-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney Sued for Changing Terms on Annual Passes
- Thread starter mkt
- Start date
"Offered passholders the opportunity to opt in or opt out during the pandemic" - 
GimpYancIent
Well-Known Member
It's all about what is in the fine print. I am sure the legal eagles, on both sides, are carefully scrutinizing the fine print with magnifying glasses.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
What compensation are you owed if you choose to not request a refund? Punitive damages seem silly and they offered full compensation for monies spent already.
Yep. Not just what's there, but if it's even enforceable.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
These are tickets for admission. They are not life long. They are good for one year. They have changed the things that you get when you come time to renew the "ticket". So you are buying what the new changes are before you buy the renewal. They only changed it at the end of the ticket time (one year). They knew what they were buying or had ever opportunity to understand the changes.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I think this park reservations blip to today is strategic on eliminating or making annual passes effectively useless
There’s a progression here and it’s not at all “intelligent”
There’s a progression here and it’s not at all “intelligent”
The suit argues that the changes were done mid-term, not at a renewal.
This.
Just like I believe a lot of return-to-office orders from major employers are designed to foster attrition.
There's no honesty anymore.
Last edited:
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I don't have an AP so I'll have to go with that. It seems to me that if that is true then they have a good case. I would think that Disney's army of lawyers would have thought of that. I'm sure that they don't list attractions on the AP promise so dropping shows, etc. would not be part of the agreement. The ticket would be for entry only. If they were sold an AP that had no blackout days and then decided to put them in place, that might be a good case.
Kingoglow
Well-Known Member
I think a lot this will rely on whether or not a reasonable person would have understood the ticket 'bucket' system that was put into place.
Would a reasonable AP holder understand that the phrase 'theme park reservation' would clearly indicate that there would be three classes of ticket reservations: AP, day of and hotel guest?
Would a reasonable AP holder understand that phrase 'theme park availability' would apply individually to each of the three classes of tickets and not to the park as a whole?
Would they really understand that no black out dates would mean that they could be denied entry to the parks while day of or hotel guest tickets/park reservations were still available and went unused?
I don't think that all three of these details were understood at the time Disney offered AP holders the chance to renew or cancel.
#notalawyer
Would a reasonable AP holder understand that the phrase 'theme park reservation' would clearly indicate that there would be three classes of ticket reservations: AP, day of and hotel guest?
Would a reasonable AP holder understand that phrase 'theme park availability' would apply individually to each of the three classes of tickets and not to the park as a whole?
Would they really understand that no black out dates would mean that they could be denied entry to the parks while day of or hotel guest tickets/park reservations were still available and went unused?
I don't think that all three of these details were understood at the time Disney offered AP holders the chance to renew or cancel.
#notalawyer
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I think they have an excellent case…and they’ll still lose.
Both things can be true
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
A lot of folks are OK with PPRs it does not work for our family due to health reasons.
The moment I heard it, and it forced me to cancel our APs after decades.
But I did not know about the bucket system until long after PPRs were implemented.
If I was in charge, on site resort guests would NOT require PPRs and EVERYONE else would pick PPRs from the same bucket; one bucket for each park.
The Disney Data folks have the analytics to estimate where the resort guests are going to account for them and adjust the buckets accordingly.
Disney's army of lawyers in Florida are quite arrogant.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Epcot82Guy
Well-Known Member
Without getting into a lot of detail, that's by design. Having considered applying to that team in the past, it is well known aggressiveness is a requirement for the department - and I've heard anecdotally it's gotten worse in recent years. And, arguably, it has to given the approach the company wants (needs) to take on issues. It is one department that is designed to be very, very anti-guest experience. Hence why, in my opinion, they had such strong other departments to handle guest relations for so many years.
As for the suit itself, it will be interesting to see how this goes. I would fully expect Disney to vigorously fight the concepts out loud in the public... then settle quietly, especially if the suit has merit. It may very well, given that there is a balance between the terms of the contract and the adhesion contract factor of large companies like this. And courts view that balance of power differently. Remember the vast majority of settlements have very, very strict confidentiality clauses. So, the theater of the suit up to settlement may be totally unrelated to the terms actually agreed to. Again... by design when you have such a large public facing image.
As for the suit itself, it will be interesting to see how this goes. I would fully expect Disney to vigorously fight the concepts out loud in the public... then settle quietly, especially if the suit has merit. It may very well, given that there is a balance between the terms of the contract and the adhesion contract factor of large companies like this. And courts view that balance of power differently. Remember the vast majority of settlements have very, very strict confidentiality clauses. So, the theater of the suit up to settlement may be totally unrelated to the terms actually agreed to. Again... by design when you have such a large public facing image.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
New APs only became available late summer 2021. Buckets already existed at that point. The only guests with any argument are those who had 2020 APs and didn’t like the park reservation system that arrived after the pandemic closure. They were all offered a refund.
Last edited:
