Grand Theft by Celebrity Employees Follow Up

[LabGuy64]

i FIND IT ODD THAT NOT A SINGLE OTHER PERSON HAS POSTED THAT THEY HAVE LOST ANYTHING .....NOT EVEN PEOPLE ON BOARD TALKING ABOUT HEARING OF THE CRIMES.....I AM THINKING THIS THREAD WILL BE DELETED ALSO...AND i WONDER WHY

[LabGuy64]

Punitive damages are not rare, and often occur in cases where the defendant is considered negligent or knowingly engages in actions that cause harm

 

 

 

a lot of folks seem o be laboring under the inaccurate impression that a company is responsible for it's employee's actions in all cases. Not at all. This case is a perfect example of where they would not be. The only time a company is responsible for an employee's actions is when that employee is performing the work directed by the company. When an employee engages in criminal conduct - presuming it's not at the company's direction, or with their knowledge - the company is not responsible. There are instances when this shield from liability would not apply. First would be if the company knew of the behavior and did nothing to stop it. Second would be if the behavior was so obviously foreseeable that it was almost certain to occur, and no policies were in place to prevent it. Clearly, as soon as celebrity became aware of the theft they took all reasonable steps to stop it (involving their own security staff and the government law enforcement agency with jurisdiction). Additionally, it's abundantly clear celebrity has both policies and procedures in place to prevent theft. It would perhaps be nice to think they have a legal obligation to make someone whole, but in this case they would argue correctly they are also victims of "rogue" employees. Whether an employee is a direct employee or independent contractor would have no bearing. By the way although they have employment contracts, celebrity's shipboard staff are clearly employees. That being said it's not clear to me if the persons arrested were celebrity's shipboard crew, or terminal employees. In either case, their employer is still not liable for actions that are a) outside the scope of their assigned duties and b) criminal in nature.

 

Next, i have no idea what the specifics would be in florida, but it's quite likely the prosecuting authority would discourage celebrity from offering financial restitution, since suspects have been arrested. Why? Because the victim's (the op) acceptance of any remuneration would jeopardize the criminal case, as the suspect could validly argue it's now a civil dispute, and that any discrepancy is correctly adjudicated in civil court, as it would be a matter of differing value assessments of the loss.

 

Finally, someone posted about "punitive damages". There are two types of damages in a civil case, compensatory and punitive. Punitive damages are awarded only in a case where the defendants actions are so egregious that the court wants to "teach a lesson". They are extremely rare, and most often occur in cases where someone's civil rights are violated; typically by a government agency. This case would result in compensatory damages in the most extreme possible outcome.

 

Best of luck, but the advice to file a claim with your travel or homeowner's insurance is your best recourse. I see a particular problem with restitution in this case if the perpetrators were ship board employees. They are almost certainly foreign nationals, with no hope of remaining in the us after adjudication of the case, and certainly not working here. Consequently they will be beyond the court's reach if restitution is ordered, and would presumably have no assets to attach. In essence, if you think it's hard to get blood out of a turnip, wait until you try to get it out of a turnip you can neither touch nor influence.

 

Harris

denver, co

[DrMark]

Legally and ethically Celebrity has no obligation to reimburse you. Sorry.

 

Out of curiosity, what are your credentials for making this claim? Are you an attorney with experience in contract law?

[DrMark]

To the best of my knowledge employees sign a contract for x number of months and thus are technically independent contractors and not employees.

 

This sounds like the reasoning that Uber is trying to use to get out of responsibility for the actions of their drivers...

[omeinv]

Punitive damages are not rare, and often occur in cases where the defendant is considered negligent or knowingly engages in actions that cause harm

 

Negligence results in compensatory damages. Without at least negligence, there would be no liability for any damage. "Knowing" behavior is one element that may result in punitive damages, other factors need to be present for punitive damages.

 

Harris

Denver, CO

[lawgeek]

To the best of my knowledge employees sign a contract for x number of months and thus are technically independent contractors and not employees.

 

Since the people on board are most likely to be contract employees, respondeat superior would not apply. Also what none of us knows is the security part of Celebrity or is the entire area contracted out? The good part of this is the theft is on USA jurisdiction and not on the high seas.

 

I would suggest to the OP that an email is not likely to be of much help. A written letter(s) and repeated phone calls (taking names each time) will be more likely to get a positive response.

 

I disagree with your interpretation of vicarious liability, or as they say in fancy latinesque legal terms, "respondeat superior." Essentially this means that the master is responsible for the wrongs of his servants.

 

When dealing with a non-delegable duty (of which protecting valuables entrusted to you from theft would certainly be) the master is certainly responsible for the acts of his employees and contractors he may hire(even intentional ones). While this is based specifically on California law as I know it, I believe it to be a horn book theory (i.e universally applied).

