Palm Coast Travel sues a customer — and me

January 10, 2010

Here we go again.

Last March, I reported that the Florida regulators had warned three travel agencies that sold insurance policies offered by bankrupt Prime Travel Protection Services of Arvada, Colo., that its activities may have run afoul of state insurance statues.

I quoted Nina Banister, a spokeswoman for Florida’s Department of Financial Services, as saying the state had ordered the agencies to “stop transacting business” and that “they’re on notice that further activity is pending [by the state].”

Soon after that, Florida issued a press release stating, “As a result of ongoing investigations into complaints about the sale of unauthorized travel insurance in Florida, Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink has notified three travel agencies that she intends to order them to stop selling insurance.”

The legal notice to one of the agencies, Palm Coast Travel, alleges that the company “directly or indirectly acted as agent for or otherwise represented or aided one or more unauthorized insurers…” The matter is still pending.

Now Palm Coast Travel has sued one of its customers, Peter Lay, and me, alleging among other things that I defamed the company when I reported the story. Here’s the full text of the complaint (PDF).

Among Palm Coast’s allegations against me are the following:

Elliott included among his reporting recent regulatory investigations of customer complaints regarding Prime Travel Protection and Jerry Watson. Elliott’s reporting included publication of false information regarding Palm Coast, which has and will continue to damage Palm Coast’s business unless it is properly remedied.

Among the statements Elliott published were falsehoods that stated that Palm Coast had been ordered to cease doing business by the State of Florida. No such order exists, and therefore that report was false.

Further, Elliott, when purporting to “clarify” his deliberately false statement regarding the State of Florida’s investigation of travel insurance, did not fully remedy the false impression he fostered regarding Palm Coast’s role.

Elliott’s falsehoods were directed at, among other aspects of Palm Coast’s business, its reputation in the trade or industry of travel. Moreover, Elliott did not properly correct, clarify, or retract his falsehoods, despite proper notice.

That’s certainly an interesting perspective on what happened. Perhaps Palm Coast Travel’s next step will be to sue the State of Florida for issuing the press release?

(Photo: Mel B./Flickr Creative Commons)

Peter

WARNING TO ALL VICTIMS OF THE PRIME TRAVEL PROTECTION SCAM
Despite his threat last year to sue Jerry Watson and PTP as evidenced by the e-mail below, Mr. Smolinski decided to pick on me, a 70 year old senior citizen who has worked tirelessly for all of you and Chris Elliott, a consumer advocate whose mission is to serve consumers through the media. Many of you may be the next to be sued so I caution you to seek legal counsel.
On another note, I have authorized my outside attorney to file suit against you and “others” as well as Prime. He is working on it and crossing every “T” and dotting every “I” so that it is legally sufficient before he files. Also, the suit will be filed in Florida and you will be subject to Florida jurisdiction and so will the “others” including Chris. The defamation against my company and me by you and others is as you would say “scandalous”. Much of the information you and “others” posted online is incorrect or casts us in a false light. In any case it is defamation and I believe it will be a tough one for you to defend.
R. Rheinhardt

It seems to me the central fact of this regulatory fiasco is that all the travel agents who sold travel insurance written by unlicensed companies did so by using deception to make each sale. To make a sale they had to recommend the policies and the insurance companies. When buying insurance consumers assume that they are protected by regulations that apply to all insurance companies. If the agents had disclosed that the policies they recommended were written by unlicensed, and hence unregulated companies, sales would not have been made. By not disclosing the most important fact about the insurance they were selling, they committed fraud. Fraud can be defined as the crime of obtaining money or some other benefit by deliberate deception.

These travel agents are not stupid and can anyone believe they did not investigate how the bogus insurance companies could pay them four times as much as a legitimate company? They learned how the scam operated, and probably of the strategy to intimidate claimants. After analyzing the probable outcomes they decided the gains justified the risks.

If regulations have no teeth, agents are only risking the possible future business of the small percentage of their clients who file claims. On the plus side, they can make more from selling a bogus travel insurance policy than they do from planning the trip.

Chris Elliott, by allowing the truth to be revealed, performs a much needed public service. And these days consumers need every effective advocate they can find.
J.T.

I celebrated my 37th year involved in the travel industry recently. I worked for one of the largest tour wholesalers, a major airline and owned both retail and wholesale operations. Never in those 37 years have I heard of a travel agent suing a member of the media or more outrageous, a client! The Palm Coast Travel lawsuit has set an unforgettable precedent. Frankly, I am shocked beyond belief that a travel agency owner would have the audacity to do such a thing. And this is from a travel agency that had already been notified by the state of Florida for being in violation of various state statutes. The owner needs to admit she did not undertake due diligence when recommending a vendor.
Bill Stokes

Dan Brown better watch out. It appears that Lee Smolinski, the owner of Smartcruiser.com and Palm Coast Travel is about to push Dan off the #1 spot in the Fiction category.
I’m not a Lawyer, and I don’t pretend to be one, but I did read Smolinski’s complaint against Mr. Elliott and Mr. Lay, and to enumerate all of the charges against them that I disagree with would take volumes, and my hard drive isn’t that large. Just to mention a few, though, which are contained in the first few pages of the complaint:

Mr. Smolinski and his Lawyers, as a start, know the precise meaning of the words, Tort and Slander. They also know that Freedom of Speech protects one from exposing charges that can be proven to be true. This being the case, can the filing of this complaint be anything other than a blatant attempt to silence Mr. Smolinski’s critics?

Over and over, the complaint states that Mr. Smolinski sold “travel protection”, and this is a fact. However, no definition is provided. Let me provide one:
“Travel Protection is a definition used to keep a product beyond the jurisdiction of State Insurance Regulators. It allows the product vendor to operate without the backing of valid Underwriters.”
It should also be mentioned that Mr. Smolinski stated in his advertising that he was providing “travel insurance” while he was selling “travel protection”. Mr Smolinski blocked access to archive sites when he found that this proof was available, but some of his customers were smart enough to make screen copies before he cut off access to the information. I’ve seen them. I bet that his Lawyers haven’t seen them.

