Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hotel took unauthorised payment from laser

Options
  • 22-05-2012 5:58pm
    #1
    ash8390
    Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭


    I know hotels are able to charge your laser if you dont show up but here is the situation and I think we should be refunded just looking for some advice.

    The hotel we booked into has a nightclub as part of it and the door into the hotel is also the door into the nightclub. We had no intention of going to nightclub we just booked into hotel as it was a cheaper rate then any around it.

    My boyfriend had been told the previous week at the nightclub "not tonight" and he did have an issue with the bouncers which was purely alcohol related.

    Last night neither of us had anything to drink. On booking the room my boyfriend explained we wouldnt be arriving until after 12 - we had something to do early today and literally just wanted somewhere to sleep.

    On arriving at the hotel my boyfriend was told he was not allowed on the premises and this included to stay in hotel. It was after 12 and we obviously had nowhere else to stay. I tried to reason with the bouncer explaining we werent attending the nightclub and my boyfriend hadnt been drinking and could we please just have access to the room we prebooked as we had nowhere else to go. He said no.

    With this we contacted the hotel asking was there anything they could do and we were told unfortunately there was not. My boyfriend had previously given his laser details and he said well since you are not letting us stay I presume my laser will not be charged. He was assured it would not and so we stayed in a different hotel(at a much higher price).

    Today we went down to the original hotel to double check card had not been charged to discover it had been. We were told by the manager the person answering the phone was not a receptionist that they dont have anyone on reception at night. He also said it was our fault as my boyfriend had been too drunk the previous week however nowhere on the hotels website does it say if you are barred from the nightclub you cant stay in the hotel and even apart from this he thought as they said not tonight it was just because he was too drunk that night but didnt realise he was barred.

    They have refused to refund the money, is this legal?


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    Of course it's not legal. They refused to provide the service for which they had contracted, so they can not charge for it.

    You would even have an arguable case to be compensated for the difference between the rate at that hotel and the rate you had to pay at the hotel you ended up using.


  • Options
    #3
    whippet
    Registered Users Posts: 7,690 ✭✭✭whippet


    I might sound harsh but from what I can make out your boyfriend had a drink fueled altercation with the hotel's staff and wasn't allowed on to the premises .. yet for some reason you thought that that wouldn't have anything to do wanting to walk in to the same premises past the same member of staff the following week?

    Regardless of your circumstances at the time they were in their rights to refuse entry to the premises as the staff would have a duty of care to other guests and residents and allowing someone in to the premises who has proven that they can become disorderly with drink on to the premises would have brought certain risks to it.

    On booking the hotel wouldn't have known of your boyfriend's actions the previous week and therefore took the booking in good faith. As you had a booking the hotel wasn't able to offer the room to anyone else and could possibly lost revenue for it and therefore in my opinion was entitled to take payment.

    Take another different but simple senario, your get thrown out of a bar / resturant on a saturday night after a day of drinking and give verbal abuse to the staff etc .. would you expect them to allow you in on the following saturday evening with your family for a dinner?


  • Options
    #4
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    Unless OP's boyfriend was barred from the premises before the booking was made, the hotel is contractually bound by the booking.

    Let's be realistic about life: drunken altercations with door staff at discos are (sadly) commonplace. And it's fairly common that people who indulge in them are admitted on other nights when they are in a better state. The "not tonight" quoted by OP is perfectly consistent with that: it is reasonable to infer that he would be allowed in when less drunk or difficult. Sober, accompanied by girlfriend, and seeking to a the hotel bedroom rather than the disco is a wholly different scenario.


  • Options
    #5
    whippet
    Registered Users Posts: 7,690 ✭✭✭whippet


    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Unless OP's boyfriend was barred from the premises before the booking was made, the hotel is contractually bound by the booking.

    the OP hasn't said that the booking was made after the altercation. However, I don't think any one can be contractually bound to provide a service to a customer who has proven to be abusive or disorderly previously.
    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Let's be realistic about life: drunken altercations with door staff at discos are (sadly) commonplace.

    While commonplace drink is too often used as an excuse in this country for peoples actions.
    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    And it's fairly common that people who indulge in them are admitted on other nights when they are in a better state. The "not tonight" quoted by OP is perfectly consistent with that: it is reasonable to infer that he would be allowed in when less drunk or difficult.

    this isn't really relevant, the OP said that her boyfriend acted in a manner after being told 'not tonight' .. which any reasonable person would expect not to be let in again after that. If I was an owner of a public house or other business that sold drink I would be doing my best to keep idiots out of it that become abusive when drunk as it could affect my license renewal when the time comes around..

    P. Breathnach wrote: »
    Sober, accompanied by girlfriend, and seeking to a the hotel bedroom rather than the disco is a wholly different scenario.

    different senario, but same people involved and same premises ... people have to understand the consequences of the actions when under the influence of drink are just as real as those when sober.