 

There also may be specific maritime theories which protect the OP's property as well, but i never really spend much time in that arena of law.

[lawgeek]

Punitive damages are not rare, and often occur in cases where the defendant is considered negligent or knowingly engages in actions that cause harm

 

Just to clarify basic requirements for punitive damages in florida (pretty sure cruise contract requires FL law applies) here is the pertinent parts of the relative statute:

 

"(2) A defendant may be held liable for punitive damages only if the trier of fact, based on clear and convincing evidence, finds that the defendant was personally guilty of intentional misconduct or gross negligence. As used in this section, the term:

(a) “Intentional misconduct” means that the defendant had actual knowledge of the wrongfulness of the conduct and the high probability that injury or damage to the claimant would result and, despite that knowledge, intentionally pursued that course of conduct, resulting in injury or damage.

(b) “Gross negligence” means that the defendant’s conduct was so reckless or wanting in care that it constituted a conscious disregard or indifference to the life, safety, or rights of persons exposed to such conduct.

(3) In the case of an employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity, punitive damages may be imposed for the conduct of an employee or agent only if the conduct of the employee or agent meets the criteria specified in subsection (2) and:

(a) The employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity actively and knowingly participated in such conduct;

(b) The officers, directors, or managers of the employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity knowingly condoned, ratified, or consented to such conduct; or

© The employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity engaged in conduct that constituted gross negligence and that contributed to the loss, damages, or injury suffered by the claimant.

(4) The provisions of this section shall be applied to all causes of action arising after the effective date of this act."

 

Blah, blah, blah...Just keep in mind that there is likely a plethora of case law that interprets and changes certain parts of this.

[lawgeek]

OK...one last thing. This is at best a "small claim." I believe (but am not sure) that FL has similar requirements as California. These include Jurisdictional limit of less than $10,000 (i.e size of claim), no lawyers, informal proceedings, limited appeal.

 

I believe you are bound to FL law (with possibly some exception) so whatever the comparable statutes say is what would apply. Pretty sure puni's are out the door, your emotional distress would be very limited and difficult to prove and you would likely be stuck with a small claims suit. You may win that, but the results might be less than spectacular.

[Jade13]

For those who didn't read the original posting about this theft there are a few things that need to be added. The OP didn't notice the missing items until Wednesday of his 7 day Reflection cruise. He and his wife had a confrontation with security demanding $2,500 per day for lost business revenue.?. Also he mentioned how rude security was to him and his wife, but as we all know all these meetings are recorded by security cameras so who knows who was rude and who was not. If Celebrity has evidence that this couple was not willing to cooperate with the Miami investigation, good luck to their lawyer.

 

I'm not writing this to be mean spirited, but we only know half the facts. And sorry OP, if you were going to lose $2,500 a day if your laptop got lost, shame on you to put it in a knapsack through multiple layers of security and not notice it to day 4 or 5.

 

Good luck with your lawsuit and for your sake I hope you and your wife were on your best behavior during your meeting with security.

 

 

I didn't see the original post so unaware that the OP had posted that they were demanding $2,500 per day for lost business revenue. I did see where he stated he asked for a percentage back of what he paid for the cruise for wasted time dealing with the matter. These are two different compensation requests for two different reasons so unclear which one it is. One made to the security guards on the ship and one in writing to Celebrity?

 

I think a more reasonable request would have been to ask for compensation in the amount equal to the lost Bose head phones and iPad case. There is a better chance in recovering that amount from Celebrity instead of asking for thousands based on the time dealing with the matter. It sounds like the OP was over half way through their cruise before discovering their items were missing including their computer. I would have known right away because mine would have gone in the safe along with the iPad. Of course I would never have left them and checked them through in the first place. Celebrity lawyers could also make the claim they do not have proof these were brought on the ship in the first place.

 

I would file a claim with travel insurance. Most people's Home Owner's have at least a $500 deductible if not more so understand if one doesn't file for the Bose head set, but most travel insurance policies would cover this amount. I missed whether the OP had insurance or not.

[Tommy3putts]

As a lawyer, I find this thread very entertaining and informative. IMHO the recent legal analysis is on point (I'm not a Fla atty). This is a tough case for the OP. I believe it was discussed earlier on in this thread or the previous thread, but I'd also recommend a close review of the contract the OP signed.

