Hotel charge 3 months after stay.

Hprum

EDIT: It has actually been 2 months, not 3.

I stayed in a hotel in Northern Ireland about 2 months ago and they called me recently to tell me that they had accidentally charged someone else for my room. They said they had refunded that person and the hotel is now looking for my payment details so they can charge me.

They had given me a receipt on the day I arrived and told me that the room was paid for, although I didn't notice any money being taken from my account. (I still have this receipt).

Am I required to pay for this room even though it has been 2 months and I have a receipt showing that it has been paid for?

They've rang a few times over the last two weeks but I haven't answered because I'm not sure what to say. I was up there for a job interview and had money at the time to pay for the hotel room but now I just don't have any money to pay them.

The total cost of the room was about €94, minus the deposit of €11 that was already paid.

Del2005

You used the room so you need to pay for it. If you booked with a CC they can still put the payment through on it for a very long time after the stay.

Hprum

Del2005 wrote: »

You used the room so you need to pay for it.

But they gave me a receipt that said I paid? And shouldn't they have contacted me sooner and not 2 months down the line when my financial circumstances have changed and I can't afford it? The mistake isn't mine, it's theirs.

Del2005 wrote: »

If you booked with a CC they can still put the payment through on it for a very long time after the stay.

They told me they can only keep the CC records for 30 days and I need to give them the details again.

dobman88

Their mistake, not yours. Is it your fault they are so incompetent that they charged someone else?? I would be looking to speak to the GM about their blundering staff and wouldn't be paying. You have a receipt, which is a legal document as proof of payment. They cant do anything about it now.

I work in a 4* hotel and I know if a member of staff let something like that happen, it wouldn't be the guest the GM would be ringing!!

Victor

Hprum wrote: »

But they gave me a receipt that said I paid?

By credit card?

You know this isn't the truth.

And shouldn't they have contacted me sooner and not 2 months down the line

It may have taken time for the person who did pay you bill to contact them.

when my financial circumstances have changed

How are they to know your financial situation?

and I can't afford it?

Then pay them over time. That is about the only option available to you.

The mistake isn't mine, it's theirs.

And they are rectifying their mistake.

How about you take some personal responsibility?

dobman88

Victor wrote: »

How about you take some personal responsibility?

Why should a guest pay for a staff members incompetence??? Sounds like a few things went wrong in this situation so the management should be looking at re-training their staff.

Zambia

Mate you used the room, just pay them . While you may have some grounds not too pay the decent thing to do is pay them.

Sofiztikated

dobman88 wrote: »

Why should a guest pay for a staff members incompetence??? Sounds like a few things went wrong in this situation so the management should be looking at re-training their staff.

He's not paying for a staff members incompetence, he's paying for the room that he booked, used, and hasn't paid for.

rovoagho

I'd pay, but I'd be looking for a discount for the mucking about.

nuac

Pay up, stop quibbling

XxMCRxBabyxX

Hprum wrote: »

They had given me a receipt on the day I arrived and told me that the room was paid for, although I didn't notice any money being taken from my account. (I still have this receipt)

Surely this is enough to show that you knew that you hadn't paid for the room and still owe for it.

You had a receipt but knew that the money hadn't been taken from your account.

the world wonders

Hprum wrote: »

Am I required to pay for this room even though it has been 2 months and I have a receipt showing that it has been paid for?

dobman88 wrote:

You have a receipt, which is a legal document as proof of payment. They cant do anything about it now.

A receipt is prima facie evidence that the room has been paid for, however prima facie evidence can be rebutted. The hotel should be quite easily able to prove that your card was not in fact charged using their own credit card merchant account records.

NoQuarter

Hprum wrote: »

But they gave me a receipt that said I paid? .

But you didn't pay!

Don't pay then and just wait and see!

camphor

Hprum wrote: »

EDIT: It has actually been 2 months, not 3.

I stayed in a hotel in Northern Ireland about 2 months ago and they called me recently to tell me that they had accidentally charged someone else for my room. They said they had refunded that person and the hotel is now looking for my payment details so they can charge me.

They had given me a receipt on the day I arrived and told me that the room was paid for, although I didn't notice any money being taken from my account. (I still have this receipt).