Mr. Smolinski even attempts to defend his association with Jerry Watson by stating on page 3 of the complaint that Mr. Watson was “A well-known figure in the travel industry” when he met him in 2007. It should be noted that Mr. Watson is still that…for all the wrong reasons!
He also mentions that Prime Travel Protection held memberships in CLIA and ASTA. This is probably true, but McKinley Johnson and his company, Trip Assured also maintained these memberships for a couple of years beyond the dates when complaints from customers started piling up, and they finally revoked the memberships around the time that Trip Assured was closed down.
He also states: “A former senior VP for one of the largest cruise lines in the world was the VP of Sales for Prime Travel Protection”. I may be incorrect, but I believe that this individual was Chris Poucher, who also, after he split with Watson, went on to sell his own shoddy pseudo insurance product. The last that I heard of Chris was a year or so ago, when he was peddling a “repair protection” product to cover auto repairs, and claiming association with a real underwriter, who when they heard what Chris was doing, promptly hit him with a Cease and Desist order.

Remember what I said several paragraphs ago. This note only addresses what is contained in the first three pages of the complaint. More observations will follow.
Peter

Dick Rheinhardt in his posting above has expressed a view which we all feel is correct but nobody has written it so simple. The Department of Financial Services is continuing parallel civil investigations but is struggling to find a statute which places travel agents in the criminal category.
Dick’s statement is ……….. To make a sale they had to recommend the policies and the insurance companies. When buying insurance consumers assume that they are protected by regulations that apply to all insurance companies. If the agents had disclosed that the policies they recommended were written by unlicensed, and hence unregulated companies, sales would not have been made. By not disclosing the most important fact about the insurance they were selling, they committed fraud. Fraud can be defined as the crime of obtaining money or some other benefit by deliberate deception.
What are the opinions of the legally astute out there? Can this be described as criminal action?
David

I am a victim of this scam. I am only including my first name because I too, fear that Mr. Smolinski and Palm Coast Travel will sue me. If Mr. Smolinski is going to sue Chris Elliott who wrote a supporting letter on my behalf as a good samaritan to the “insurance company”, he’ll sue anyone. I was sent the full threatening e-mail that Peter posted above. There is one line that I found interesting. It reads as follows:

“One point of note, we did not represent an unauthorized insurer as Prime never claimed they were an insurer”

If Prime never claimed they were an insurer, Mr. Smolinski, how come on Palm Coast Travel’s website you advertised using the words “Trip Insurance?”
As Mr. Stokes wrote, I bet Mr. Smolinski hasn’t told his lawyers about that fact. All I can say is Mr. Smolinski and Palm Coast Travel ought to be ashamed of themselves. Even Best Price Cruises and Legendary Journeys have not stooped so low as to sue the number one advocate for seniors or any of their clients. I’ve read these message boards and Best Price Cruises and Legendary Journeys have taken a real beating by those of us who have been scammed. But they haven’t sued Chris or a client. I never thought I’d find myself saying something nice about those two companies, but Mr. Smolinski has made it easy.
Poppy44

David
You av it ze nail on ze ed! Lee Smolinski and all the other travel agents claimed they sold insurance in their documentation but seven states ruled “protection” was insurance. Lee Slolinski has blown his case apart by going back to the old premise of protection.
Ben99

Many allegations have been made against Elliott and Lay in Lee Smolinski’s recent suit against them. Are they true?

ALLEGATION:

“Elliott depicted Palm Coast in a false light, by stating and/or suggesting that Palm Coast had failed to properly investigate Prime Travel Protection”.

Did Palm Coast Travel properly investigate Prime Travel Protection?

Palm Coast claimed they were informed PTP was licensed in 50 states. Was this verified by Palm Coast Travel? Mr. Smolinski writes:

“we did not represent an unauthorized insurer as Prime never claimed they were an insurer”

If Prime was not an insurer why has Mr. Smolinski made a point OF claiming PTP was licensed in 50 states? If they weren’t an insurer as Smolinski wants us to believe, what were they licensed to do in all 50 states?

If Mr. Smolinski still wants us to believe Prime was not selling insurance. If so, he needs to read Florida Statute 626.321(1)(c)…

Palm Coast Travel did sell insurance – unauthorized in Florida.

ALLEGATION:

“In his postings and communications, Lay purported that Palm Coast had been complicit in violations of Florida law, and that Palm Coast’s conduct also independently violated Florida law.”

See Florida Department of Financial Services Case #102955-09-AG.

Quote:
IT IS THEREFORE CHARGED that you, PALM COAST TRAVEL, have violated or are accountable under one or more of the following provisions of the Florida Statutes or Florida Administrative Code…

No individual or entity shall directly or indirectly transact travel insurance without a license

Engaging in the unlawful transaction of insurance

YOU PALM COAST TRAVEL, directly or indirectly acted as agent for or otherwise represented or aided one or more unauthorized insurers…
Factual

This Bulletin (a public record) warns of travel agents law breaking activities. It is a retrospective early statement resulting from an extensive fourteen month investigation. The investigation started months before Lee Smolinski claimed there was no known investigation. The investigation is ongoing. Elliott and Lay’s accurate and fully documented complaints contributed to the publication of this bulletin.

