The St. Regis Bal Harbour is facing a huge lawsuit after a guest was reportedly walked in on while showering, in a way that simply can’t be described as accidental. It’s bad enough that the incident happened, but it’s even worse to see how the hotel reportedly responded, and I think it’s important to call…
Continue reading: St. Regis Bal Harbour Faces $7 Million Lawsuit Over Creepy Shower Incident
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
I feel like he'd more likely be the one who likes to watch 48 yr olds shower thru a peephole...
What a horrific thing to happen. By the way Ben, the year of this terrible incident is incorrect. It is 2023, not 2024.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article307798865.html
She can certainly sue the hotel but criminal action on the employee? Idk what he would be charged with or how.
If they can locate who he was, it would be he said/she said. He wouldn't admit to gawking at her or touching her. He would simply say he entered the room for cleaning as housekeeping does. Also, this didn't happen in the US so curious how this would play out in a foreign court. I'd refer to the news worthy Erin Andrews peephole case from a few years ago. But, he took photos so there was concrete evidence.
That's awful and I hope she takes the operator to the cleaners. It's one thing for a hotel employee to behave like this, but the hotel trying to sweep it under the rug and lying to police about what she said is on another level entirely.
It's hard to remember in the moment sometimes, but be your own advocate. Never assume the hotel will call the police for you or tell them what you said to tell them. Call them yourself and file the report yourself.
While I agree with much of your did happen in the US. Bal Harbour is a neighborhood in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
Sorry, maybe I’m jaded, but I’m not sure I am buying this story. How does she prove any of this? Even if there is video of him or some electronic record of him entering the room, he’s the cleaning staff so is that unusual? I suppose there is some sort of log or work order system that would show he had no reason to enter, but would that cover any reasonable or permissible access? And even if it could be shown that he entered the room for no need, how do they establish what happened? If I were a juror, I would not see a preponderance of the evidence, based on what is publicly known, to warrant handing the plaintiff $7 million. There are too many cases of people suing to shakedown a deep-pocketed corporation and get a fat settlement to assume that everything is as alleged in this case, absent actual evidence.
Sorry, maybe I’m jaded, but I’m not sure I am buying this story. How does she prove any of this? Even if there is video of him or some electronic record of him entering the room, he’s the cleaning staff so is that unusual? I suppose there is some sort of log or work order system that would show he had no reason to enter, but would that cover any reasonable or permissible access? And even if it could be shown that he entered the room for no need, how do they establish what happened? If I were a juror, I would not see a preponderance of the evidence, based on what is publicly known, to warrant handing the plaintiff $7 million. There are too many cases of people suing to shakedown a deep-pocketed corporation and get a fat settlement to assume that everything is as alleged in this case, absent actual evidence.
Exactly! Innocent until proven guilty. Not enough evidence to convict the guy of anything.
What value does your opinion have here? If it happened then she should absolutely seek justice and retribution. If not, that is what court is for. To just assume she is making it up serves no purpose besides revealing your character.
"... always dead bolt the door, especially if you shower, and probably wouldn’t know if anyone entered the room."
What are you trying to say in the last part of the sentence?
Sorry, Andrew, it reflects an awareness of reality of so many lawsuits. In this one, we have allegations that, conveniently, most likely can’t be proven, perfect for a lawyer to use to get a payday out of a big corporation. If it ever reaches trial - it won’t - they will want gullible jurors who assume the defendant is liable without the plaintiff ever offering that via a preponderance of the evidence. Sounds like you’re what they are hoping for.
Well hopefully the police did their job and seized evidence (e.g. logs of rooms access and CCTV) from the hotel to make this clear
Well, the water running in the shower makes noise, so you wouldn't necessarily immediately noticed if someone gets into the room. Happened to me once, but thankfully the person who entered was my wife!
@AGrumpyOldMan_GA
I would think that hotels would train their cleaning staff that if they enter a hotel room they assumed to be empty and hear the shower running, they exit the room immediately. Beyond just being a CYA policy, that should be common sense for ANY adult working in a place where guests might be disrobed in a private room.
