Might want to think twice before staying at Mariott hotels

[KomradeEli]

If you follow Lehto's Law on youtube you probably saw this.

TL;DR: They lose his luggage and after he wins, they appeal and find a loophole to not pay what is truly owed.

Guy gets to a San Fran Mariott and his room isnt ready. He has them hold his bags so he can go explore while he waits. They give him a claim check.
Rando walks in and claims to have lost his check and wants his bags. So without even checking his ID or getting his name, an employee walks him back and lets him pick out 4 bags.
Guy gets back and presents his check and of course, his bags are gone.
He sues in small claims for $8k because thats what everything was worth.
He gets a judgement for the max of $5k
Here is where it gets unbelieveable:
Mariott appeals and references an obscure state law from the 1870s that limits liability to $250 per bag. Judge finds for Mariott and reverses the first decision.
He writes a lengthy letter explaining why. Says his hands are tied and he would give him it all if he could. So he gets creative and gives the guy interest on the money to soften the blow at least. (still only $1500 or so)
Now Mariott is rightfully catching hell because they have zero common sense and created a massive PR blunder by stiffing the guy when it was obviously their fault.

Wow this is crazy. At least the judge tried. I’ve been in a similar situation with a Marriot stay where my bags were checked. Thank goodness nothing happened to me! Worth considering in the future though.

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

It's always in the interest of corporations, but especially low-margin commodity ones, to defend precedents which limit liability. This is some corporate lawyer earning their pay.

I'm guessing they felt this "PR self-own" was worth it on some level, because if they're not going to defend the principle of limiting liability to some dollar level, then you either have to trust and train your staff with handling personal property, the value of which may in some cases greatly exceed the revenue from the guest's stay...or do away with the customer convenience of issuing claim checks altogether.

Frankly, after having seen the yellowed notices in hotel rooms about either locking your valuables in their safe, or accepting the possibility of loss above a certain level...this case does not surprise me one bit. Those laws have been around forever, and are totally designed to "protect the House."

Stop with the logic. The Karens need their outrage!

 

[jake blue]

No doubt a placard will go up at the bell station clearly proclaiming that checked luggage lost or damaged is not the hotel's responsibility, just like the warnings in the rooms and those out in the parking lots warning against non-liability of theft or damage to parked vehicles.

This isn't that much different than airlines. You entrust them with your checked luggage and to get you to your destination on time but when that contract fails the renumeration is often more an outcome of your attitude and that of the agent you deal with than the actual printed contract of carriage. When airlines cared about the PR they might put you on a competitive carrier flight, or put you up in a hotel until the next day's flight, or compensate reasonably for the loss and inconvenience. Nowadays airlines will do the bare minimum required by the contract in order to save money and even then may make you fight for what meager amount you're entitled to simply hoping the cost to fight for pennies isn't worth your time and effort so therefore they save even more. It costs corporations less to not do their job than it does for you and me to try to make them do it so they're incentived to do less than their obligation. It's cost-conscious!

 

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

Don't know about Marriott, but after my experience in the Traverse City Baymont, I left Wyndham behind and started staying at Hiltons.

 

[Principal Skinr]

Sounds like California is part of the problem, too. Reason number 1,427 not to go to CA.

 

[Ark]

Keep your bags in your car while looking.

Not in San Francisco. Locked cars last about ten minutes before getting the windows busted out.

 

[gregkl]

That's too bad that happened to him and not so great that he didn't get the restitution he felt he deserved.

After over 30 years being a road warrior, I know enough to not leave my bags with anyone with anything remotely valuable in them. If I had to leave my bags, I would have removed the valuable items. If doing that was inconvenient, then I would grab the laptop and park in the lobby, pool or restaurant until my room was available with the bags by my side.

It's one thing to be "right". It's another to go through a lot of pain and hassle to be right.

Heck, when I stay at hotels, upon entry to my room, I put the "Do Not Disturb" sign on my door. I don't need or want any housekeeping staff in my room during my stay.

 

[Cameramonkey]

I think my point was missed by many. It was more about how they handle/own their mistakes as a corporation and treat customers than one property's bag check policies and a clerk's mistake. Its not so much about whether its safe to have them check your bags.

