4 ms·

Doesn't matter where they claim this fee is legitimate, if the person refuses to pay (which I would), there's no way this would be upheld in civil court.

by ebbv 12y ago

chatmasta 12y ago
According to the article, charges come out of your deposit. So that means it's on you to bring it to civil court after they take your money.
- Maskawanian 12y ago
  Easy to work around, make your review after the deposit comes back.
  - dspillett 12y ago
    Or, if you've not signed anything yet, the better work around is to find another venue (and drop them a letter with proof of the booking for the other venue and an explanation as to why you passed them by and went with a competitor).
  - chatmasta 12y ago
    Your guests are the ones leaving the reviews, not you.
cookiecaper 12y ago
On what grounds would it be dismissed from a civil court? Similar clauses are in many contracts. I'm just curious if there's a reason to believe this is illegal other than simple unpopularity.
- JadeNB 12y ago
  > Similar clauses are in many contracts. I'm not sure that I believe this. I can believe that there are some places out there that think that they can get away with enjoining you against posting negative reviews (until the law eventually settles down against that, as I'm sure that it will), but I find it hard to believe that there are many places that think that they can fine you for the actions of other people. Can you give examples? EDIT: As baddox (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8131575 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8131575) politely points out, I worded this badly. I want to say something like "the actions of other people over which you have no reasonable expectation of control" (for example: you can reasonably be expected to prevent guests in your room from damaging the furniture, but you cannot reasonably be expected to monitor the Internet usage of all your guests after they leave to make sure that they do not post a negative review).
  - baddox 12y ago
    > but I find it hard to believe that there are many places that think that they can fine you for the actions of other people. There are plenty of examples of that, even in the context of hotel booking. The person who pays for a hotel will be fined if non-paying guest damage hotel furniture, for example.
    - JadeNB 12y ago
      Agreed—I meant to be more precise about the kinds of behaviour that you (the contract-signer) can be expected to monitor. I have updated my post accordingly.
  - cookiecaper 12y ago
    If all we're saying is it doesn't pass the "reasonable person" test, then it's not obviously illegal. Some may feel it is reasonable to communicate the terms of the non-disparagement clause you've signed to the members of your party and that it is reasonable to expect the party's sponsor to pay a fine if the members fail to adhere to the rules. I'm not a lawyer so maybe I'm missing something obvious. I would just like some substantiation. It seems that many people have the habit of automatically declaring something they don't like to "must be illegal" simply because they strongly dislike it. That's now how law works, and that's important to understand because many people seriously underestimate the powers that the legislature holds.
    - JadeNB 12y ago
      > If all we're saying is it doesn't pass the "reasonable person" test, then it's not obviously illegal. Some may feel it is reasonable to communicate the terms of the non-disparagement clause you've signed to the members of your party and that it is reasonable to expect the party's sponsor to pay a fine if the members fail to adhere to the rules. I didn't claim that it was (il)legal or (un)reasonable, only that I wasn't convinced that language of this sort (where you are being held responsible for the actions of people when they are not under your immediate control) was common in contracts.

Doesn't matter where they claim this fee is legitimate, if the person refuses to pay (which I would), there's no way this would be upheld in civil court.

by ebbv 12y ago

Doesn't matter where they claim this fee is legitimate, if the person refuses to pay (which I would), there's no way this would be upheld in civil court.

chatmasta 12y ago

According to the article, charges come out of your deposit. So that means it's on you to bring it to civil court after they take your money.

Maskawanian 12y ago
Easy to work around, make your review after the deposit comes back.
- dspillett 12y ago
  Or, if you've not signed anything yet, the better work around is to find another venue (and drop them a letter with proof of the booking for the other venue and an explanation as to why you passed them by and went with a competitor).
- chatmasta 12y ago
  Your guests are the ones leaving the reviews, not you.

cookiecaper 12y ago

On what grounds would it be dismissed from a civil court? Similar clauses are in many contracts. I'm just curious if there's a reason to believe this is illegal other than simple unpopularity.

JadeNB 12y ago
> Similar clauses are in many contracts. I'm not sure that I believe this. I can believe that there are some places out there that think that they can get away with enjoining you against posting negative reviews (until the law eventually settles down against that, as I'm sure that it will), but I find it hard to believe that there are many places that think that they can fine you for the actions of other people. Can you give examples? EDIT: As baddox (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8131575 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8131575) politely points out, I worded this badly. I want to say something like "the actions of other people over which you have no reasonable expectation of control" (for example: you can reasonably be expected to prevent guests in your room from damaging the furniture, but you cannot reasonably be expected to monitor the Internet usage of all your guests after they leave to make sure that they do not post a negative review).
- baddox 12y ago
  > but I find it hard to believe that there are many places that think that they can fine you for the actions of other people. There are plenty of examples of that, even in the context of hotel booking. The person who pays for a hotel will be fined if non-paying guest damage hotel furniture, for example.
  - JadeNB 12y ago
    Agreed—I meant to be more precise about the kinds of behaviour that you (the contract-signer) can be expected to monitor. I have updated my post accordingly.
- cookiecaper 12y ago
  If all we're saying is it doesn't pass the "reasonable person" test, then it's not obviously illegal. Some may feel it is reasonable to communicate the terms of the non-disparagement clause you've signed to the members of your party and that it is reasonable to expect the party's sponsor to pay a fine if the members fail to adhere to the rules. I'm not a lawyer so maybe I'm missing something obvious. I would just like some substantiation. It seems that many people have the habit of automatically declaring something they don't like to "must be illegal" simply because they strongly dislike it. That's now how law works, and that's important to understand because many people seriously underestimate the powers that the legislature holds.
  - JadeNB 12y ago
    > If all we're saying is it doesn't pass the "reasonable person" test, then it's not obviously illegal. Some may feel it is reasonable to communicate the terms of the non-disparagement clause you've signed to the members of your party and that it is reasonable to expect the party's sponsor to pay a fine if the members fail to adhere to the rules. I didn't claim that it was (il)legal or (un)reasonable, only that I wasn't convinced that language of this sort (where you are being held responsible for the actions of people when they are not under your immediate control) was common in contracts.