INFORMATIONAL BULLETIN
DFS-04-2009
ISSUED December 24, 2009
Florida Department of Financial Services
Division of Agent and Agency Services
Alex Sink, CFO
TO ALL REGISTERED SELLERS OF TRAVEL
Note: Please ensure this bulletin reaches all travel independent agents
working through your travel agency. It may be found at
http://www.MyFloridaCFO.com/Agents/Industry/Bulletins-Memos/docs/DFS-04-2009.pdf
Recently, a significant number of travel agencies have been identified as selling travel
insurance on behalf of one or more insurance companies that were not authorized to sell
insurance in Florida. Some of these travel agencies also lacked the appropriate limited lines
insurance agent license under s. 626.321, Florida Statutes, needed to sell these products.
The purpose of this bulletin is to notify all persons who sell or solicit travel insurance1 that you
must be properly licensed and appointed to solicit or sell travel insurance in Florida and that
you must sell insurance only from authorized companies.
The ramifications of soliciting or selling insurance on behalf of any unauthorized insurance
company can be severe. It is classified as a third-degree felony and, under Florida law, if an
unauthorized insurance company fails to pay claims, any person who sold the unauthorized
coverage can be held responsible for unpaid claims. Florida Department of Financial
Services’ investigations have led to initiating administrative actions against insurance agents
and agencies, shutting down unauthorized insurance companies, and filing criminal charges
against operators or marketers of unauthorized insurance companies.
David

Wow – great points. I never thought about that. Smolinski in his lawsuit claims Prime Travel Protection represented it was “licensed in fifty states” yet also claims he wasn’t representing an insurer.
It’s like he wants it both ways. He advertises on his website that it is TRIP INSURANCE. He states in the complaint he relied on PTP’s claim they were licensed in 50 states, but sends a threatening e-mail claiming he wasn’t representing an insurer. Am I missing something here?
CTC

I AM SO DAMN SICK OF READING ALL OF THIS! Mr. Smolinski, damnit – would you just pay this client of yours and if anything about your agency has been presented (as your attorney’s write) in a “false light” or if you have been “defamed” make a claim with Chris Elliott to have it removed and a clarification issued. This is the first thing a judge is going to ask if you have done after you have defended yourself for filing an Anti-SLAPP and malicious prosecution suit.
Cliff Sousa

Correction to CTC – Smolinski will be defending the SLAPP suit he filed against Chris and the other person. Anti-SLAPP legislation is designed to fight these types of lawsuit that attempt to intimidate and silence critics by causing them to pay the cost of a legal defense until they stop their criticism.
Susan James

“Congratulations to Lee Smolinski – after seven years of selling insurance related travel protection plans, he finally received his “resident travel” insurance license (#P223379). in order to allow him to sell insurance. Let’s all join in congratulating Lee on this oustanding achievement.”
Harry Baxter

What do these six travel companies have in common?
Cruise Value Center
Cruises of Distinction
eCruiseStore
Trip Assured
Vacation Protection Serices
Prime Travel Protection
They are all members of the “Travel Business Hall of Shame”.

The first three once were very successful sellers of travel. They all went bankrupt, not because of the economy, but because of shady, and in some cases, illegal business practices.
The last three developed and sold a scam pseudo insurance product to unwary consumers, did not pay valid claims, and were forcibly shut down by a flurry of Cease and Desist Orders filed in multiple states, and in the case of Trip Assured, refusal by all of the major credit card companies to do business with them.
And what did the last three companies have in common?
They all were run by the same group of scam artists, including McKinley Johnson, Chris Poucher, and Jerry Watson.
THEY ALL CONVINCED LEE SMOLINSKI TO SELL THEIR PRODUCT.

Harassment is commonly understood as behaviour intended to disturb or upset. In the legal sense, it is behaviour which is found threatening or disturbing. Harassment now appears to be Lee Smolinski’s last ditch effort to stop the truth telling, and silence two of his most honest critics, Chris Elliott and Peter Lay. Unfortunately for him, just about everything included in his lawsuit against them has already been disproven.
Lee simply doesn’t realize how close the worldwide travel community is, and how quickly they share information about bad-smelling deals, dealers and products. Information on the suit filed by Palm Coast Travel / Smartcruiser has already gone viral. This board is proof of the universal condemnation that Smolinski’s actions are receiving. He’s a major story on Google and Yahoo, and he’s prominently featured on Cruise Critic.
Lee might not have even heard about many of the other boards out there like Cruisemates, CruiseAddicts, AllThingsCruise, and CruiseDiva, but believe me, they know about Lee, and won’t deal with him in the future.
Even TripAdvisor, one of the most highly respected travel forums in the world, has carried recent information highly critical of his company and business practices…..and that was before his lawsuit became common knowledge.

Keep up the bad work, Lee, but be aware that there’s still plenty of room in the “Travel Business Hall of Shame”, and there aren’t customers in the world to support Dumbcruiser.com!
CTC

@Susan James
Please explain. If Mr. Smolinski HAS a license to sell insurance, what’s the big deal?
Rod Beresford

Just read through some of these posts going back several months. Chris interviewed John Cook of QuoteWright

http://www.quotewright.com/cobrand/qw/about.html

According to the company’s website, QuoteWright sells over 100 travel insurance products. They sell real insurance – underwritten and authorized in many states. Mr. Cook even has a license in Florida. He is obviously someone who knows this business. He made the following comment to Chris:

As I stated before it’s the responsibility of the travel agent to vet any company that they sell.

I would assume vetting a company would mean more than relying on someone’s word that they are licensed in 50 states.
Harry Baxter

@Susan James
Please explain. If Mr. Smolinski HAS a license to sell insurance, what’s the big deal?

