Hotel took unauthorised payment from laser

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

Boggles

Melendez wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Even if they are contractually obliged to deal with them, they can still refuse entry. It would be stated in most hotels terms & conditions.

As long as they don't refuse on the grounds of discrimination they can refuse anyone they want when they want.

ardmacha

As long as they don't refuse on the grounds of discrimination they can refuse anyone they want when they want.

That's not the point. The point is can they charge you if they don't let you in.
People here contend that they can't charge you unless it was crystal clear that that someone would not be allowed in and this is not the case here.

number10a

OP, if you booked this reservation through on online booking website, I would suggest reporting the hotel to them before you go to the Small Claims Court as that course of action would cost you nothing. These websites can be very persuasive by threatening action against hotels that are tarnishing the website's reputation. That or seek a chargeback with your bank.

Boggles

ardmacha wrote: »

That's not the point. The point is can they charge you if they don't let you in.
People here contend that they can't charge you unless it was crystal clear that that someone would not be allowed in and this is not the case here.

Never said it was the point.

I merely stated in reply to a post that the hotel are well within their rights to refuse entry contract or not.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

Boggles

Melendez wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You misunderstood, I never said they could refuse entry without consequence.

But they can refuse entry, contract or not.

Kolido

Melendez wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I dont think this example is anyhwere near the same. For one, the bottle of beer can still be sold, barman hasnt suffered any lose, whereas the hotel room may no be occupied that night.

BizzyC wrote: »

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.

If you have ever booked an hotel either via telephone or online, its highly unlikely they will ask you if any of your party has been barred or refused entry recently.


In my opinion I would definately persue a refund. It's cheeky of the hotel to charge them when it was the hotel who essentailly canceled the booking.
Saying that, do we know when the booking was made, if it was after the altercation with the bouncers, they should have known better to choose somewhere else.
On another note, of no relavence, an hotel with their nightclub having the same entrance, sounds very sleezey to me.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

Newaglish

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

I don't think you've considered the technicalities with your scenario. In reality, the hotel would be refusing the person the entitlement to bring their dog into the room - they wouldn't prevent the person themselves from accessing the room sans dog. In this case, they would still be entitled to charge for the room.

The OP's case would be decided around the following:
1) If there is a clause in the booking agreement that people who are barred from the adjoining nightclub will not be permitted to stay in the hotel and will be charged usual cancellation fees, the hotel is entitled to charge the fee.
2) If there is no such clause (I'm certain there won't be) the hotel would probably need to prove that they suffered a loss from the cancellation of the contract, namely that they were at full capacity and that there would have been alternative demand for the OP's hotel room.

I think the hotel would have a hard time proving that the OP should have been aware that a barring from the nightclub would extend to the hotel also, unless they were expressly told at the time.

Boggles

Melendez wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hang on there. That is completely on how the judge sees it.

If one breaks a consumer contract without due notice there can be penalties.

It would not be beyond the realms of possibility that the judge not only award the OPs boyfriend a refund on monies owed, but makes the hotel pay the alternative accommodation and any expenses incurred from going to court, e.g day of work, etc.

amandstu

Newaglish wrote: »

I don't think you've considered the technicalities with your scenario. In reality, the hotel would be refusing the person the entitlement to bring their dog into the room - they wouldn't prevent the person themselves from accessing the room sans dog. In this case, they would still be entitled to charge for the room.

again off the topic of the thread.If a customer turned up with a dog without mentioning it would the hotel be within its rights to ask the customer to find a room elsewhere even if he was agreeable to not to have the dog in the room.

whippet

What I'd like to know is who's name was it booked under? The OP or her boyfriend?

I'd say the room would have been available for the OP to use but she may have refused to use it as her boyfriend wasn't allowed in .. In that case the hotel provided the service and the OP would have chosen not to use it

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

ash8390

whippet wrote: »

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?

