Top Secret Hotel inaccurate info given - can i get refund?

gordikin

I think OP is just looking for a 'get out' clause.

UK2010

gordikin wrote: »

I think OP is just looking for a 'get out' clause.

All too common on here. Like the earlier thread today about a poster trying to get out of "charges as notified" saying they didn't know!

rl290

Don't get it. Either OP is:
(a) trying to find some kind of "get out clause" for some reason,
(b) OR would not stay at a hotel that is not brand new (which seems daft)
(c) OR would want to pay less for staying in a hotel that is not brand new (which also seems daft, as older, well established hotels are only still around because they have a good track record).

It would really help to know why the newness of the hotel is an issue?

R

succuba5

If you're unable to respond constructively then please don't bother it's a waste of the readers' time.

RL290 - Why should it help you to know my reasons for wanting to stay in a hotel that has been described correctly? The legalities shouldn't change depending on my reasons.

If someone sold you a TV as brand new and you found out that it wasn't (even though it worked just fine) then I'm sure any normal person would have an issue with that.


My question is have I been mis-sold an item, and if so which company is responsble for providing a refund.

Thanks for any constructive feedback.

pulliptears

succuba5 wrote: »

If you're unable to respond constructively then please don't bother it's a waste of the readers' time.

RL290 - Why should it help you to know my reasons for wanting to stay in a hotel that has been described correctly? The legalities shouldn't change depending on my reasons.

If someone sold you a TV as brand new and you found out that it wasn't (even though it worked just fine) then I'm sure any normal person would have an issue with that.


My question is have I been mis-sold an item, and if so which company is responsble for providing a refund.

Thanks for any constructive feedback.

Or....

If you wont agree with me dont post.

One thing guaranteed to get people's backs up in this forum is that attitude OP.

UK2010

succuba5 wrote: »

If someone sold you a TV as brand new and you found out that it wasn't (even though it worked just fine) then I'm sure any normal person would have an issue with that.

If a TV lasted as long as a building say hundreds of years then no one would care! Buildings don't go out of date in a few months either. Your arguements a load of rubbish! You're just making excuses to try and get out of this.

succuba5

Wow there is a lot of attitude on here but it's not from me. I've asked a simple question and am getting irrelevent responses back. I'm not asking for agreement I'm asking what my rights are.

Once again, constructive feedback appreciated.

succuba5

UK2010 wrote: »

If a TV lasted as long as a building say hundreds of years then no one would care! Buildings don't go out of date in a few months either. Your arguements a load of rubbish! You're just making excuses to try and get out of this.

the priniciple is the same though. A 10 year old hotel is not "brand new"

UK2010

succuba5 wrote: »

the priniciple is the same though. A 10 year old hotel is not "brand new"

But trying to pass it off as being "miss sold" as a reason not to stay is a joke!

gemstars

We don't know the background.

Maybe the fact that it was a new hotel influenced the OP yo splash out and spend a bit more, and now that they know it's not new they're annoyed as they could have spent less staying at the 'old' hotel down the street.

IMO I think if it was described as new it should not be 10 year old.

Maybe new referred to new management? Or newly refurbished? Did it specifically say newly built?