Smoking Fine Travelodge (Civil Recovery)

frog_bounce

whos to say there there wasnt someone below the window or in another room hanging out of the window having a ciggy, with the smoke wofting in through the window

shaun_from_Africa

I'm a non smoker (not one of the rabid anti-smoking lobby!), and I can generally detect even the slightest whiff of ciggie smoke, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if what frog_.. has said is the case.

I've often been in hotel rooms and have smelt smoke from people having a puff near the door or windows.

Nine_Lives

Searcher wrote: »

Seriously, this is getting really boring now!

Why?

And why has someone even thanked your post?

sirmarcus gave a fair suggestion. Why is it boring?

While most other people were taking the jimmy-riddle in my travelodge thread, i think it was sirmarcus who helped with the email link & because of this, i got my full stay refunded.

So not boring to me i'm afraid & if it helps OP, i'm sure it wont be boring to them either.

halibut2209

sirmarcus has a reputation for posting in most threads "I suggest you escalate and complain to" followed by the email of the CEO.

It's annoying to some as he offers nothing else and also has a tendancy to reply to criticism with silly responses. (not good)

However, in many cases his advice leads to positive results, and I believe this could be one of them. (good)

Money_User

K_P83 wrote: »

Why?

And why has someone even thanked your post?

Simple, Sirmarcus does this with anything and everything. A can of baked beans goes up 5p at Tesco and Sirmarcus does his "op suggest you esculate and complain to....."

The result people in high paid positions have to deal with c***! They have umpteen people employed to deal with these sorts of situations which don't end up dealing with them. The result will be increased cost of goods for all of us due to the wrong people dealing with things. Theses are businesses, they are there to make money, there running costs go up we pay more!

Also the CEO will never end up reading these emails anyway, Sirmarcus is still in denial about this, eg in a recent Comet thread I think (there was even a bet going on as to who would respond first, the CEO or the Comet rep on the thread) the rep on here stated he checked the CEO's emails and didn't find the email that was suppose to be sent. If a rep on here is checking the CEO's emails then probably loads of people have access and grab everything so it doesn't waste the CEO's time. Never the less these people don't work for free and will be costing us all more money if the people who did this went through the proper complaints procedure.

dekaspace

I heard a case last year whena guy successfully challenged a £250 charge as his teenage son smoked in the room when the parents were out.

In the end he paid about £67 for the cost of hiring a cleaner and the cleaning supplies.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

It is possible to tell through such things as a CO monitor (they're used in smoking cessation clinics) that someone is at best highly unlikely to be a smoker - then there are blood tests.

I'll wager than Travelodge will not be willing to take it that far.

It's most likely a) a means of improving the takings b) they didn't notice when cleaning the room from the previous occupier c) the cleaner had a sneaky fag just before the manager stuck their head round the door and caught a whiff.

dekaspace wrote: »

In the end he paid about £67 for the cost of hiring a cleaner and the cleaning supplies.

An hour on minimum wage and a can of air freshener for £67? Not that much of a win in my eyes, but better than £250.

asbokid

g0rf wrote: »

I have had no luck from citizens advice, they have advised to pay

A local branch of the CAB published its internal figures for 2008 showing that an hour of "advice" in the Bureau cost over £12 to provide.

Since the CAB is funded largely from public funds, and since its advice is very often deficient, the Bureau is not giving value for money.

In these challenging economic times, the numerous public bodies which finance the CAB should rein in their spending. Public funds should be invested in organisations which can provide competent, impartial and non-judgmental legal advice.

A few years ago, I was given very shoddy advice by the CAB. It nearly cost me £10k. While holidaying in America, I fell ill and was hospitalised. On return to Blighty, I found that my travel insurance would cover only a part of the healthcare bill. An unbelievably self-righteous CAB worker, with no legal qualifications, told me that I had a "moral duty" to pay the rest. She wouldn't even discuss where I stood legally. That sort of advice, delivered as it was with an admonishing sneer, is worse than no advice at all.

As for the OP, I wouldn't like to offer any legal advice but, morally, Travelodge is trying it on, and should get stuffed. Even if you had smoked in the room, the clean-up bill would never cost £150. Those places are a dive at the best of times. Local councils use them as dumping grounds for the homeless. Its much cheaper than paying for permanent housing.

Jennikay

Money_User wrote: »

Also the CEO will never end up reading these emails anyway...

I think you're missing the point - I got into a right faff with a company and by emailing the CEO, it was read by someone more important than the people I was paying to call who were saying 'you can't have a refund MADAM'. (Hate that word. )

Result? Cheque currently in the post for something which was entirely their fault but all CS were telling me was 'it's our T&Cs....'

Yes sometimes escalating gets recommended for tiny things. But it does help, a lot.

Money_User

Jennikay wrote: »

I think you're missing the point - I got into a right faff with a company and by emailing the CEO, it was read by someone more important than the people I was paying to call who were saying 'you can't have a refund MADAM'. (Hate that word. )

Result? Cheque currently in the post for something which was entirely their fault but all CS were telling me was 'it's our T&Cs....'

Yes sometimes escalating gets recommended for tiny things. But it does help, a lot.

Well you still shouldn't needed to have done this. Why didn't you write a letter saying you will go to the small claims court if you had that stronger case?