Regarding evidence, cameras and key logs should be able to show when he entered and when he exited, thereby showing how long he was in the room. If it was more than 10-15 seconds, which is what it sounds like from the woman's story, you absolutely can make a case he was peeping.
And lastly, the most egregious part of this is that the woman informed the hotel she wanted the police to come, the hotel told her they would call police for her alongside their own investigation, then LIED about what she said to them to the police and tried to brush it all under the rug. That's unacceptable, full stop. She should take them to court, the entire purpose of that system is to determine if a remedy is needed and enforce it.
To add to that, I'm guessing the room wasn't deadbolted because her boyfriend was out and she wasn't going to lock him out too while she showered.
This doesn't prove what happened IN the room. A housekeeper can enter the room. Beyond that, it's just accusations without real evidence.
Agreed, logs could show that he entered. And there may be something to show that the room was already cleaned, which would certainly raise questions as to why he was going back in. But...none of that tells us what happened once in the room unless she has some sort of video to support her story (doubtful as she was in the shower). You are assuming her story is the truth, including the request for police. It might be, it might not be. I don't know if hotels record all calls to the front desk, but if they do, there could be a way to corroborate that part of the story. Bottom line, without more evidence than we know about - and to be clear, there may well be more that we do not know about - there is nothing there to justify handing her $7 million because she "said so." That's why I suspect they are angling for a settlement since, to be fair, $7 million is a pittance for the Marriott corporation. As we can. see from the comments here, too many people assume that an accuser is telling the truth so a business could very well be willing to part with, say, $4 million to move on and get this out of the spotlight. And that would not be lost on some of these plaintiff's attorneys.
@AGrumpyOldMan_GA
Dude, the fact that a lawyer would also get paid is immaterial here.
I agree with innocent until proven guilty, and I'm not passing judgement on the housekeeper yet, only saying that it's a very bad look and camera logs could easily prove he didn't immediately leave, which would lend credence that he was trying to peep. I'm saying that she is well within her right to file a lawsuit, both for the intrusion and for the hotel lying to the police. From then on, it's up to how well each side presents their case in court. I'm not assuming she's here just for money, a stranger walking in on you in the shower and staring at you is violating and could have resulted in something far worse than voyeurism. It's not like she knew the employees intent, or even that knowing he only wanted to look makes it ok.
If $7 million will make her feel better and the judge doesn't think that's too much of a remedy, then by all means she should get it if the court rules in her favor. If Marriott doesn't want poor training practices or bad management decisions coming out in court, they're within their rights to try and settle beforehand. It really is as simple as that.
I am on the fence on this one in terms of did it happen or not the way it was described. The story about running out of the shower naked and chasing the man down vs. locking the bathroom door seems odd to say the least. There should be video footage outside the room to confirm or dispute her story.
3 major scenarios I see with room in between...
1. Happened the way the lady said - Payment of $10k-$100k
2. Someone entered and didn't see her until he opened the door and didn't leave as quickly as she would have liked. - Comp the stay ++.
3. Someone entered on a work order requested by them and when seeing her, left. - ehh Dinner?
And sure there are scenarios in between as well.
"There are too many cases of people suing to shakedown a deep-pocketed corporation and get a fat settlement to assume that everything is as alleged in this case, absent actual evidence."
Thank god someone is thinking of the multi-billion dollar company here!
"There are too many cases of people suing to shakedown a deep-pocketed corporation and get a fat settlement to assume that everything is as alleged in this case, absent actual evidence."
Thank dog someone is thinking of the multi-billion dollar company here.
What is the most disturbing is the actions of the Dir of LP. I'm a 40 year hotel veteran, and I can say that the LP people I've worked with over the years would jump on this and get the police involved to take statements that could be used in court, for either side. A hotel knows when each and every employee enters a room. Their keys are tracked. And hallways should have camera's to track time. It would take all of an hour at most to pull this all down for a report for both the guest and police.
Marriott is super lawsuit adverse, but in this instance, the hotel made it worst.
And yes, I can be very jaded after my years in the industry, but with the lack of transparency and errors made by the hotel, I'd lean towards the guest.