It’s a big deal because, for the first time in several years, Mr. Smolinski appears to be finally selling insurance, and having a license to do this is required by Florida law. He was forced to do this because, for the first time in several years, he hasn’t found another “travel protection” policy to sell. Despite his protestations to the contrary, he felt safe in not having a license because he knew full well that he wasn’t selling insurance. Even the other Florida Travel Agents like Al Ferguson of Legendary Journeys and Ron Russo of Best Price Cruises / Vacation Superstore had the integrity to obtain a license.
Please go back and read some of the previous posts:
It is a proven fact that Smolinski represnted non-insurance products as insurance, and this is illegal.
That’s the big deal.
David

CTC – you asked what the big deal was if Smolinski has an insurance license. Well, according to the state of Florida, his license was issued last week (January 6) and he’s been offering these plans as far back as 2003 per the Sun-Sentinel. I’m not sure what kind of license he has or the legalities of selling with our without one. I do know the intent to issue a cease and desist Smolinski was issued in March mentioned insurance was sold without a license. I’m hoping QuoteWright can clear this up. He seems to have a lot of knowledge of these laws.
Poppy44

In the suit filed against Elliott and Lay in Palm Beach County, December 29, 2009 the plaintiffs are Smolinski & Associates d.b.a. Palm Coast Travel. It is claimed damage has been done to these entities – including a rating decline by the BBB.
From the support displayed on Elliottblog everyone would assume the plaintiffs reputation would possibly worsen – NOT SO!
Lee Smolinski owns five incorporated companies or LLC’s plus eleven departments, fictitious names or divisions, or there about.
Smolinski & Associates is not an accredited member of BBB and is not rated.
Palm Coast Travel (PCT) is not an accredited member of the BBB and is not rated. PCT does not have a website for booking cruises or travel.
Lay has never booked a cruise or paid money to Smolinski & Associates (who are the associates?) or to PCT.
Bloggers on Elliott have mentioned Smolinski & Associates once or twice in a list during the past seventeen months — limited postings talked of Palm Coast Travel.
WHAT GOES?
Smartcruiser.com LLC and its web retail travel business Smartcrusier.com is the most active of Lee Smolinski’s businesses and is the one known to the traveling public. Lay booked through Smartcruiser.com and at the time of booking knew nothing of Palm Coast Travel.
Researching BBB data for PCT brings up Smart Travel Group Ltd who are shown today as having an A+ rating.
So, Lee Smolinski, by utilizing names out of his spider’s web of holdings has managed to divert consumer’s attention from Smartcruiser.com to lesser known entities.
That is rather clever.
Diana

I have used Smartcruiser.com numerous times to book a cruise. I am totally satisfied with their business. I ALWAYS READ all of the documents prior to booking and it states on the documents “Palm Coast Travel, Boca Rotan.”
I believe that everyone should stop all negativity about everyone involved in this suit. Let the suit play out and see what happens. I really get sick and tired of people posting negativity and they have no idea what is going on. They read “one person’s” take on the situation and believe it.
Frankie Leo

Diana, I’m happy that you’ve been satisfied concerning your dealings with this company. I also hope that you booked your own insurance and didn’t have to cancel or curtail your trip. However, to claim that “people are posting negativity when they don’t know what’s going on” is jumping to a conclusion that is unwarranted and incorrect.
The person suing Chris Elliott and Peter Lay has been selling fake insurance products for over six years. He’s sold three or four different products marketed by the same three individuals. All of these companies established dismal records for paying claims, and all were closed by government action.
These are undisputed facts. Why did Mr. Smolinski do this? Well for one, the companies paid him commissions which were far beyond the going rate. Obviously they could do this, because they didn’t pay a lot of claims! Maybe you might want to go back and read the comments more carefully before you make blanket, incorrect accusations.
By the way, did I mention that I was victimized by one of these sham companies, as was Peter Lay and hundreds of others? The reason for the comments on this board is to protect you, and thousands of people like you in the future.
LeeAnne

Interesting, Diana, that you believe that all of the posters on this forum “have no idea what is going on”. Oh really? Many of them seem to have quite a few details about this lawsuit, and the entities involved. Some of them are actual parties to the various goings-on. Yet you claim they “have no idea.”

Do YOU have any idea? Have you done your research to learn about the businesses involved? Do YOU have some inside knowledge? And do YOU really think it’s okay for a company to file a malicious lawsuit against a journalist to attempt to silence him from publishing facts on the internet?

Further, do YOU really think it’s wise to give your vacation dollars to a company that has as many black marks against it?

Methinks you’re a company plant, Diana. I highly doubt that you are an actual customer. Any real customer who had any “idea what is going on” would not be giving their money to these scammers.
Carl Shanks

(Thank you Mrs. Leo for alerting me to this site).

I too, am a victim of this scam and find Diana’s comments ridiculous. Why are you even telling us that you read all of your documents before you book? This statement sounds like Mr. Smolinski’s defense tactic claiming the victims of the sale of illegal insurance should have known better. The person who should have known better is Mr. Smolinski. He holds himself out to be a highly professional travel agency. Wouldn’t you suppose an agent of his stature would have picked up the phone and called the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation to determine if Prime Travel Protection was authorized to sell in Florida? Instead he took one person’s word for it and put his many clients in jeopardy. If you don’t believe me, read the complaint.
http://www.quotewright.com John Cook

You’re dealing with two different levels of licensing. The first level is that of the company that underwrites or guarantees the coverage. In order to offer products within a State the company has to seek a license with the State Insurance Department that will authorize it to assume insurance risks. In order to qualify for a license the Company is require to prove to the State Insurance Department that they have the necessary insurance knowledge and financial backing. They also have to indicate the type of insurance that they wish to underwrite, such as life insurance, home owners, automobile, etc. Once they have gone through this process, have met the State standards and have proven to the satisfaction of the State Insurance Department that they capable of underwriting insurance than they will be issued a license to operate within the State. But State oversight doesn’t stop there; most policies and rates have to be submitted to the State Insurance Department for approval prior to actually selling them. Once sales start the insurance companies have to continually submit reports to the State Insurance Department concerning the overall level of risk they have assumed, their financial condition, and their future ability to pay claims. From what I’ve read Prime Travel Protection and Trip Assured never applied for licenses to underwrite insurance either in their state of residence or in Florida.

