<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Travel agent backs resort that broadsided customer with mandatory &#8220;under 25&#8243; fee, until &#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/</link>
	<description>Consumer advocate Christopher Elliott&#039;s site.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:25:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-64400</link>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 07:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-64400</guid>
		<description>as an agent, i know that there are hotel that charge a fefundable deposit as so many wpring breakers are reckless, but it is my job to inform the client which I do.  What is becoming far more common are resort fees, which, once again, it is my obligation to inform clients, and i do.  Truthfully i hate these fees...most cases these are lsited before the booking is completed.  Many times i have come back on the phone to advise of the fees.  Occassionaly, however, no fee is listened and the surpirse is at check in.  At that point I ask my client to please put in writing so i can forward it to a supplier for a refund.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>as an agent, i know that there are hotel that charge a fefundable deposit as so many wpring breakers are reckless, but it is my job to inform the client which I do.  What is becoming far more common are resort fees, which, once again, it is my obligation to inform clients, and i do.  Truthfully i hate these fees&#8230;most cases these are lsited before the booking is completed.  Many times i have come back on the phone to advise of the fees.  Occassionaly, however, no fee is listened and the surpirse is at check in.  At that point I ask my client to please put in writing so i can forward it to a supplier for a refund.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Rowell</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-29031</link>
		<dc:creator>William Rowell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-29031</guid>
		<description>Let me see, Mexico has SECTUR and PROFECO to help protect tourist.  WE have Chris Elliott.  I think we have state departments of tourism and FTC&#039;s Bureau of Consumer Protection, Chris is just more efficient!

While I think letting Sectur and Profeco know about what happened is important, I think the real aggravation is how stringent Orbitz was about denying any recourse until Chris got involved.  It seems that the entire industry is so committed to the &quot;deny, deny, deny - maybe they&#039;ll give up and go away&quot; method of customer (non)service that it makes you sick.

AGAIN, THANK YOU CHRIS for what you do!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me see, Mexico has SECTUR and PROFECO to help protect tourist.  WE have Chris Elliott.  I think we have state departments of tourism and FTC&#8217;s Bureau of Consumer Protection, Chris is just more efficient!</p>
<p>While I think letting Sectur and Profeco know about what happened is important, I think the real aggravation is how stringent Orbitz was about denying any recourse until Chris got involved.  It seems that the entire industry is so committed to the &#8220;deny, deny, deny &#8211; maybe they&#8217;ll give up and go away&#8221; method of customer (non)service that it makes you sick.</p>
<p>AGAIN, THANK YOU CHRIS for what you do!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hidden Hotel Fees: The Rise of the “Say What?!” Surcharges</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-23954</link>
		<dc:creator>Hidden Hotel Fees: The Rise of the “Say What?!” Surcharges</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 04:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-23954</guid>
		<description>[...] an “Under-25 Fee”—a $54 surcharge for guests 24 and under (at the Grand Oasis [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] an “Under-25 Fee”—a $54 surcharge for guests 24 and under (at the Grand Oasis [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16809</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 00:52:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16809</guid>
		<description>Perhaps the &quot;under 25&quot; fee is a way to recover the massive amount of hard
liquor that those under 25 can and will consume at ANY &quot;all-inclusive&quot;
resort, and has nothing to do with room damage reminiscent of a stay
by the rock group &quot;The Who&quot;.

Now, this would ALSO be unfair, in that &quot;all inclusive&quot; is an (ahem) very
all-inclusive term, not open to differing interpretations.

But at least it is a possible way to think about the fee that is slightly
less insulting to the hotel guest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps the &#8220;under 25&#8243; fee is a way to recover the massive amount of hard<br />
liquor that those under 25 can and will consume at ANY &#8220;all-inclusive&#8221;<br />
resort, and has nothing to do with room damage reminiscent of a stay<br />
by the rock group &#8220;The Who&#8221;.</p>
<p>Now, this would ALSO be unfair, in that &#8220;all inclusive&#8221; is an (ahem) very<br />
all-inclusive term, not open to differing interpretations.</p>
<p>But at least it is a possible way to think about the fee that is slightly<br />
less insulting to the hotel guest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lianne</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16802</link>
		<dc:creator>Lianne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:38:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16802</guid>
		<description>&quot;Although in retrospect, I think that rather than an additional charge, a higher deposit is more appropriate.&quot;

A prepaid, refundable deposit I have NO problems with. Precaution I understand especially if a property tends to run into issues with a the &quot;college crowd&quot;.  The fees described on in this story teeter on age discrimination which is BS.

I just object to young people being universally penalized for the irresponsibility of some. I&#039;ve never in my life trashed a hotel room, and I&#039;ve stayed in quite a few between the ages of 18-25.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Although in retrospect, I think that rather than an additional charge, a higher deposit is more appropriate.&#8221;</p>
<p>A prepaid, refundable deposit I have NO problems with. Precaution I understand especially if a property tends to run into issues with a the &#8220;college crowd&#8221;.  The fees described on in this story teeter on age discrimination which is BS.</p>
<p>I just object to young people being universally penalized for the irresponsibility of some. I&#8217;ve never in my life trashed a hotel room, and I&#8217;ve stayed in quite a few between the ages of 18-25.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16796</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:33:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16796</guid>
		<description>My sister in law is the new regional director of SECTUR in the Yucatan State (Cancun while on the Yucatan peninsula is not in the state, but in Quintana Roo) however she was interested in this story and asked that I send a link to her counterpart in Q.R. 