And ALWAYS lock the door, and put the latch in place when you're in a room. ALWAYS
Corporations pushed for tort law over regulation to police their actions and prevent harm and abuse of consumers. Funny how as soon as they got it, they pushed for tort reform to limit their liability and started a propaganda campaign against “frivolous” lawsuits. And here you are, bootlicking to protect the poor corporation. What should that be called? “Frivolous accountability” maybe.
40 years hotel veteran?
If you're veteran means staying at a lot of hotels or you actually work in the industry?
I would have fired you and gave LP a big fat bonus for properly doing his job.
Loss prevention, contrary to your beliefs, are not a politically correct way to call a security officer. Their job is to prevent "loss", from thefts or customers alike.
This is more than creepy. The way she tells it, I'd consider it a little rapey. This proves the necessity of using the door-guard device when you're in the room, particularly when sleeping or bathing. There are lots of creeps and weirdos out there, some of whom work for hotels.
"The couple were moved to a larger suite for their troubles, but the traveler claims they were charged for the upgrade"
I have no words...
because her boyfriend (read the article again) was not in the room and was expected to return from wherever he was.
Yes, it removes any doubt that she was showering in say, a bathing suit, or perhaps bikini bottoms only.
First Off, I've worked in this industry for 40 years. And worked my way up from Banquet Server to my current position, Director of Sales for a large luxury brand. And I've worked many other departments in my time, INCLUDING Loss Prevention.
Second I never gave any impression of being "politically correct". The OFFICIAL job title in most hotels is Loss Prevention. This change happened decades ago and has nothing to do with political correctness.
This department is much, much more than just preventing thefts.
Lastly, based on the information at hand, this LP Director did not follow protocol. Had they called in the police they could have PREVENTED legal action against the hotel.
Not sure if its just a representation of American society, but this blog does tend to attract alot of people with racist or prejudice views.
Unfortunately it happens far to frequently be it housekeepers or others
Just doesnt escalate as much typically as some get over it and move on
Unfortunate but it is what it is
@David H You are correct about the terminology. Eskimo is wrong. A lot of companies use LP to mean security just as they use housekeeping instead of cleaning staff at hotels or engineering instead of maintenance.
And what is Eskimo saying here: ‘ I would have fired you and gave LP a big fat bonus for properly doing his job.’
Is Eskimo actually commending the LP guy for lying to the hotel guests and trying to protect the hotel from a lawsuit even if it constitutes wrongdoing? And yes it all needs to be proven so these are all allegations at the moment but for Eskimo to say how he would give LP a big fat bonus for doing his job which was just sweeping everything under the rug and if the claim turns out to be real then that is just too wild.
We stayed at this hotel last year - Somebody working there walked into our room completely unannounced. Everything was fine, but I did tell the hotel about it just as a heads up because it could have been much worse. They were very responsive about it. Seems to be a common issue at the St Regis Bal Harbour.
This is absolutely outrageous! I'll let you watch me shower 3 minutes for only $3M.
Unless the hotel was negligent somehow, I fail to see why they are the defendant, aside from having money. Sue the perp.
You must be a commie. You do realize that they simply pass the costs to the consumers. Do you have retirement saved up in the market? Then you own these companies. I promise you when these big payouts happen it has zero affect on the CEOs and top brass and it is pushed on to us.
There is usually a procedure of a certain number of knocks and what they need to say before they try to enter the room. Furthermore, usually the shower sould of the water can be heard especially as the door opens. On the other hand, I wonder how $7m can be justified.
Sounds a little suss to me. Did hotel staff accidentally come in to the room while she was showering?…likely, did that person go into the bathroom, open the shower door to gawk at the woman?…highly unlikely. Did he refuse to leave when she was screaming at him to leave?…also highly unlikely. What you have here is somebody trying to take a relatively minor incident and extort a large corporation for monetary gain hoping the hotel will settle to avoid public disclosure. Sadly, this happens all the time and there are no shortage of lawyers willing to take cases like this. The $7 million lawsuit is the tipoff!