The second level of licensing is for the person/entity that sells the policy to the consumer. They are known as Agent/Agency and are required to apply to the State Insurance Department for an agents insurance license Usually this requires a person to take a course of study and to pass an insurance examination for the type of insurance that they wish to sell. The education and examination requirements are waived in most States if the person applying for the license is a travel agent. This level of licensing should not be confused with being licensed as a “seller of travel”. That is a totally different requirement and does not involve insurance. State regulations also requires that the business entity be registered with the State Insurance Department. So if John Smith who is an employee of ABC Travel wishes to sell travel insurance then John Smith has to be licensed and ABC Travel also has to be registered with the State Insurance Department. One of the keys in determining whether a person/entity has to be licensed is whether or not they are actually selling a product or are merely providing a clerical service by providing a brochure or other material to a client. If they are providing just a clerical service than many States would not include that within their definition of “selling” however, there usually is another law or regulation that says if you receive any form of remuneration based on the purchase of insurance than you are also required to be licensed.

These two levels of licensing tie together in that only licensed agents/agencies are allowed to sell insurance – including travel insurance. As a licensed agent you are required to only sell insurance from licensed insurance companies that have duly appointed you.
David

Let me see if I have this straight, Mr. Cook –

Prime Travel Protection never met any state standards for selling insurance
Palm Coast Travel did not have the appropriate license to sell insurance
Eugene Hahn

Regarding the “second level of licensing” as explained in Mr. John Cook’s extremely lucid and informative posting, I did some research, and there are some things that I don’t understand. Lee Smolinski was just issued his license by the State of Florida on January 6, 2010. His Wife Anne, however, has had her insurance license since 1994. Al Ferguson, the CEO of Legendary Journeys, had has his insurance license sinc 2001, and Sandra Russo of Best Price Cruises / Vacation Superstore, received her license last April.
As explained by Mr. Cook, the insurance licensing laws are complicated, but is there some confusion among the sellers of “travel protection” products concerning what the laws are? If Mr. Smolinski says that he never sold insurance, why did his Spouse obtain a license to sell insurance? Can these people be confused to the point that they think that having an insurance license makes it legitimate to sell fake insurance? I don’t think so! Given a choice, I’d prefer to be sold real insurance by someone not licensed to sell insurance!
Cliff Sousa

My guess and this is a guess only – Mr. Smolinski was caught by the state for selling travel insurance (or at least what met the definition of travel insurance by Florida statute) WITHOUT the proper license. The notice of intent to issue a cease and desist clearly spells this out. Perhaps if Smolinski’s wife was the actual seller of these plans, there would not have been a lack of licensure problem. But selling illegal insurance WITH a license may carry a more severe penalty than selling illegal insurance without a license. This whole issue comes down to a simple fact clearly outlined in the complaint against Chris Elliott and Peter Lay – Smolinski believed what he was selling was licensed in 50 states. Backtracking, he has stated it was not insurance as evidenced in an e-mail posted several posts back. Nevertheless Palm Coast’s advertising indicates the product was “insurance”. Bottom line – the state has claimed no matter what Smolinski says the product may have been it was insurance according to statutes and he was selling it without a proper license. Should this be a buyer beware issue? My feeling is Smolinski will try to make that his issue.
Ron Beresford

BUYER BEWARE? PULEEZE!! Below is a definition of a professional travel agent by the Federal Trade Commission, published in Aviation Quarterly, April 1997.

“Professional travel agents are essential for the efficient marketing of air transportation, both domestic and foreign, cruises, hotel accommodations, tour packages, TRAVEL INSURANCE and much, much more. Travel agents, of which there are currently more than 100,000 in the United States, have a special relationship with consumers. Professionalism and consumer reliance have created a special relationship between consumer and travel agent. Today’s travel agent is the consumer’s agent and a FIDUCIARY WITH LEGAL DUITES AND RESPONSIBILITES.
Travel agents are held to a high standard of care and are relied upon by consumers. Travel agents are best viewed as information specialists upon whom consumers rely for the provision of accurate information and the confirmation of travel arrangements. The contemporary travel agent is a professional, holds himself out as a travel expert and is relied upon much like other information specialists and professionals such as attorneys, doctors and accountants.

Note the highlighted words that I have emphasized. The “Buyer Beware” argument? – yeah right, when pigs fly.
Eugene Hahn

I love it! I just looked at the website of one of Mr. Smolinski’s companies, smartcruiser.com, and here’s what I found:
http://www.smartcruiser.com/insurance
Lee is now selling real insurance from Access America, but he calls it Travel Protection! He appears to, in his haste to get out of what he did wrong, created more trouble for himself by selling real insurance without a license than his Spouse ever did, selling fake insurance with a license.
The past always catches up with you. Isn’t that sweet?
http://www.quotewright.com John Cook

Response to David;

I believe the jury is in on Prime Travel Protection and Trip Assured as many States have found that they were operating as an underwriting insurance company without being licensed. As for Palm Coast Travel and the second level of licensing it is up to the Florida State Insurance Department to make a determination of the facts.

