Disneyland passholder lawsuit alleges Magic Key deceptively advertises no blockout dates.
The $5 million suit filed on behalf of all annual passholders alleges Disneyland relegated them to 'second class' ticket holders by artificially limiting Magic Key reservations and the number of passholders that can visit on any given day.
Disneyland deceived its most loyal fans by artificially limiting theme park capacity and blocking passholders with “no blockout” annual passes from making reservations, a lawsuit filed against Walt Disney Parks and Resorts alleges.
The $5 million suit filed on behalf of all annual passholders alleges Disneyland relegated them to “second class” ticket holders by artificially limiting Magic Key reservations and the number of passholders that can visit on any given day.
The case was moved to United States District Court on Wednesday, Dec. 15 because the “matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5 million” and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is based in Florida while the plaintiff lives in California, according to the court filing.
The complaint was originally filed Nov. 9 in Orange County Superior Court by Magic Key passholder Jenale Nielsen of Santa Clara County. Nielsen’s attorneys are seeking to have the case certified as a class action by the U.S. District Court — a step that has not yet happened.
“We intend to respond as the case proceeds in court,” according to a Disneyland spokesperson.
The new Magic Key annual passes went on sale in late August after Disneyland ended its former four-decade-old annual passholder program in January during the extended coronavirus closures of the Anaheim theme parks.
Disneyland sold out of the top-priced Dream Key in late October amid howls from angry passholders because of the widespread lack of reservations available for the $1,399 pass with no blockout dates. The $949 Believe Key sold out in late November. The $649 Enchant Key and $399 Imagine Key remain available.
Magic Key reservations have been frequently unavailable on weekends and near-term dates stretching for weeks have been completely “sold out” to annual passholders still looking for a reservation. In contrast, the daily admission ticket calendar often shows availability on virtually all weekdays, weekends and holidays — with a few near-term dates “sold out.”
The lawsuit alleges that Nielsen purchased a $1,399 Disneyland Dream Key annual pass with no blockout dates in September, but was unable to make theme park reservations for certain dates in November.
When Nielsen tried to make reservations in October, she was disappointed to learn Disneyland had already blocked out Dream Key passholders on many days and all weekends in November, the suit alleges.
“Given that Disney advertised and promised that there would be no ‘blockouts’ for Dream Keyholders, Ms. Nielsen was surprised,” according to the suit.
As a frequent Disneyland visitor, Nielsen thought it was unlikely so many dates would be sold out in November. She checked the reservation availability calendar for single-day visitors and found out that neither Disneyland or Disney California Adventure were sold out on any days in November.
“The problem was not that Disney had reached its capacity and therefore could not provide reservations to its Dream Key passholders,” according to the suit. “The problem was that Disney had decided to block out reservations so that they were only available to new purchases and were not available to Dream Key passholders.”
Nielsen believed when she bought the Dream Key annual pass that passholders would be allowed to make reservations if Disneyland and DCA had capacity, according to the suit.
“Disney appears to be limiting the number of reservations available to Dream Key passholders on any given day in order to maximize the number of single day and other passes that Disney can sell,” according to the suit.
Nielsen reasonably believed “no blockouts” meant she could use her Dream Key as long as the parks were not at capacity, according to the suit.
“This is a far cry from what Disney advertised to consumers and from what Disney sold to its customers,” the suit said.
Nielsen would not have bought the Dream Key annual pass if she had known so many dates would be unavailable, according to the suit.
“Ms. Nielsen did not know — and had no way of knowing — that the Dream Key was, essentially, a ‘second class’ ticket with limited availability because Disney had reserved an unknown majority of the available reservations for single day or other full price ticket purchases,” the suit said.
Nielsen ultimately had to purchase a single day ticket to go to Disneyland in November even though she was a Dream Key passholder, the suit said.
Disney is engaging in unfair, unlawful and deceptive business practices, the suit contends.
The complaint accuses Disneyland of breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation and false advertising and seeks civil penalties to prevent Disney from engaging in similar unlawful trade practices, restitution based on the harm consumers experienced and repayment of all revenue gained by the practice.
Walt Disney Parks and Resorts has not filed an answer, according to the suit.