Am I required to pay for this room even though it has been 2 months and I have a receipt showing that it has been paid for?

They've rang a few times over the last two weeks but I haven't answered because I'm not sure what to say. I was up there for a job interview and had money at the time to pay for the hotel room but now I just don't have any money to pay them.

The total cost of the room was about €94, minus the deposit of €11 that was already paid.

You would be lucky to avoid a criminal charge under the Theft Acts 1968 and 1978 if you don't pay.

Lbeard

Hprum wrote: »

They've rang a few times over the last two weeks but I haven't answered because I'm not sure what to say. I was up there for a job interview and had money at the time to pay for the hotel room but now I just don't have any money to pay them.

The total cost of the room was about €94, minus the deposit of €11 that was already paid.

Well, they don't have much of a claim on you. They could try taking you to court but they'd have to extradite you to force you to attend. And I can't think of any instances of extraditing people for mistakes over hotel bills.

They've rang a few times over the last two weeks but I haven't answered because I'm not sure what to say.

Tell them you have brain cancer.

They're chancing their arm. It's their responsibility to collect payment - if they've f'dd up and collected from someone else, they can't come back to you later. Strictly speaking they can, but courts, solicitors with gelled hair, all that would cost far in excess of what the debt is worth - an extradition would cost at least a million.

Tell them you have brain cancer, and to send you the bill so it can be settled by your estate. That'll be the end.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

rovoagho

camphor wrote: »

You would be lucky to avoid a criminal charge under the Theft Acts 1968 and 1978 if you don't pay.

For €83? Yeah, the Guards'll be breaking down their door.

Bepolite

camphor wrote: »

You would be lucky to avoid a criminal charge under the Theft Acts 1968 and 1978 if you don't pay.

I'd be obliged if you could point out what might ground such a charge? Surely this is very much in the realm of a civil matter?

Royal Irish

Lbeard wrote: »

Tell them you have brain cancer.

Tell them you have brain cancer, and to send you the bill so it can be settled by your estate. That'll be the end.

:eek:

Yeah I totally agree here. You should try dodging paying the bill for the hotel room that you stayed in by claiming to have cancer which kills about 10,000 people in Ireland each year. If they still want you to pay your bill tell them you now have AIDS as well.

Mellor

Hprum wrote: »

But they gave me a receipt that said I paid?

I doubt you do tbh.
I imagine if you look closely at that receipt, it will reference the CC number that was erroneously charged. I also assume that they'll some sort of receipt of proof for the refund to that card.

camphor

Bepolite wrote: »

I'd be obliged if you could point out what might ground such a charge? Surely this is very much in the realm of a civil matter?

far from it. He accepted a receipt knowing that it was not correct. A jury might well believe that this was dishonest. He availed of the hotel room which amounts to an appropriation. All that is required for theft under UK law is a dishonest appropriation. He is the in the same category as a shoplifter or a person driving away from a petrol station after filling up and not paying.
When he was checking out he should have pointed out that he had no idea how his account could have been paid and had it checked. Instead he took a receipt knowing it to be a mistake and in the hope of relying on it to avoid payment.
The PSNI might well charge him if they come across him.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Sofiztikated

So I'm guessing the interview didn't go well then?

In reality, there's nothing they can/will do. But just remember a couple of things.

1) It's theft.
2) Someone (more than likely the receptionist) will pay for it.
3) It's still theft
4) You may be required to return to Belfast, maybe with work, maybe on leisure. Confident enough that you won't need to return to this hotel?
5) Racking up bills, and expecting someone else to foot the bill sound familiar?

Bepolite

camphor wrote: »

far from it. He accepted a receipt knowing that it was not correct. A jury might well believe that this was dishonest. He availed of the hotel room which amounts to an appropriation. All that is required for theft under UK law is a dishonest appropriation. He is the in the same category as a shoplifter or a person driving away from a petrol station after filling up and not paying.
When he was checking out he should have pointed out that he had no idea how his account could have been paid and had it checked. Instead he took a receipt knowing it to be a mistake and in the hope of relying on it to avoid payment.
The PSNI might well charge him if they come across him.