SECTUR is the Mexican federal secretary of tourism, a body with primarilay concerned with tourism promotion but they do have regulatory and enforcement powers.   Charging undisclosed fees is of course against the law, and they do not tolerate this sort of nonsese, and they take complaints very serioulsy. 

It is suggested that a complaint be filed with PROFECO - the Mexican consumer protection agency - if the complaint is not resolved (as it was in this case)   The PROFECO website in English is http://www.profeco.gob.mx/consumidor/extranjeros.asp    They will assist the consumer in resolving the complaint. 

Mexico values its tourism industry and unethical behvior is quickly corrected when the proper authorities are involved.   Simply invoking PROFECO and SECTUR are often sufficient to resolve any improper charges.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My sister in law is the new regional director of SECTUR in the Yucatan State (Cancun while on the Yucatan peninsula is not in the state, but in Quintana Roo) however she was interested in this story and asked that I send a link to her counterpart in Q.R. </p>
<p>SECTUR is the Mexican federal secretary of tourism, a body with primarilay concerned with tourism promotion but they do have regulatory and enforcement powers.   Charging undisclosed fees is of course against the law, and they do not tolerate this sort of nonsese, and they take complaints very serioulsy. </p>
<p>It is suggested that a complaint be filed with PROFECO &#8211; the Mexican consumer protection agency &#8211; if the complaint is not resolved (as it was in this case)   The PROFECO website in English is <a href="http://www.profeco.gob.mx/consumidor/extranjeros.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.profeco.gob.mx/consumidor/extranjeros.asp</a>    They will assist the consumer in resolving the complaint. </p>
<p>Mexico values its tourism industry and unethical behvior is quickly corrected when the proper authorities are involved.   Simply invoking PROFECO and SECTUR are often sufficient to resolve any improper charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carver Farrow</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16782</link>
		<dc:creator>Carver Farrow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:49:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16782</guid>
		<description>@lianne

Car rental companies reserve the right to pull your driving record and deny you a rental car if it&#039;s too spotty.  I don&#039;t know if they actually do that or not.  Similarly, Dollar pulls a credit report if you secure the reservation by a debit card instead of a credit card.

I&#039;m assuming that the hotel has had problems with younger guests. I recall checking into a Residence Inn and the manager explaining that under no circumstances was I to throw a party. That&#039;s they&#039;d had problems with college students renting suites to have parties.  I actually had to sign a no party pledge.

Although in retrospect, I think that rather than an additional charge, a higher deposit is more appropriate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@lianne</p>
<p>Car rental companies reserve the right to pull your driving record and deny you a rental car if it&#8217;s too spotty.  I don&#8217;t know if they actually do that or not.  Similarly, Dollar pulls a credit report if you secure the reservation by a debit card instead of a credit card.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m assuming that the hotel has had problems with younger guests. I recall checking into a Residence Inn and the manager explaining that under no circumstances was I to throw a party. That&#8217;s they&#8217;d had problems with college students renting suites to have parties.  I actually had to sign a no party pledge.</p>
<p>Although in retrospect, I think that rather than an additional charge, a higher deposit is more appropriate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lianne</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16780</link>
		<dc:creator>Lianne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16780</guid>
		<description>@ Carver

I would agree with you on the car rental issue but I don&#039;t believe that car rental companies take your driving record into account when you rent cars. Please correct me if I&#039;m wrong, I honestly don&#039;t rent cars all that often.  Assuming I am right, is fair that a 32 year old person with 6 speeding tickets or a DUI on their driving record doesn&#039;t have to pay a surcharge but that a 24 year old with a spotless driving record does? 

I don&#039;t blame insurance for what they do because they take MANY risk factors into account in addition to age. Managing risks based on statistics is what they do.

@ Jess

You hit the nail on the head</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Carver</p>
<p>I would agree with you on the car rental issue but I don&#8217;t believe that car rental companies take your driving record into account when you rent cars. Please correct me if I&#8217;m wrong, I honestly don&#8217;t rent cars all that often.  Assuming I am right, is fair that a 32 year old person with 6 speeding tickets or a DUI on their driving record doesn&#8217;t have to pay a surcharge but that a 24 year old with a spotless driving record does? </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t blame insurance for what they do because they take MANY risk factors into account in addition to age. Managing risks based on statistics is what they do.</p>
<p>@ Jess</p>
<p>You hit the nail on the head</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jess</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16777</link>
		<dc:creator>Jess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:12:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16777</guid>
		<description>It took some prodding, but Orbitz did the right thing.  They must take responsibility for the fee after accepting a complete payment on a package that they offered.

