2017 Dining Plan

So my question is, if I have 3 season passes and only put the dining plan on 2 of my platinum passes... but don't take one of the people who have a dining plan... can I still use that pass in the park for dining if it wasn't scanned at the gate?

Presumably not, since the plan is tied to a specific pass, and the pass is tied to a specific person.

I would assume that the pass has to be scanned to be activated for the day. And that's theft. Plus, the passholders photo would come up when it's scanned.

This seems to be a question best asked of the park. Better to know in advance the answer than to show up and proceed based on what people on the Internet said.

It also would depend on how enforcement works with respect to your photo that appears when a dining plan meal is redeemed.

Last year I only had them check to see who was using the pass once, early in the season.

My family of 7 all had the meal plan and either my wife or I would wait outside with the majority of the kids while the other went in a ordered the meals.

As others have said, that would be theft. Probably not worth the risk of losing your season pass if you get caught.

Well with your convoluted understanding of what theft is, I assume you also just use your sons platinum pass to get in the park too?

Interesting scenario here. My cousin purchases the dining plan for her daughter and rarely (I mean once or twice a season or not at all) when food lines are long she will use it to get a meal for her daughter while she is on a ride. She has never used it to get a meal for herself because like me we don't really care for the food at Cedar Point but that is for discussion in another topic. As others mention our faces show up on the screen whenever we use our passes. So if the employees allow my cousin to get the meal for her daughter (which just like Rippin she paid for), then technically by the parks methods it's not theft. I understand the meaning of theft and agree with some of you that this situation would be considered theft. However, the park has allowed this (parents to use child's pass) to happen so it's not theft. NightClub brings up an interesting point about entrance to the park with someone else's pass. Again, I agree that's theft. But I'm assuming Rippin has a pass and has no need to use the sons pass for entry. And depending on the age gap, I would hope an employee at the gate could tell the difference between the person they are looking at versus the person on the screen, especially if one is in their 30's or 40's and the other is just a child or a teen.

Rippin said:

I use my sons pass to get meals when he is not with me. I paid for the pass. It's not theft.

So if you purchased one pass for a family of five, and took turns using the pass, you wouldn't consider that theft? I bet if you asked the park they would disagree. In fact...

From their terms and conditions:

Any attempt to gain admission using a Platinum Pass by a guest to whom the pass was not originally issued will result in immediate confiscation of the pass without refund.

It stands to reason that other benefits that are tied to the pass are subject to the same conditions.

trapt3 said:

So if the employees allow my cousin to get the meal for her daughter (which just like Rippin she paid for), then technically by the parks methods it's not theft.

Nonsense. That some random minimum wage employees may not know or care enough to stop you is in no way an indication that the park doesn't consider this practice theft.

Rippin said:

How is it theft when I paid for my son's pass and meal deal?

Because the meal deal is on his pass, not yours. And as their T&C point out, using someone else's pass is not permitted. What you're doing is no different than buying one pass for your whole family, and taking turns using it, regardless of who paid for it.

Yes I have a family of 5 and it is expensive.

So something being expensive justifies not paying for it?

It's only theft if it's not paid for.

But it's not paid for, that's the thing. You paid for your son to have the meal plan. You did not pay for you to have a meal plan. Perhaps "theft" is too strong a word, but you are almost certainly violating the terms and conditions of the pass.

But you know, call the park and ask.

So it's OK because stuff is expensive and others are doing it too.

That sounds an awful lot like someone justifying doing something they know to be wrong.

Yes, but it's not yours. You gave it to your son.

Rippin said:

My justification is that it's paid for. By me.

If paying for something is what grants you the right to use it, then your Son shouldn't be using the meal plan. He didn't pay for it, after all. Nor did your Wife, who also uses it.

It's pretty straightforward - the terms and conditions of the sale prohibit use of the pass by anyone other than to whom the pass was issued.

Are you a despicable thief who's stealing from helpless little old ladies? No. Well, maybe, I don't know you. But even if what you're doing doesn't amount to "theft", you are clearly violating the terms of the sale to which you agreed. Your justifications are irrelevant.

Rippin said:
My justification is that it's paid for. By me.

But it's not for you. It's your son's dining plan.

