few more Margaritas, they are too drunk to drive and since we are staying at the All Stars we can't put them in our room. So they book a room at CR (because they are loaded and didn't really need the free meal anyway). And since they wake up next to MK they decide to stay the day, blowing lots more cash.

It all makes perfect sense. So I say Yes Bring Smith and Conchita.

 

[mickman1962]

Sammie,

They not only didn't do a good job preventing loopholes they actually had the vast majority of thier employees that have contact with the customers encouraging it. This wasn't the case of some "secret" loophole that only savy WDW visitors got from the Internet. It wasn't the case of a few rouge CM's encouraging people to behave poorly or sprinkle pixie dust. This was a case where thier front line employees were offering this up as unsolicited advice. A simple change to the FAQ clears up the policy intention. Hopefully they will train thier CM's properly as well.

Pedler,

As I've said before, the CM's would have to be nuts not to "push" the loophole. We all know they are extremely dependent on tips to make a living. We also know that they get 18% of every DDP bill. Why would they not encourage you to use the plan in a way that maximizes the total bill?

 

[Pedler]

I am strongly in favor of following the rules and treating everyone fairly (no matter if they are a little guy or a massive world-dominating corporation), but I do not agree that Disney can make up the rules as they go along and require us to honor the rules even if we were never told about them. If they tell me the rules, I'll follow them. If they reserve the right to change the rules, then they can change them if they want to. Until they tell me that they have changed them, however, then they have not changed them.

When we checked in we were handed a copy of the brochure for the dinning plan. That could be considered as informing you about the rules. If they provide the new brochure at check in and it has the FAQ about child entitlements and that the credits are non transferable then that could be considered informing you of the rules. Of course on the flip side we were in such a hurry to get out and do things that I think we spent all of 2 minutes in our room and didn't read any of the paperwork they handed us.

 

[Pedler]

Pedler,

As I've said before, the CM's would have to be nuts not to "push" the loophole. We all know they are extremely dependent on tips to make a living. We also know that they get 18% of every DDP bill. Why would they not encourage you to use the plan in a way that maximizes the total bill?

I know why the CM's pushed it what I don't understand is why managers would push it, front desk people at the hotel would push it and such. It would not be that hard for managers at the restaurants to do random checks on servers to see who is doing this and have punative measures. Just check the cards occasionally when they are rung up to see if the number of adult meals exceeds the number on the card. It it does there should be a punishment for the server trying to scam the system. That would put a stop to it pretty quick. And before people start to reply that these are draconian measures there have been many changes made in the way servers enter orders and such to prevent other types of fraud at most of the major chains. For example there is a reason that servers must enter every item ordered into a computer system in order for it to get made by the kitchen at most places. Aside from the tracking benefit it prevents servers from comping food items or drinks to people.

 

[frndofpooh]

When we checked in we were handed a copy of the brochure for the dinning plan. That could be considered as informing you about the rules. If they provide the new brochure at check in and it has the FAQ about child entitlements and that the credits are non transferable then that could be considered informing you of the rules. Of course on the flip side we were in such a hurry to get out and do things that I think we spent all of 2 minutes in our room and didn't read any of the paperwork they handed us.

I agree that this could be considered informing you about the rules. As long as they gave the brochure to you before they charged you for the plan, I think it's up to you whether you choose to read it before paying for it. Until you hand over your payment, you have a choice whether to accept the deal that Disney is presenting.

The problem is that our ADRs often are made 180 days in advance, and many of us choose where to book based upon an expectation about how we will be allowed to use the dining plan. If Disney informs us of changes after our ADRs are made but before we actually pay for the plan, then I agree that the changes are now a part of the plan. Still, many of us would be disappointed. At that point, it becomes a customer service issue rather than a question about what the rules actually are.

The majority of WDW visitors aren't as fanatical as we are about studying every aspect of their WDW vacation, and so they won't even be aware of the changes that we are discussing. For them, there is no issue because they never had an expectation in the first place since they never studied the brochure or camped out at the DIS boards to analyze the dining plan. As a result, any change that Disney hands them as they check in won't be disppointing. It is only the select few of us who will care enough to be disappointed. It's then up to Disney to decide how to deal with the minority of its guests who are disappointed by not getting something that they genuinely thought they would be getting. For me, it's not a big deal. For others, it may be a big deal, and I think their point of view is reasonable. Either way, we'll all still have a great time at WDW.

 

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

WOW, frndofpooh..............that is just how I feel. Are you an attorney? My DH is. This is how he would think. And we WANT to obey the rules. I have no intention of trying to figure out how to scam the system. Ofcourse, there's just one more thing. If the server tells my DH and I that we can't share a meal, I'm not going to quote your post or argue with them. I will just let it die.

When we checked in we were handed a copy of the brochure for the dinning plan. That could be considered as informing you about the rules. If they provide the new brochure at check in and it has the FAQ about child entitlements and that the credits are non transferable then that could be considered informing you of the rules. Of course on the flip side we were in such a hurry to get out and do things that I think we spent all of 2 minutes in our room and didn't read any of the paperwork they handed us.

Yes, this would handle the Adult/credit issue (which I had all intentions of following,even without the brochure.......it's just logical sense to me, but whatever) but the brochure doesn't say anything about sharing between two adults that are on the same plan, example, my DH and myself. In fact, it says "use them anyway you want". THAT's the big question.

 

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

oh, frndofpooh, I was talking about your first post.

I don't have a problem with Disney informing me before I arrive. You're right though, I've already bought the plan, so that is sneaky on their part if you ask me.

But the adult/child credit thing didn't really "change". They just had to spell it out for people who couldn't figure that out for themselves..........

 

[patsal]

Interesting.....I would think you would be allowed to have teens order from the children's menu and pay for it out of pocket. I for one, would not be interested in paying for an adult meal plan and then using it for kids meals.

This is not how I want to use it either, but if my child really wants to eat from the children's menu and IF they would not permit me to share a meal then this would be the direction I would go in. Usually they give a double portion for the kids meals and charge double as well when a teen orders--a few years ago my son did this somewhere that there were chicken fingers for some reason (which escapes me now). If s/he does this on this trip and gets an app/child's entree/dessert and drink it will still be a wash for the price of the plan so I am not going to be upset by it.

 

[Linda 441]

But the adult/child credit thing didn't really "change". They just had to spell it out for people who couldn't figure that out for themselves..........

Exactly. As far as I can tell, the brochure always said, if you have a children's credit, you must buy a children's meal if available (or something like that).
I am in a quandry about the "treating" to meals. I'd hate to get there and be told we can't do it when we've planned it. But now I do see how the "non-transferrable" terminolgy can be inturpeted to mean "sold" to another or handed to strangers as you leave.