I would be remiss not to mention that while Prime Travel Protection and Trip Assured are the most flagrant examples of being an unlicensed insurance company they are not the only ones. That door has been opened by large travel suppliers who offer “waiver” of cancellation programs. New York is one of a few States that have addressed this issue when they published Circular Letter No. 24 (2006), http://www.ins.state.ny.us/circltr/2006/cl06_24.htm. Basically they’ve ruled that plans that allow unconditional cancellations are not insurance while plans that are conditional on a future event are insurance and therefore must meet their standards.
Steve

Smartcruiser.com which is affiliated with Palm Coast Travel earns an A+ rating from the BBB!

http://www.pr-inside.com/smartcruiser-com-celebrates-a-rating-from-r1673699.htm
Frankie Leo

I guess that this will blow Mr. Smolinski’s lawsuit against Chris Elliott and Peter Lay out of the water. When he filed the lawsuit, he proclaimed to the world that these individuals had caused hid BBB rating to nosedive. It appears that his critics may have actually raised his rating, if his first statement was correct. In order to further increase his rating, he should, as a Good Will gesture, promptly pay Mr. Lay’s claim, and also pay for any legal expenses incurred by Mr. Lay and Mr. Elliott as a result of his erroneous claims in the lawsuit.
What will it be, Lee? Does criticism have an impact on a BBB rating, or not? You can’t have it both ways!
Will Norris

“Smartcruiser.com which is affiliated with Palm Coast Travel earns an A+ rating from the BBB!”

Steve, that’s good to know, but I understand that Mr. Smolinski has something like eleven entities in his vast empire. Palm Coast Travel can’t even be located on the BBB website. If Angelina Jolie has a homely Sister, she can’t claim that she’s beautiful because he Sister is beautiful!
Steve

Will and Frankie – you might want to read the complaint. Mr. Smolinski’s travel empire includes many outstanding entities. Palm Coast Travel is the one referred to in the complaint and it was this entity that suffered and saw it’s BBB rating drop to a B+ from an A-. It is for that reason the lawsuit has been filed. What do you think a judge and/or jury is going to think when they read what has been written about Mr. Smolinski’s companies?
Will Norris

I don’t know what the judge will think, Steve. I also don’t know what he’ll think about a company (or series of companies) who have been selling fake insurance policies without a valid license to do so for over six years. I don’t know how he’ll react to ongoing investigations of Mr. Smolinski’s companies and others in the State of Florida by State Officials for these practices. I’m sure that if Mr. Smolinski’s suit ever reaches the trial stage, all of the documented evidence will be shown to the Judge in copious detail.
It should also be noted that a BBB search for “Palm Coast Travel” defaults to “Smartcruiser.com”, so as I mentioned before, how do you come up with ‘B+’ rating for Palm Coast Travel, Lee? (Excuse me; Steve).
Regarding your sterling BBB rating, I recommend that all of the curious readers of this blog go to http://www.tripadvisor.com and do a search on “smartcruiser.com”. I guess that someone should tell them to send a copy of their complaints, if any, to the BBB.
Cliff Sousa

Very clever regarding the BBB sleight of hand, Mr. Smolinski. My guess is you have developed this skill from selling illegal trip protection, advertising it as insurance until you found you were breaking the law and then claiming it wasn’t insurance.

What you have done is defaulted the name of your agency, Palm Coast Travel on the BBB of SE Florida and Caribbean site to the Smart Travel Group, LTD – a company you incorporated in May 2004. Of course The Smart Travel Group has an A+ rating – no one purchases product from you through that company and wouldn’t know to file a complaint under that name. What about Smartcruiser’s A+ rating? It’s not even listed as a member of the BBB. Don’t believe me? Check it out yourself:
http://www.seflorida.bbb.org/Home.aspx
Christopher Elliott

Technically, the grade belongs to Smart Travel Group, Ltd.: http://www.seflorida.bbb.org/Business-Report/Smart-Travel-Group-Ltd-23000856?source=ctc

I can’t comment on the charges Mr. Smolinksi has made against me in his lawsuit. My lawyers will be doing that in a court filing, which I will post to this site.

But I look forward to my day in court. I wish this matter could have been amicably resolved — and there’s certainly still time to do that — but it is Palm Coast Travel’s right to take this matter to court.
David

“Technically”, Chris is irrelevant. Consumers do not buy from Smart Travel Group, Ltd. Where do you even see Smart Travel Group, Ltd. advertised? The complaint points out that it is Palm Coast Travel whose rating was downgraded to a B+, but now the consumer is referred to Smart Travel when they peruse the BBB website. The press release states the rating for Smartcruiser.com is an A+, but you can’t find a mention of Smartcruiser.com on the BBB site. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but this does look a little odd.

As far as wishing the matter could be settled amicably – well, it probably could, and most rational individuals would have reached some sort of agreement. I’ve read every one of the articles you have written and each post and can find nothing that appears to be untruthful. As far as looking forward to your day in court, so do the many victims of travel protection plans. We’ll be there with you and we will be posting, too unless Mr. Smolinski tries to stop us with a lawsuit.
Will Norris

Mr. Smolinski has created a “Rube Goldberg” organization chart that wouldn’t work in the real world. Smartcruiser.com appears to be a phantom company. If you book a cruise on SmartCruiser.com, your cruise is booked for you by Palm Coast Travel. Consequently, Smartcruiser.com has no sales and no customers. As a result, they have no complaints, and therefore, they have an ‘A+’ BBB rating. Slick, but not realistic. In any major business, all transactions flow upward, and are consolidated at the top level of the corporation. This would include complaints. Certainly, Palm Coast Travel has had dissatisfied customers, but like magic, they appeared to have disappeared, instead of flowing upward to the Smartcruiser.com level. Somehow, Mr. Smolinski’s people convinced the BBB people that having Palm Coast Travel’s business default to Smartcruiser.com while dropping information along the way made sense to them. It makes no sense to me, and individual who spent more than 30 years working for a multi-billion corporation with facilities all over the world. Financial manipulations like this worked for companies like Enron, but only for a limited time.
Steve

Now I’m confused. I originally posted the press release that mentions Smartcruiser received an A+ rating from the BBB. I can’t find a Smartcruiser or a Smartcruiser.com as a member of the BBB. There is a membership listed for Palm Coast Travel that links to Smart Travel Group and it has an A+ rating. I can’t find anyplace where as a customer I could have purchased anything from Smart Travel Group. I don’t get it.
Adolph

“I can’t find anyplace where as a customer I could have purchased anything from Smart Travel Group. I don’t get it.”