 

My thoughts is it's often far better to attract bees with honey. Instead of rattling the lawsuit saber, why not work to help X. Once resolved I could foresee X maybe reaching out to perhaps indirectly compensate the OP for his trouble. Perhaps not. If the OP must go the way of PR on TV, why not make it a "lessons learned" story and portray the OP as the good guy trying to help the cruise line and its passengers. Just my .02.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Tommy3putts

[Gracie115]

As a lawyer, I find this thread very entertaining and informative. IMHO the recent legal analysis is on point (I'm not a Fla atty). This is a tough case for the OP. I believe it was discussed earlier on in this thread or the previous thread, but I'd also recommend a close review of the contract the OP signed.

 

My thoughts is it's often far better to attract bees with honey. Instead of rattling the lawsuit saber, why not work to help X. Once resolved I could foresee X maybe reaching out to perhaps indirectly compensate the OP for his trouble. Perhaps not. If the OP must go the way of PR on TV, why not make it a "lessons learned" story and portray the OP as the good guy trying to help the cruise line and its passengers. Just my .02.

 

I like this idea and wish more people would use this route than going for the jugular so often in difficult situations.... (I am NOT saying the OP has done that...so don't attack)

[Tommy3putts]

I like this idea and wish more people would use this route than going for the jugular so often in difficult situations.... (I am NOT saying the OP has done that...so don't attack)

 

 

Ha. My idea so let them attack me. [emoji16]

[Jade13]

I have some slight misgivings about the demands made by OP. Hopefully, the OP has learned a valuable lesson about safeguarding his valuables. There is some contributory negligence on his part and therefore I'm not sure why he believes that he is entitled to a partial refund/ credit. I doubt Celebrity will be forthcoming with such a credit. Hopefully, the OP will be made whole and receive a check so he can replace the headphones and put this behind him.

 

 

 

Having been in a dispute with cruise line before, you may want to reach out to their general counsel's office. In my dispute, I tried working through customer services but that was a dead end. They lacked decision-making authority and the GC's office resolved the dispute within a couple of days.

 

 

How does one contact the general counsels office

[Jade13]

As a lawyer, I find this thread very entertaining and informative. IMHO the recent legal analysis is on point (I'm not a Fla atty). This is a tough case for the OP. I believe it was discussed earlier on in this thread or the previous thread, but I'd also recommend a close review of the contract the OP signed.

 

My thoughts is it's often far better to attract bees with honey. Instead of rattling the lawsuit saber, why not work to help X. Once resolved I could foresee X maybe reaching out to perhaps indirectly compensate the OP for his trouble. Perhaps not. If the OP must go the way of PR on TV, why not make it a "lessons learned" story and portray the OP as the good guy trying to help the cruise line and its passengers. Just my .02.

 

 

As an attorney do you agree if the Op just asked for a total $500 to compensate for the Bose, iPad case and rounded up by approx $150 (basically made whole without threatening to go to the media) they would have a better outcome?

Edited December 17, 2015 by Jade13

[waterbug123]

To clarify, I did not say there were 90 victims. I said there were 90 recovered items and I know that some items were not recovered or were confirmed destroyed by the PD. The total number of victims is unknown to me at this time,

 

I see your point about no physical harm being done, however, there is an emotional aspect to this. My wife was in tears

 

Sorry, my bad. I recalled reading "90" and thought it was victims. So you don't know how many victims, and really don't know how many items are still missing or their value. I just have a hard time believing that multiple lawyers are, as you said, salivating at the thought of bringing a class action lawsuit over this. Just can't see it being worth it, but I'm not a lawyer so who really knows.

As for the emotional distress, I don't mean to discount it, but that is not generally what brings the big payouts in class action cases; in those cases there is typically physical harm to many people. And without a huge payout, the only one getting any money is the attorney. There maybe a change in business practice that results as well, and benefits customers, but you already know how to benefit-- don't check your valuable electronics, so I can't see that you really have anything to gain, even if it DID turn into a class action lawsuit.

 

Is an ipad cover and headphones really worth the aggravation at this point? I'd be inclined to let it go. I'm sure it's been a hassle for X and that they are already changing the way they do things, whether they tell you that or not.

[Dave85]

I like this idea and wish more people would use this route than going for the jugular so often in difficult situations.... (I am NOT saying the OP has done that...so don't attack)

 

 

I'd ordinarily agree with this as well, but in this case X has made it petty darn clear that they are not going to do anything for him and that while they're so so sorry, he should just go away. At the point, I think there's merit to the "going for the jugular" approach.

[Tommy3putts]

As an attorney do you agree if the Op just asked for a total $500 to compensate for the Bose, iPad case and rounded up by approx $150 (basically made whole without threatening to go to the media) they would have a better outcome?

 

 

Ha here's a typical lawyer response, possibly. But as others before pointed out, it maybe that the cruise line and its legal counsel decided it's best to wait until resolution of the criminal matter. It s speculation at this point.

