Amen brother.
Corrupt individuals should be held accountable, not the corp. for malfeasance. If this was a 2 * B&B, this $$$ lawsuit wouldn't have been worth anyone's time.
It's like that other story where the fucking Principal blamed the teacher for not locking her phone when that fucking kid went Mission Impossible into her phone to find nude pics of her. What bullshit is this?! Go after the kid, not the teacher! Whether you lock your phone or not or what apps you use is up to you. It's your fucking phone!
Accountability is fucked up way too often.
Except that is not what happened. He found an unattended house phone in the restaurant that guests are not supposed to use. I believe it was the one at the reservation desk while the hostess was seating someone. It is quite common for these phones to be used to contact guests staying at the hotel. He then called the Operator and asked to be connected to her room. The phone then displays the room number which is a common setup so the restaurant knows which room is calling them. He hangs up. He heads up to that floor. He sees the room nearby is being cleared out - goes down to the front desk and asks for that room.
He did originally ask to be in a room near hers but the hotel did not do that nor did they ever explicitly tell him what room she was in
http://pagesix.com/2016/02/29/erin-andrews-stalker-revealed-his-creepy-peephole-techniques/
Personally it doesn't seem like Marriott is 49% at fault for this since they didn't give him the room near hers because he asked to be near her nor did they ever tell him what room she was in. (Its not uncommon for travelers to request certain rooms or certain floors for a variety of reasons)
OK, thanks for that. The bolded changes everything in my mind. I assume that, as reported earlier, is what happened.
Yay, media!
--The Nashville Marriott at Vanderbilt University is a franchised hotel, meaning that Marriott neither owns it nor operates it. It is operated independently under a license from Marriott to use its trademarks, among other things.
--Ms. Andrews later sued West End Hotel Partners, LLC (the owner/franchisee of the hotel); Windsor Capital Group, Inc. (the operator of the hotel); Michael David Barrett and Marriott International.
--The Court in Tennessee found that Marriott International had no liability and dismissed Marriott from the case.
OK, thanks for that. The bolded changes everything in my mind. I assume that, as reported earlier, is what happened.
Yay, media!
So "Marriott" wasn't found guilty, and isn't paying this out.
And if the events truly unfolded as Exterous' link provides, then I'm scratching my head as to why she was awarded... Something seems to be missing?
Good for her. Congrats on the win.I wonder if she's going to file a lawsuit against whatever hotel chain she stayed at?
I think its just terrible wording with some laziness thrown in. Technically he did ask to be put next to Erin Andrews but only because the room he asked to be put in happened to be next to Erin Andrews.
Marriott actually owns very few hotels - I think they have the lowest number of non-franchise hotels of the major hotel chains
Its supposedly in the actual court docs although I haven't looked. There are a plethora of other websites like SI, ABC, RT, Dailymail that report the exact same chain of events. For example:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/erin-andrews-stalker-details-court-secretly-videotaped/story?id=37290228
From everything I have read I can't really fault the hotel. Nothing they did was out of the ordinary. The phones displaying the room number is typical as is using that phone to connect to guests. I have to think its pretty common for hotel\restaurant workers to ask to be connected to a specific guest for some reason or another (laundry services, room service, reservations, concierge etc). Accommodating specific room requests by room number or floor is very common and generally considered good business practices by travelers. (And not getting a requested room of the same category or allowed upgrade usually results in nasty emails and demands for compensation if its found to have been available)
But that can't compete with emotions and people thinking the hotel should have Done SomethingTM
So "Marriott" wasn't found guilty, and isn't paying this out.
And if the events truly unfolded as Exterous' link provides, then I'm scratching my head as to why she was awarded... Something seems to be missing?
The part where they basically told him where to find her and then put him in the room next to her?
Companies are responsible for the actions of their agents.
if he's dealing drugs out of your business then yes your business should be liable to a degree.
and you're a moron for hiring a drug dealer, let alone one that deals drugs from your business.
interesting; thanks for the correction. Guess they're going to need some additional policies & procedures to close those loopholes up.
so like you can not check in a hotel and ask for a specific room number????
i have a better rule
if you do not want anything to happen to you
you will be forced to rent also the rooms next to yours for safety reasons
only then the hotel will be in the fault
if she rented the other 2 rooms next to hers this could never happened
HER FAULT
are you foaming at the mouth now, because you're not even making sense anymore.
The loophole exploited by ThePerv can easily be fixed with 2-3 process changes. With a 27m judgement against them, I would assume that they would start implementing those changes.