Nice try. Read what the last posting from Will Norris says:

” If you book a cruise on SmartCruiser.com, your cruise is booked for you by Palm Coast Travel. Consequently, Smartcruiser.com has no sales and no customers.”
Cliff Sousa

Smartcruiser or Smartcruiser.com is not referenced at all on the website for the BBB of SE Florida and the Caribbean. If you enter “Palm Coast Travel” you are referred to “Smart Travel Group Ltd.” and vice versa. However, the only rating that appears is that for Smart Travel Group, Ltd. To tie Palm Coast Travel to a corporation that appears not to deal with the public for the sake of a higher rating raises issues in my mind. Especially considering one of Smolinski’s issues was the rating of Palm Coast Travel which now does not even appear on the BBB website.
Peter

Sent to Brodie White, President of the Better Business Bureau Southeast Florida and Caribbean.
Dear Mr. White,
Attached you will find a civil action summons naming me as a defendant in a lawsuit against one of your members, Palm Coast Travel as well as a notice of intent to issue a cease and desist by the Florida Department of Financial Services against Palm Coast Travel. According to the complaint, Palm Coast Travel’s BBB rating dropped from an A- to a B+. It appears to compensate for this lowered rating, Palm Coast Travel’s owner, Lee Smolinski (through your website) has all inquiries for Palm Coast Travel referred to Smart Travel Group, Ltd. I can find no visible reference to the public for anything related to Smart Travel Group, Ltd. I feel this is deceptive. By his own admission in the civil action summons Mr. Smolinski has claimed the BBB has lowered the rating of Palm Coast Travel. Why is this not reflected on your website?
Ben99

It would appear that posters to Elliottblog are not the only confused clients of SMARTCRUISER.COM?

The following is a complaint on Cruise Forum exactly as it was printed.

“ Smartcruiser.com – A Big Fat Liar!!! ”
Oct 26, 2009, 2:09 AM
I hope you will be very careful in buying cruise package online after reading our story.
I bought a cruise package online through smartcruiser.com last week and ran into a terrible situation. After I read the information and itinerary from smartcruiser.com, I purchased a 16 nights Princess Diamond cruise package online. I received a confirmation few minutes later and surprised to find out that the itinerary is different from what I have just read from the web. First, the cruise is taking off from Tianjin instead of Beijing. Secondly, the litinerary doesn’t has the port of Japan but have an additional night in Hong Kong ( I live in Hong Kong and I don’t want to spend 2 nights in HK at cruise). We chose their cruise because we really want to go to Japan and we were very surprise that the port at Japan was not exist. So I called Smartcruiser immediately to report the error. The rep said they will check and call me back.
The rep emailed me back and said that Princess has changed the itinerary and they did not aware of it. Smartcruiser said nothing they can do and we have to suck it up. I was very upset because I thought this is the agent’s responsibility to provide the most accurate and updated information. They can’t get away with it like this. Since my husband is a lawyer, he said that smartcruiser has to refund me because it’s their fault of not providing correct information on the web at the time I made the booking.
I called smartcruiser again and told them we are fine with store credit or just change to another itinerary but they refused. So I told them that we are going to dispute and the rep said that they will check with Princess again. After waiting and chasing for a couple days, smartcruiser told us that they will not refund us and also mentioned that there was a term at the webiste “Cruise lines reserve the right to cancel or change itineraries at any time. Palm Coast Travel is not responsible for any inaccuracies resulting from changes or modifications to cruise itineraries”.
Here’s the highlight – my husband and I had read the term of use right after our first call to them and we are 100% sure that smartcruiser did NOT have this term on their website at that time. Smartcruiser added this term during the time they claimed to check with Princess for us the second time. That’s why they have to take so long to get back to us. They even said that feel free to dispute with credit card company and please be aware that we have this term.
This is how Smartcruiser.com (Palm Coast Travel) do business. They displayed inaccurate information and did not resume any responsibility for their mistake. They even made up stuff to cover their mistakes and made the customer hard to dispute.
My husband and I will not let them get away like this and we are reporting smartcruiser to BBB and all travel agent associate to report their integrity issue. Hope you all will not have the same experiences like us.
Adolph

In regard to Ben99′s last post…
I guess that this explains the “shuck and jive” that Lee (and Steve) went through to ensure that the Palm Cost Travel criticisims weren’t reflected in the actual customer opinions of his company.
J.T.

I read the complaint posted by Ben on the Trip Advisor board. I guess it’s on multiple boards. Seems the actions of Palm Coast were similar in that situation as I’ve read here. Palm Coast changed the wording related to various terms of their agreement shortly after this customer made a dispute. Didn’t Palm Coast do the same thing with the insurance? Posting it was insurance on their website, then changing the wording? This company is unbelievable – all for a $4000 claim and now look what’s happened. As one poster wrote, this issue has gone viral all over the internet. Sometimes threats and lawsuits aren’t the way to resolve disputes.
Will Norris

Reading the posts from Steve and Lee today caused me to look up the exact meaning of a word. That word is “Diversion”:

Diversion is a feint, intended to draw attention away from the point of an attack.
It’s something that Magicians do all the time to get you to watch their left hand while they’re picking your pocket with their right hand.

Steve and Lee would dearly love to turn this Forum into a discussion of the validity of an A+ rating for one of their many companies by the Better Business Bureau. There is plenty of information available to refute this rating, and how it was obtained, but that’s a subject for another day and another Forum.

Here’s the point of this Forum: Even if Lee and Steve’s BBB rating is valid, IT DOESN’T MATTER.