 

[BE Mike]

Since I buy my clothes at Sam's Club and similar places (the Outlet Mall in Edinburgh) don't have anything to put in luggage that would be worth $8,000 or even $800. That being said, it IS San Francisco. Looks like Marriott is getting their money's worth from their shysters.

 

[xwing]

That sucks for the customer, but I doubt it is anything specific to Marriott. The hotels have lobbied long ago to get laws that favored them in terms of liability, and they will all take advantage of those laws.

BTW, a couple of people above mentioned Hilton; Did you know Hilton is specifically anti-gun and they post most of their properties? (And such postings have force of law in many states; it is a criminal act to carry in their hotels.) Marriott is actually one of the more relatively gun-friendly hotel companies.

 

[Cameramonkey]

That sucks for the customer, but I doubt it is anything specific to Marriott. The hotels have lobbied long ago to get laws that favored them in terms of liability, and they will all take advantage of those laws.

BTW, a couple of people above mentioned Hilton; Did you know Hilton is specifically anti-gun and they post most of their properties? (And such postings have force of law in many states; it is a criminal act to carry in their hotels.) Marriott is actually one of the more relatively gun-friendly hotel companies.

Interesting. I know its only anecdotal, but I travel a LOT for work. Out of 40+ stays last year, I cant say I have seen ANY no gun signs in OH, IN, MI, KY, TN, or AL.

IF they are posting the signs, they sure arent doing a good job of putting them in prominent places.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Since I buy my clothes at Sam's Club and similar places (the Outlet Mall in Edinburgh) don't have anything to put in luggage that would be worth $8,000 or even $800. That being said, it IS San Francisco. Looks like Marriott is getting their money's worth from their shysters.

Half the value was in high end Apple electronics.

 

[LEaSH]

Don't know about Marriott, but after my experience in the Traverse City Baymont, I left Wyndham behind and started staying at Hiltons.

What happened there? I go up to that area sometimes.

 

[HoughMade]

#1- Bailment law. I don't think I've encountered that since the bar exam.

#2- This is an aberration. I've used this service before and will again.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Heck, when I stay at hotels, upon entry to my room, I put the "Do Not Disturb" sign on my door. I don't need or want any housekeeping staff in my room during my stay.

Thats the one silver lining about Covid. I dont need strangers in my room. I dont need somebody to make my bed for me or new towels every day. I was loving travelling during covid and not having to worry about that. They'd ignore the "hang it if you want to keep it" instructions most times anyway.

Though in the heat of it, I joked to my wife "If I ever wanted to murder a hooker and hide her body under the bed, now is the time to do it. The paper in the room says hotel policy is to not enter a customer's room for 7 days after checkout. (to let the covid die and not kill their staff ) I can be in Mexico by then."

 

[printcraft]

Thats the one silver lining about Covid. I dont need strangers in my room. I dont need somebody to make my bed for me or new towels every day. I was loving travelling during covid and not having to worry about that. They'd ignore the "hang it if you want to keep it" instructions most times anyway.

Though in the heat of it, I joked to my wife "If I ever wanted to murder a hooker and hide her body under the bed, now is the time to do it. The paper in the room says hotel policy is to not enter a customer's room for 7 days after checkout. (to let the covid die and not kill their staff ) I can be in Mexico by then."

 

[xwing]

Interesting. I know its only anecdotal, but I travel a LOT for work. Out of 40+ stays last year, I cant say I have seen ANY no gun signs in OH, IN, MI, KY, TN, or AL.

IF they are posting the signs, they sure arent doing a good job of putting them in prominent places.

They often post them on the wall in the vestibule after the first set of glass doors, but it does vary by property. Sometimes they are outside; sometimes near other "informational" signs. Looking in the "Posted!" (iPhone / Android) app, I see 133 Hilton properties that have been reported with details, but the "reported" number is usually just a subset of all the ones who post anti-gun signs. As with any large business, it varies; but the three hotels that seem to usually be posted are Hilton, Hyatt, and Holiday Inn.

 

[tmcindy]

Probably shouldn't take any hookers there as well.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Probably shouldn't take any hookers there as well.

Why? Do you have to check your hookers at the desk if your room isn't ready too?

 

[tmcindy]

Why? Do you have to check your hookers at the desk if your room isn't ready too?

That's what I hear.