Why not just use your son's season pass to get into the park? You paid for it. So what if it's not your pass?

It's amazing how people find ways to justify shady actions just to make themselves feel good about doing something wrong.

It's not a hard concept to understand, if your picture doesn't appear when the pass is scanned you shouldn't be getting the food. If the employee chooses to ignore that, then it is a training/performance of job issue, it doesn't make it right.

Remember, abuse hurts everyone by possibly causing policy changes that make it less pleasant for everyone.

Here's my thought. No matter what you say, the guys still going to do it. It's not our job to enforce ethics here on other people or police everyone on trivial stuff like this. I mean times it matters like when someone posts content the park doesn't want (like off season in park pictures), as that affects our relationship with the park, and the park has been extremely verbal in this area. In regards to this person and how he handles the dining plan, let them enforce it. We're not on the CP police or rules enforcement teams :)

Now I can be petty and hope he encounters that one awesome employee that sees a kid come up on the screen and doesn't takes the guys pass for being an asshat.

"I bought it, it's my sons pass."

"Lol k, still not your pass though, that'll be 12.99"

I would be extremely happy if I saw that haha.

If you paid the fees for your son's driver's license, do you think it's okay for YOU to use it?

Chris

Nonsense. That some random minimum wage employees may not know or care enough to stop you is in no way an indication that the park doesn't consider this practice theft.

I'll give you that a minimum wage employee that doesn't care is just at fault as someone who tries to use another persons pass for anything such as admission or dining or whatever perk. The picture that should show up on their monitor should clearly indicate who is in front of them at the time of the transaction. However, as Pete mention for an employee that doesn't know procedures now becomes a performance/training issue which I feel reflects on management. Don't get me wrong if you read my original post I agree it's theft and don't agree with anybody trying to use another persons pass (I did talk with my cousin and she has not purchased any add ons so no worries about them sharing passes for perks this year). But if management does not enforce the issue to their employees, then where does the line get drawn? And just curious for the parents out there that have the dining or drink plans, when you use these perks and then give the food or drink to your spouse, children, or anybody else in your group, is that any different than Rippin's situation? Just playing devil's advocate here. I think it is because if the person who redeems the perk is the person on the pass then who cares what they do with the food, drink, or whatever they redeemed. They can throw it away or give it to some stranger on the midway for all I care.

trapt3 said:

And just curious for the parents out there that have the dining or drink plans, when you use these perks and then give the food or drink to your spouse, children, or anybody else in your group, is that any different than Rippin's situation? ... I think it is because if the person who redeems the perk is the person on the pass then who cares what they do with the food, drink, or whatever they redeemed. They can throw it away or give it to some stranger on the midway for all I care.

We agree here. If the person whose pass has been used to obtain food wants to give it away, feed it to seagulls, drop it on the ground and stomp up and down on it, deliver me an order of chili cheese fries* .... It's theirs. They can do as they wish.

The difference I see with Rippin's situation is that he's (she's?) purposefully misrepresenting themselves by using someone else's dining pass, regardless of whether they paid for it or not. Sorry, I tend to focus on tiny details.

*I've no idea whether this exquisite concoction is available on the dining plan.

trapt3 said:

But if management does not enforce the issue to their employees, then where does the line get drawn?

So... if you can get away with it, that makes it OK?

And just curious for the parents out there that have the dining or drink plans, when you use these perks and then give the food or drink to your spouse, children, or anybody else in your group, is that any different than Rippin's situation?

It is entirely different. Rippin is using the pass of someone who isn't even at the park. I would wager that the pass and dining plan prices are set according to, among other things, the expected collateral revenue they expect to gain from a visiting pass holder. As in, they expect the average pass holder guest to spend $XX per visit, and they expect the average pass holder + dining plan holder (not purchaser) to spend $YY per visit.

So, if the person to whom the dining plan was issued wants to throw the food in the garbage, the park can still reasonably expect their $YY revenue per visit. This is why such behavior can arguably be considered theft, even if the connotation of that word is a bit strong.

But more important than how we label such self-entitled behavior is that, as Pete alludes to, this type of behavior can negatively impact those of us who have the ethical wherewithal to do the right thing.