I'm still not seeing it, my apologies for being thick. Don't the actus reus and mens rea have to coincide? At the time of the appropriation the OP had no idea he wasn't being charges, it wasn't until afterwards he became aware of the situation.

It does seem more complicated then out own 2001 Act as here a shoplifter and someone driving off without payment would likely face charged under separate sections. I realise it's the height of laziness, but I don't suppose you could link the sections to which you refer, or perhaps the Act? The UK show amendments IIRC.

Lbeard

camphor wrote: »

far from it. He accepted a receipt knowing that it was not correct.

No he didn't. They just told him his room had already been paid for.

A jury might well believe that this was dishonest. He availed of the hotel room which amounts to an appropriation. All that is required for theft under UK law is a dishonest appropriation.

He's not going to end up before a jury. The burden at least in the UK, is always on the service provider.

He is the in the same category as a shoplifter or a person driving away from a petrol station after filling up and not paying.

No he is not in any of those categories. The shoplifter and petrol bilker have set out with the intention of theft. Being incorrectly billed is not theft.

When he was checking out he should have pointed out that he had no idea how his account could have been paid and had it checked. Instead he took a receipt knowing it to be a mistake and in the hope of relying on it to avoid payment.

No that receipt is as good as if he has paid. If the business was sloppy they have to take it on the chin. They may have lost 80 quid this time, but they're probably skimping on several grand to avoid bring their process up to the level where they do not lose the odd 80 quid. Paying people to do all the double checking requires money.

The PSNI might well charge him if they come across him.

They will my hole. My experience, and this is with the UK, when we mischarged the wrong customer by as much as thousands, we didn't pursue the other customer for the difference. It's a civil matter, not a criminal matter.

The other side to this, is if the hotel has done this once, they've probably done it many times with no one noticing.

Bilking the hotel directly would be a criminal offense. That is booking in, charging it to a company without their permission, and then wining and dining.

Cody Pomeray

Bepolite wrote: »

I'm still not seeing it, my apologies for being thick. Don't the actus reus and mens rea have to coincide?

Yes.

Although establishing the actus reus is the bit I'm struggling with. The OP has no funds.

LuisSuarezLFC

Yes it was a mistake on their part. but just pay up. Its the decent thing to do especially when businesses are closing and strugling just pay up or come to a compromise with a 30% discount or a voucher for next time you visit. Be decent

NoQuarter

camphor wrote: »

A jury might well believe that this was dishonest.

Trial by indictment because or a mix up over payment of a hotel? Let me guess, a first year law student gone mad?

camphor

NoQuarter wrote: »

Trial by indictment because or a mix up over payment of a hotel? Let me guess, a first year law student gone mad?

I never said that there would be a trial by indictment. The test is whether an offence has been committed. Let me guess, a former soldier after doing a year in the Law Library?
Given the views expressed on this forum at least some people think what the op did is dishonest. That is a reasonable basis for saying that a jury might take the same view. That would justify a charge. The hotel told the o/p the room had been paid for by someone else. He knew that it had not. He accepted a receipt knowing it was a mistake. That is the same as being given back too much change in a shop.

Cody Pomeray

camphor wrote: »

Given the views expressed on this forum at least some people think what the op did is dishonest.

Yes but how many of them have any legal training (I'm not including you in this question). You can't just approach the question from the point of view of popular opinion. There are obvious legal constraints to any criminal prosecution here.

NoQuarter

camphor wrote: »

I never said that there would be a trial by indictment. The test is whether an offence has been committed. Let me guess, a former soldier after doing a year in the Law Library?
Given the views expressed on this forum at least some people think what the op did is dishonest. That is a reasonable basis for saying that a jury might take the same view. That would justify a charge. The hotel told the o/p the room had been paid for by someone else. He knew that it had not. He accepted a receipt knowing it was a mistake. That is the same as being given back too much change in a shop.

A private detective?

You did mention a jury!

camphor

NoQuarter wrote: »

A private detective?
That was before you came up.

You did mention a jury!

Context is everything, but the you are only a res a**.

Tom Young

Rather than move this to AH I decided to close the thread.

OP: Call the hotel and settle the bill. Karma, bad money and all that. You may end up being persued through some means.

We don't do advice, but my ten cent is do to others as you would have done to you.