 

I do agree that (no offense intended to the OP) that the tactic of pursing other compensation in the form of cruise refunds or future cruise discounts did not help this matter and is quite possibly the main cause of frustration for the OP. Based on what I've read in this thread, I don't see any legal obligation on the cruise line to provide this type of compensation. That's why I like the idea of taking the non-confrontational approach.

[Bo1953]

Ha here's a typical lawyer response, possibly. But as others before pointed out, it maybe that the cruise line and its legal counsel decided it's best to wait until resolution of the criminal matter. It s speculation at this point.

 

I do agree that (no offense intended to the OP) that the tactic of pursing other compensation in the form of cruise refunds or future cruise discounts did not help this matter and is quite possibly the main cause of frustration for the OP. Based on what I've read in this thread, I don't see any legal obligation on the cruise line to provide this type of compensation. That's why I like the idea of taking the non-confrontational approach.

 

aka - bullying your way into what you want... :)

[az_tchr]

Out of curiosity, what are your credentials for making this claim? Are you an attorney with experience in contract law?

 

Taught business and contract law.

Edited December 17, 2015 by az_tchr

[Oceangoer2]

If the crew are truly independent contractors, then respondeat superior would not apply. However, the definition of employee vs. independent contractor has been litigated many times. Who sets the work hours? Does the crew bring their own tools? Are taxes taken out of the paychecks? I know there are other questions and there are blurry lines involved.

Sounds like two litigators going at each other...LOL.

[stevenr597]

I am sure that Celebrity takes any theft or even the possibility of a theft very seriously. I do have one question or idea. Did you file trip insurance. If so, they should be able to cover the lost of any items and in fact, it would be their responsibility to get any restitution form Celebrity. If you didn't have trip insurance, perhaps the credit card you used to pay for the trip would be able to collect reimbursement. Just an idea.

[Cuizer2]

Next, I have no idea what the specifics would be in Florida, but it's quite likely the prosecuting authority would discourage Celebrity from offering financial restitution, since suspects have been arrested. Why? Because the victim's (the OP) acceptance of any remuneration would jeopardize the criminal case, as the suspect could validly argue it's now a civil dispute, and that any discrepancy is correctly adjudicated in civil court, as it would be a matter of differing value assessments of the loss.

 

Harris

Denver, CO

 

You cannot buy your way out of a criminal case. Stealing something and then when caught paying for it does not turn a criminal case into a civil case.

 

Also, if an employee's job is to screen incoming luggage and then steals from that luggage, then the employer would be responsible, since the employee is doing his or her job at the time. The same could be said if a room steward takes something out of the room (s)he is cleaning. Or if the a ship officer uses his/her passkey to go into someone's room and steal something. We are talking about civil liability here. Respondeat superior would apply if the person was the in fact an employee that was on the job at the time.

[Cuizer2]

Punitive damages are not rare, and often occur in cases where the defendant is considered negligent or knowingly engages in actions that cause harm

 

Weather or not punitive damages are rare or not, the defendant has to go beyond simply negligent to have exposure to punitive damages. Knowingly engaging in actions that would cause harm would qualify if proper safety protection was not also used.

 

In this case the employees might have exposure to punitive damages, but not Celebrity itself.

 

Punitive damages are designed to punish certain behavior. This cannot be done in a simple negligence case since by definition negligence is an accident. Running a stop sign because you didn't see it is an accident. Being punished is not going to improve your eyesight. Running a stop sign because you are late for work is not negligence. It is intentional conduct and could potentially expose someone to punitive damages and punishment for being intentionally reckless.

[Cuizer2]

Sounds like two litigators going at each other...LOL.

 

I was not attacking anyone. I don't know if the people arrested are employees or independent contractors. And I am not going to speculate on the outcome since I don't have much experience in labor law. IF the people arrested are employees, then I believe Celebrity is civilly responsible, even if Celebrity itself did nothing wrong. If the people arrested are independent contractors, Celebrity may not have an civil liability in this case.

 

I do know however, that the issue of employee vs. independent contractor comes up often and there are several questions that must be answered before a decision can be made. Many times the question is not so clear cut. An independent contractor has much more control over how the job is performed than an employee does.

[GOLDENBONNY]

Kind of creepy to think that someone might be going through luggage of cruisers looking for stuff to steal......maybe they like someones shoes, handbag, pajamas....

 

Shouldn't someone be monitoring the loading and distribution process?

And cabin attendants have pass keys too....who moniors them?

 

We always carry off but wonder how we could carry on,...size limits?

 

Ever flight from USA? Whats creepy when they open your(cut your lock) luggage and put you a note that they check your luggage . That drives me nuts . :mad::mad::mad: you open my luggage without me?