Nielsen and her attorneys could not be reached for comment.
The $5 million suit filed on behalf of all annual passholders alleges Disneyland relegated them to 'second class' ticket holders by artificially limiting Magic Key reservations and the number of passholders that can visit on any given day.
Disneyland deceived its most loyal fans by artificially limiting theme park capacity and blocking passholders with “no blockout” annual passes from making reservations, a lawsuit filed against Walt Disney Parks and Resorts alleges.
The $5 million suit filed on behalf of all annual passholders alleges Disneyland relegated them to “second class” ticket holders by artificially limiting Magic Key reservations and the number of passholders that can visit on any given day.
The case was moved to United States District Court on Wednesday, Dec. 15 because the “matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5 million” and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is based in Florida while the plaintiff lives in California, according to the court filing.
The complaint was originally filed Nov. 9 in Orange County Superior Court by Magic Key passholder Jenale Nielsen of Santa Clara County. Nielsen’s attorneys are seeking to have the case certified as a class action by the U.S. District Court — a step that has not yet happened.
“We intend to respond as the case proceeds in court,” according to a Disneyland spokesperson.
The new Magic Key annual passes went on sale in late August after Disneyland ended its former four-decade-old annual passholder program in January during the extended coronavirus closures of the Anaheim theme parks.
Disneyland sold out of the top-priced Dream Key in late October amid howls from angry passholders because of the widespread lack of reservations available for the $1,399 pass with no blockout dates. The $949 Believe Key sold out in late November. The $649 Enchant Key and $399 Imagine Key remain available.
Magic Key reservations have been frequently unavailable on weekends and near-term dates stretching for weeks have been completely “sold out” to annual passholders still looking for a reservation. In contrast, the daily admission ticket calendar often shows availability on virtually all weekdays, weekends and holidays — with a few near-term dates “sold out.”
The lawsuit alleges that Nielsen purchased a $1,399 Disneyland Dream Key annual pass with no blockout dates in September, but was unable to make theme park reservations for certain dates in November.
When Nielsen tried to make reservations in October, she was disappointed to learn Disneyland had already blocked out Dream Key passholders on many days and all weekends in November, the suit alleges.
“Given that Disney advertised and promised that there would be no ‘blockouts’ for Dream Keyholders, Ms. Nielsen was surprised,” according to the suit.
As a frequent Disneyland visitor, Nielsen thought it was unlikely so many dates would be sold out in November. She checked the reservation availability calendar for single-day visitors and found out that neither Disneyland or Disney California Adventure were sold out on any days in November.
“The problem was not that Disney had reached its capacity and therefore could not provide reservations to its Dream Key passholders,” according to the suit. “The problem was that Disney had decided to block out reservations so that they were only available to new purchases and were not available to Dream Key passholders.”
Nielsen believed when she bought the Dream Key annual pass that passholders would be allowed to make reservations if Disneyland and DCA had capacity, according to the suit.
“Disney appears to be limiting the number of reservations available to Dream Key passholders on any given day in order to maximize the number of single day and other passes that Disney can sell,” according to the suit.
Nielsen reasonably believed “no blockouts” meant she could use her Dream Key as long as the parks were not at capacity, according to the suit.
“This is a far cry from what Disney advertised to consumers and from what Disney sold to its customers,” the suit said.
Nielsen would not have bought the Dream Key annual pass if she had known so many dates would be unavailable, according to the suit.
“Ms. Nielsen did not know — and had no way of knowing — that the Dream Key was, essentially, a ‘second class’ ticket with limited availability because Disney had reserved an unknown majority of the available reservations for single day or other full price ticket purchases,” the suit said.
Nielsen ultimately had to purchase a single day ticket to go to Disneyland in November even though she was a Dream Key passholder, the suit said.
Disney is engaging in unfair, unlawful and deceptive business practices, the suit contends.
The complaint accuses Disneyland of breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation and false advertising and seeks civil penalties to prevent Disney from engaging in similar unlawful trade practices, restitution based on the harm consumers experienced and repayment of all revenue gained by the practice.
Walt Disney Parks and Resorts has not filed an answer, according to the suit.
Nielsen and her attorneys could not be reached for comment.