  • Options
    #6
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    whippet wrote: »
    the OP hasn't said that the booking was made after the altercation.
    Fair enough, but it looked to me that it was that way.
    However, I don't think any one can be contractually bound to provide a service to a customer who has proven to be abusive or disorderly previously.
    That's a highly contentious suggestion. If a booking was accepted from somebody who was not already barred from the premises, a contract exists. Even if, as you contend, the hotel should have the right to cancel the contract, it is hardly reasonable that they should still expect OP's boyfriend to be bound by it and pay for the room he was refused.
    While commonplace drink is too often used as an excuse in this country for peoples actions.
    Neither OP nor I made that suggestion.
    this isn't really relevant, the OP said that her boyfriend acted in a manner after being told 'not tonight' .. which any reasonable person would expect not to be let in again after that. If I was an owner of a public house or other business that sold drink I would be doing my best to keep idiots out of it that become abusive when drunk as it could affect my license renewal when the time comes around..
    OP's boyfriend didn't get into the nightclub when he was drunk; he wasn't even trying to get into it when he was sober; he wanted a hotel bedroom. How might that affect licence renewal?
    different senario, but same people involved and same premises ... people have to understand the consequences of the actions when under the influence of drink are just as real as those when sober.
    What's that got to do with it?

    There is a simple fundamental point at issue here. A booking was accepted. If OP's boyfriend had not been barred from the premises, then an enforceable contract existed. It cannot be voided when he turns up by the doorman saying "Oh, it's you. Because of your behaviour last week I'm not letting you in." and the management follows up by taking the money under the contract that the doorman had effectively cancelled.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Senna
    Registered Users Posts: 8,800 ✭✭✭Senna


    It sounds like the boyfriend booked the hotel after the altercation, which i have to say was a particularly stupid thing to do. If i had "an issue with the bouncers which was purely alcohol related" i wouldn't want to go back the next week, i'd be embarrassed.

    The hotel took the booking in good faith, i doubt the OP mentioned the altercation the previous week and if he did i doubt they would have taken the booking. The hotel made the room available but the OP's actions stopped him from being able to use it.

    I wouldn't expect them to refund the money.


  • Options
    #8
    Melendez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,645 ✭✭✭Melendez


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #9
    jor el
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,713 ✭✭✭✭jor el


    Melendez wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    It's not that clear at all. There are many cases where a service can be withdrawn and still a charge is applied. Whether this is one of those cases or not, I don't know, but I wouldn't say it's a clear cut case of a refund being warranted.
    Melendez wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Any establishment, such as pub or hotel, can refuse service to anyone they want at any time they want. They are perfectly within their rights to refuse service to anyone, especially someone with a proven record of being abusive to staff.
    Melendez wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    You seem to have missed the part about him having some drunken "issue" with the door staff, and being refused entry.
    Melendez wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    While the Small Claims Court is probably going to be the only recourse, if the Hotel refuses to refund the charge, it is by no means a guarantee of refund. Look at the facts, someone that had been barred from the premises proceeded to try and re-gain entry to that same premises without checking if the barring would be an issue, or without informing them of this fact in advance. He made an invalid assumption about what he was entitled to, and what the consequences would be. The hotel took the booking in good faith and should not be held liable for any loss incurred by the customer's deception (whether that was intentional or not).


  • Options
    #10
    P. Breathnach
    Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    jor el wrote: »
    ... Look at the facts, someone that had been barred from the premises ....
    Where is that established as a fact? Being refused admission on one particular occasion does not amount to being generally barred from a premises.

    Yes, of course if OP's boyfriend had been barred from the premises, then he has no case for his being allowed in.


  • Options
    #11
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    Was the OP refused entry to the room, or just choose not to take it?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    BizzyC
    Registered Users Posts: 3,012 ✭✭✭BizzyC


    Unless the hotel had a caveat in their T&C's about such occasions, by refusing entry to the hotel, the bouncer effectively cancelled the agreement.

    The hotel has the right to refuse service, but not to take money without providing any.


  • Options
    #13
    Melendez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,645 ✭✭✭Melendez


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #14
    BizzyC
    Registered Users Posts: 3,012 ✭✭✭BizzyC


    jor el wrote: »
    Look at the facts, someone that had been barred from the premises proceeded to try and re-gain entry to that same premises without checking if the barring would be an issue, or without informing them of this fact in advance. He made an invalid assumption about what he was entitled to, and what the consequences would be. The hotel took the booking in good faith and should not be held liable for any loss incurred by the customer's deception (whether that was intentional or not).

    Why is onus on the customer to know whether or not their booking will be honored?

    If the hotel didn't intend on allowing him to stay, they should have refused the booking in the first place.
    On accepting the booking they agreed to provide a service, which they later decided to withhold.

    They should not be entitled to payment under these circumstances.


  • Options
    #15
    amandstu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,675 ✭✭✭amandstu


    If the OP's boyfriend has admitted the initial dispute was caused by him having taken drink and being irrascible to what extent is the rest of his account reliable?

    On the other hand does the hotel not have any obligation to show that there were actually at a loss of income and that ,for example, they were fully booked that night?


  • Options
    #16
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    Melandez I think your example of using a barman and taking his money and then saying he can't get served is a poor one.