I understand that but he hadnt been drinking and neither had I we just wanted to go up nd get some sleep as we were up early it was very obvious there wasnt going to be any hassle

And to be fair he honestly thought it was just that one night as he had been in there plenty of times before and he wasnt a problem

We werent trying to get into the nightclub and we werent drinking and even so say that is 100% he didnt know he was barred and we rang the hotel and told them the issue so the room was available for someone else to take and we were assured by a staff member the card was not charged over the phone yet when we went into the hotel we were told theres no receptionist at night

ash8390

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

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

we were refused entry to room by doorman, we rang hotel and they said there was nothing they could do but we wouldnt be charged, then we were charged and told that whoever we were speaking to wasnt a receptionist and they didnt know what they were talking about

ash8390

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?

He admitted he had an issue last week as he is an honest hardworking guy who went out one night and had one too many drinks cuz he was on a lads night out.

And we rang the hotel as soon as there was an issue and they knew on our arrival we couldnt take room and so could have given it to someone else

ash8390

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.

But its a nightclub I work in a hotel which has a nightclub and EVERY night people decide they dont want the hassle of getting home and they want a residents bar and they book into hotel instead of going home after the disco

ash8390

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.

Also the room wasnt booked until approx 8.30pm that evening so somehow I doubt the hotel filled up and they were turning people away in the space of 4 hours

ash8390

Boggles wrote: »

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.

He didnt even realise he was barred!he honestly believed it was just that one night he had too much and wasnt allowed but he believed he would be let in again

Boggles

Hand deliver the Owner / Senior Manager a letter outlining your grievances, keep a copy of the letter.

Be polite but tell them clearly you expect a refund within 14 working days or you will file with the small claims court.

Forms below, cost 25 euro.

http://www.courts.ie/courts.ie/Library3.nsf/PageCurrentWebLookUpTopNav/Small%20Claims%20Procedure

ash8390

whippet wrote: »

What I'd like to know is who's name was it booked under? The OP or her boyfriend?

I'd say the room would have been available for the OP to use but she may have refused to use it as her boyfriend wasn't allowed in .. In that case the hotel provided the service and the OP would have chosen not to use it

The room was in his name and it was his laser card

ash8390

Boggles wrote: »

Hand deliver the Owner / Senior Manager a letter outlining your grievances, keep a copy of the letter.

Be polite but tell them clearly you expect a refund within 14 working days or you will file with the small claims court.

Forms below, cost 25 euro.

http://www.courts.ie/courts.ie/Library3.nsf/PageCurrentWebLookUpTopNav/Small%20Claims%20Procedure

Thank you!

Linoge

whippet wrote: »

What I'd like to know is who's name was it booked under? The OP or her boyfriend?

I'd say the room would have been available for the OP to use but she may have refused to use it as her boyfriend wasn't allowed in .. In that case the hotel provided the service and the OP would have chosen not to use it

Even if it was, she wasn't allowed to use the room the way she wanted ie. to have her boyfriend there. Restricting it in such a way effectively means that she couldn't use it. Besides that, the person who actually booked it/ whose name it is under is just that, the person who booked it. Same way as you can buy a present for someone and they can bring it back to the shop if it is faulty.

whiterebel

Boggles wrote: »

Hand deliver the Owner / Senior Manager a letter outlining your grievances, keep a copy of the letter.

Be polite but tell them clearly you expect a refund within 14 working days or you will file with the small claims court.

Forms below, cost 25 euro.

http://www.courts.ie/courts.ie/Library3.nsf/PageCurrentWebLookUpTopNav/Small%20Claims%20Procedure

Jesus, Its going up like a shot!! I opened a case about 2 months ago, and it cost €18, now its €25?A few years ago it was something like €9.

pleasant Co.

whiterebel wrote: »

Jesus, Its going up like a shot!! I opened a case about 2 months ago, and it cost €18, now its €25?A few years ago it was something like €9.

Must be a lot of people using it arbitrarily, based on "rights" that don't exist :pac:

fletch

whiterebel wrote: »

Jesus, Its going up like a shot!! I opened a case about 2 months ago, and it cost €18, now its €25?A few years ago it was something like €9.

Yeh think I only paid €15 a few years ago! €25 is getting steep