I still don&#039;t understand why &quot;under 25&quot; fees are allowed at hotels to begin with (these are different from the &quot;under 25&quot; insurance surcharge on rental cars).  If the hotels would prefer not to have young adults rent from them, a hidden fee is not an effective deterrent.  Aren&#039;t 25 year olds considered adults in Mexico?  If their concern is damage caused by the guests, then the credit card number kept for &quot;incidentals&quot; should cover that.  It seems that this is just another way for hotels to wring more money out of people who frequent them, instead of treating them well and getting their repeat business.

@Carver - I wonder if the resort would have even allowed Mr. Plaxun to even pay with a separate credit card.  If they would, your suggestion sounds like the ideal immediate solution to that situation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It took some prodding, but Orbitz did the right thing.  They must take responsibility for the fee after accepting a complete payment on a package that they offered.</p>
<p>I still don&#8217;t understand why &#8220;under 25&#8243; fees are allowed at hotels to begin with (these are different from the &#8220;under 25&#8243; insurance surcharge on rental cars).  If the hotels would prefer not to have young adults rent from them, a hidden fee is not an effective deterrent.  Aren&#8217;t 25 year olds considered adults in Mexico?  If their concern is damage caused by the guests, then the credit card number kept for &#8220;incidentals&#8221; should cover that.  It seems that this is just another way for hotels to wring more money out of people who frequent them, instead of treating them well and getting their repeat business.</p>
<p>@Carver &#8211; I wonder if the resort would have even allowed Mr. Plaxun to even pay with a separate credit card.  If they would, your suggestion sounds like the ideal immediate solution to that situation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carver Farrow</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16775</link>
		<dc:creator>Carver Farrow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:04:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16775</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t necessarily object to the underage charge, particurly when its warrents, e.g. car rentals.  Younger folks pay higher insurance premiums accordingly.

My larger concern is what could Ryan have done differently to protect himself.  As much as I want to blame Orbitz, they ultimately did the right thing.  And my usual mantra of booking directly with the supplier doesn&#039;t work as the under age surcharge was not disclosed on the internet, yet the front desk refused to let him get the room without paying this charge

At a regular hotel, one would simply leave, but resorts are different.

The best thing would be to pay the underage charge with a different credit card then dispute it with the card company.  For those who might be confused and think its unethical, duress is a well accepted reason to dispute a credit card charge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t necessarily object to the underage charge, particurly when its warrents, e.g. car rentals.  Younger folks pay higher insurance premiums accordingly.</p>
<p>My larger concern is what could Ryan have done differently to protect himself.  As much as I want to blame Orbitz, they ultimately did the right thing.  And my usual mantra of booking directly with the supplier doesn&#8217;t work as the under age surcharge was not disclosed on the internet, yet the front desk refused to let him get the room without paying this charge</p>
<p>At a regular hotel, one would simply leave, but resorts are different.</p>
<p>The best thing would be to pay the underage charge with a different credit card then dispute it with the card company.  For those who might be confused and think its unethical, duress is a well accepted reason to dispute a credit card charge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lianne</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16774</link>
		<dc:creator>Lianne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:53:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16774</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m more outraged at the existance of the &quot;under 25&quot; surcharges to begin with.  I hated the fact that I, as a legal adult, could be restricted or surcharged for things on the basis that I *might* behave irresponsibly. Slap me with a penalty AFTER I&#039;ve done something wrong, not before, and not based on my aged.

And no, I&#039;m not currently under 25, but it wasn&#039;t that long ago.

Kudos to Mr Plaxsum for standing up for himself with silly, undisclosed charge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m more outraged at the existance of the &#8220;under 25&#8243; surcharges to begin with.  I hated the fact that I, as a legal adult, could be restricted or surcharged for things on the basis that I *might* behave irresponsibly. Slap me with a penalty AFTER I&#8217;ve done something wrong, not before, and not based on my aged.</p>
<p>And no, I&#8217;m not currently under 25, but it wasn&#8217;t that long ago.</p>
<p>Kudos to Mr Plaxsum for standing up for himself with silly, undisclosed charge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judy</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16773</link>
		<dc:creator>Judy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16773</guid>
		<description>I am glad that Ryan Plaxsum brought this to our attention, to often I will see people just let problems that occur go.  For the under 25 age group, they often have to deal with problems such as this.   Kudos to you Ryan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am glad that Ryan Plaxsum brought this to our attention, to often I will see people just let problems that occur go.  For the under 25 age group, they often have to deal with problems such as this.   Kudos to you Ryan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Angi Semler</title>
		<link>http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-backs-resort-that-broadsided-customer-with-mandatory-under-25-fee-until/comment-page-1/#comment-16771</link>
		<dc:creator>Angi Semler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:55:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.elliott.org/?p=5689#comment-16771</guid>
		<description>This is one of those consumer interest tales with a happy ending, but it&#039;s a disgrace that it took a third-party call to Orbitz to get a resolution. They should have done right by the client initially and refunded his money immediately as soon as he called. Do you think he&#039;ll ever book travel with them again??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is one of those consumer interest tales with a happy ending, but it&#8217;s a disgrace that it took a third-party call to Orbitz to get a resolution. They should have done right by the client initially and refunded his money immediately as soon as he called. Do you think he&#8217;ll ever book travel with them again??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