    If a football fan is barred from a ground but buys a ticket for a match there and turns up with his ticket he paid for and isn't allowed entry, they wouldn't get a refund. Same can be said for a concert venue, that's more apt than the example you gave


  • Options
    #17
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    amandstu wrote: »
    If the OP's boyfriend has admitted the initial dispute was caused by him having taken drink and being irrascible to what extent is the rest of his account reliable?

    On the other hand does the hotel not have any obligation to show that there were actually at a loss of income and that ,for example, they were fully booked that night?

    They would have been at a loss, it was after midnight when they arrived, it'd be extremely unlikely they'd sell that room again that night.


  • Options
    #18
    amandstu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,675 ✭✭✭amandstu


    UrbanSea wrote: »
    They would have been at a loss, it was after midnight when they arrived, it'd be extremely unlikely they'd sell that room again that night.
    my reasoning is the opposite.If he arrived after midnight then they would be unlikely to have turned anyone away on account of his booking.

    He only causes them a loss if they turn away other custom for the room.
    If he "is cancelled" then the only loss the hotel suffers is the loss of his own booking (which they didn't want as it turned out)


  • Options
    #19
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    As a lay person, I cannot understand the hotels justification in charging this guy for a room they did not allow him to use. They denied him the service, then charged him after that fact. It wasnt that he didnt turn up, or that he turned up in a state or causing aggro. It does not seem right or reasonable to me to charge for something they decided to cancel.


  • Options
    #20
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 40,236 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    It's not clear whether or not the OP's boyfriend was just refused on the night or barred. There is a massive difference.

    That said he would have to be explicitly told he was barred from staying at the actual hotel for him not to enter the contract in good faith.

    I will assume he thought he was barred from the nightclub not the hotel.

    Therefore he entered the contract in good faith, the nightclub was not a factor.

    By being refused entry into the hotel the contract was broken and no monies should have been paid out, unless it explicitly states in said contract that anyone barred from the nightclub is automatically disqualified from the hotel and failure to disclose this will incur a penalty.

    Contact the NCA for advise.

    Your entitled to your money back at the very least. IMO.


  • Options
    #21
    ardmacha
    Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    the OP said that her boyfriend acted in a manner after being told 'not tonight' .. which any reasonable person would expect not to be let in again after that.

    This would imply that any person refused entry on one occasion was automatically excluded for subsequent occasions, 'not tonight' is not 'not ever'. This is not usually the case, a person might well be admitted on another night when sober.

    It does not follow (in the absence of some information to the contrary) that
    - a person refused entry to the nightclub when drunk is automatically barred when sober
    - a person refused entry to a nightclub is automatically refused entry to the rest of the premises


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Melendez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,645 ✭✭✭Melendez


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #23
    BrianD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    The hotel should refund the OP on the basis that they should have a separate entrance for nightclub and hotel patrons or be in a position to control admission to both areas of the hotel.

    The Op paid for a service where there was no grounds to refuse it.

    They should take it up with their bank and dispute the payment.


  • Options
    #24
    MajorMax
    Registered Users Posts: 865 ✭✭✭MajorMax


    The hotel has the right to apply a charge.

    Let me give you a scenario.
    If a person tried to book a hotel room and brought a dog (Obviously not a seeing eye dog) with them, they wouldn't be allowed access to the room.

    As the hotel has supplied the room in good faith and it is the actions of the potential guest that won't allow them to occupy the room. The hotel is allowed to charge them


  • Options
    #25
    Linoge
    Registered Users Posts: 1,790 ✭✭✭Linoge


    MajorMax wrote: »
    The hotel has the right to apply a charge.

    Let me give you a scenario.
    If a person tried to book a hotel room and brought a dog (Obviously not a seeing eye dog) with them, they wouldn't be allowed access to the room.

    As the hotel has supplied the room in good faith and it is the actions of the potential guest that won't allow them to occupy the room. The hotel is allowed to charge them

    You are mixing up T&Cs and the law.


  • Options
    #26
    amandstu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,675 ✭✭✭amandstu


    MajorMax wrote: »
    The hotel has the right to apply a charge.

    Let me give you a scenario.
    If a person tried to book a hotel room and brought a dog (Obviously not a seeing eye dog whats that?) with them, they wouldn't be allowed access to the room.

    As the hotel has supplied the room in good faith and it is the actions of the potential guest that won't allow them to occupy the room. The hotel is allowed to charge them
    a bit off topic (and why not?) but is the hotel allowed to rebook the room and still charge for the "cancellation"


  • Options
    #27
    Melendez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,645 ✭✭✭Melendez


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #28
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    Melendez wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    They have the right to refuse admission, which is legal.


  • Options
    #29
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    UrbanSea wrote: »
    They have the right to refuse admission, which is legal.
    But is charging, then refusing admission without refund legal?


  • Options
    #30
    mad m
    Registered Users Posts: 9,005 ✭✭✭mad m


    Just wondering since when did bouncers have the last say as to wether someone is allowed a room or not. Ok to get into night club its different. But the hotel had the same entrance to night club and hotel (mad)...

    The manager/someone in charge should of had the last say, not the bouncers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    ardmacha
    Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    If a person tried to book a hotel room and brought a dog

    only if their T&Cs indicated that dogs were not allowed or if dogs were never allowed in hotels.


Advertisement