The only subject that should be discussed on this Forum is whether or not the information in the lawsuit filed by Steve and Lee against Peter Lay and Chris Elliott is truthful. It is not, and there’s overwhelming evidence in the postings on this Board to refute it. Steve and Lee would like to change the subject, but a BBB rating has nothing to do with whether they are trying to silence their critics by intimidation, and it’s pretty obvious that this is what they’re trying to do. They may as well claim that their Wives are beautiful and there Children are above average. They may well be, but this has zero relevance concerning the subject that is being discussed. Don’t fall for it.
Poppy44

@John. What an excellent perspective. Jerry Watson didn’t do any favors by being a member of ASTA either.

In tJohn’s previous post I found the code of ethics very interesting. Number 8 states:

“Conflict of Interest. ASTA members will not allow any preferred relationship with a supplier to interfere with the interests of their clients.”

Did Mr Smolinski think of the best interests of his clients when he sold the illegal Trip Assured and PTP’s travel protection for huge commissions in lieu of selling legitimate travel insurance?
Bill Stokes

I just discovered this morning that in addition to his other qualities, Lee Smolinski can see into the future. Let me tell you why:

In his Lawsuit, Lee makes two damning accusations against Peter Lay:

“Until Defendant Lay started his efforts against Palm Coast relating to his dissatisfaction with Palm Coast’s attempt to accommodate him, Palm Coast had an ‘A-’ rating with the Better Business Bureau. The rating is now ‘B+’”’.

“When his claim was denied because it was facially deficient, he participated in an internet campaign to tarnish Palm Coast’s reputation. Without fully disclosing the details of his interactions with Palm Coast, he regularly accused Palm Coast of a scam”.

Let’s deal with the first accusation:

Just about 100% of the individuals who walk on two feet know that rumor and innuendo have no impact on a BBB rating. Read the BBB’s Methodology for proof of this. Besides, Mr. Smolinski’s accusation is incorrect. The current BBB rating for “Smartcruiser.com / Palm Coast Travel is ‘A+’. Shall we, then, delete this accusation from the lawsuit?

Now for the Second Accusation:

Mr. Lay’s dissatisfaction with Mr. Smolinski and his companies was expressed in the comments of two columns written by Chris Elliott. These columns were:

“The Prime Travel protection mystery is solved” pub. August 8, 2008

“Palm Coast Travel sues a customer – and me” pub. January 10, 2010

In the First Article, (188) comments were made before comments were closed by the writer on February 11, 2009. Of these comments, four were written by Peter, and two of the comments really didn’t concern Mr. Smolinski.

In the Second Article, (101) comments were made as of today, and four were written by Peter.

I would urge anyone to go back and read these comments, and decide for themselves where “reckless falsehoods” were committed. Mr. Smolinski would like you to believe that Peter left out important details, and he helpfully included them in his lawsuit. My Family and I have been cruising for over fifteen years. I read all of the details, and can assure you that none of them had any mitigating circumstances that eliminated the fact that Mr. Smolinski sold an illegal fraud insurance product to Mr. Lay.

Now, let’s get to my claim that Mr. Smolinski can see into the future.

Before January 10, 2010, a Google or Yahoo inquiry (“Lee Smolinski” “Peter Lay”) would result in one “hit” containing information about Peter’s dissatisfaction with Mr. Smolinski. Even then, you’d have to be a real travel insurance junky to read the article, sort through all of the (188) comments, and then decide to complain to the BBB about Smolinski’s underhanded tactics
After Chris Elliott wrote his second article on January 10, 2010, the same internet inquiry would produce two “hits” regarding Peter’s dissatisfaction.

Now, Mr. Smolinski may produce a website named
http://www.pigmy-NBA-Centers.com, or some other obscure site that Peter posted on to complain about his treatment, but everyone in the know will admit that if it doesn’t appear on Google or Yahoo, it’s irrelevant.

Is this evidence that Peter “participated in an internet campaign”? The Comments portion of Chris Elliott’s first article was open for posting for over six months, from August 8, 2008 through February 11, 2009. In that time, Peter posted two comments that concerned his dissatisfaction with Mr. Smolinski and his companies. That’s one comment every three months. THAT’S SOME CAMPAIGN.

Based on these two comments, Mr. Smolinski, who apparently has no awareness of the Laws regarding Freedom of Speech, decided to silence Peter by suing him. His rationale must have been that in the future, everyone in the country was going to see Peter’s comments on the internet, so he better be prepared. Unfortunately for Lee, it hasn’t happened. However, “hits” on the internet are starting to increase dramatically, because publications worldwide are picking up the articles and republishing them as examples of how not to treat a customer. In addition, several independent writers have written articles about Mr. Smolinski and several other Florida-based travel agents, retelling the sordid story of the greedy selling of fraud insurance policies that has been going on for more than six years, and has victimized thousands of customers.

You did this to yourself, Lee. In your attempts to justify your actions, you’ve made yourself well-known to travelers….and for all the wrong reasons!

It was Lee Smolinski who lowered the reputation of Lee Smolinski’s companies. The quicker you accept this fact and pay the valid claims that you owe, the better off your company will be in the future.
David

According to Smolinsi’s lawsuit, Peter’s “campaign” also included his complaints to the Florida Department of Financial Services and the Better Business Bureau. Obviously, according to Smolinski these complaints must have been valid because Palm Coast Travel’s rating dropped and the state of Florida sent Smolinski an intent to issue a cease and desist. Of course Smolinski is claiming Peter was reckless in his complaint. Maybe Smolinski should complain to the DFS and BBB that their actions were as a result of reckless testimony on the part of Peter.

You can’t have it both ways, Smolinski. Just like you can’t sell trip protection, claim it’s insurance and then cry it’s protection when you know you were wrong.

Share: