A Chicago federal judge has shut down a class action accusing Hyatt Hotels of deceiving customers by not including mandatory resort fees in the initial room rate quoted online when searching for a room at some of its properties.
In the June 9 decision, the judge noted the resort fees are referenced twice during the booking process, with the total final rate, with fees, clearly displayed right before a customer would complete booking a room.
Hyatt’s “booking process here provides clear and easy access to the existence, purpose, and amount of the resort fee,” said U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey. “Indeed, a customer booking a room through (Hyatt’s) website or app would have necessarily noticed a price discrepancy between the initial price quote and the final charges before committing to the transaction.”
The judge said those elements of the process make any deception on Hyatt’s part “implausible.”
In July 2019, attorneys with the firm of Bursor & Fisher, of Walnut Creek, Calif., and McMorrow Law, P.C., of Chicago, filed their class action lawsuit against Hyatt in Chicago federal court. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of named plaintiff Eric Washington, among others.
According to the complaint, Washington and his fellow plaintiffs accused Hyatt Hotels of violating consumer fraud laws, by allegedly misleading customers into purchasing rooms that included additional mandatory “resort fees.”
The class action asserted Hyatt engaged in essentially a bait and switch campaign, known as “drip pricing.” When customers would search for hotel rooms, Hyatt’s listings would show a room for a certain rate. In Blakey’s decision, the judge referenced an initial listed rate of $104 per night.
However, once the customer began booking the room, Hyatt would tack on an additional resort fee. In the instance cited by Blakey, that fee amounted to an additional $22 per night.
According to court documents, Washington booked stays at Hyatt properties in Phuket and Bangkok, Thailand; in Montego Bay, Jamaica; in Waikiki, Hawaii; and Cancun, Mexico. He booked the stays using Hyatt’s website and mobile app.
He asserted he paid resort fees of $20-$40 per night during each stay.
In the example referenced by Blakey, the fees included “Sunset Celebration Reception nightly from 4pm – 5pm serving complimentary wine, domestic beer & our specialty cocktail of the day along with small bites, morning coffee in the lobby, daily newspaper, daily in room water, daily in room coffee and tea, bicycle rental, business center, 24 hour Stay-fit Gym, round trip shuttle service.”
In his decision, Blakey said there is little to no chance a customer could be deceived by Hyatt’s booking practices.
While conceding Hyatt did not include the fee in its initial room listing quote, Blakey said the fees were readily disclosed amid a “transparent” booking process.
If the customer chose to pay the final room rate, Blakey said, it was not as a result of any trickery on Hyatt’s part.
“As illustrated by Washington’s own complaint, the first and second screens on Defendant’s booking website provide a starting quote, not a contractual obligation,” Blakey said. “… The only bargain Washington struck with (Hyatt) was the ultimate price he paid on the hotel room, inclusive of the resort fee. And because he does not allege that his hotel room and resort services were worth less than the real value, or that he could have obtained a better price elsewhere, … he fails to plead actual damages.
“… In the end, Washington’s damages theory boils down to nothing more than defeated expectations from paying more than what (Hyatt) quoted him on the first screen.”
The judge dismissed the class action complaint with prejudice, meaning Washington and his attorneys are not permitted a chance to refile their claims.
Hyatt has been represented in the case by attorneys with the firm of Jenner & Block, of Chicago.