Mis-sold Wedding Venue Capacity?

daska

I suggest you ask them for a plan of the room detailing the 'fork' layout and how many people would be seated at each table - demonstrating that they can in fact meet your requirements.

And I'd ring your credit card company and establish what you need to do in order to secure a refund. That way, if they don't come up with the plan you'll know where you stand.

tooldle

I have mentioned the numbers before, and cannot get away from these being significant. If the venue had agreed to host a party of 75 people in a room that clearly only accommodated 4, I think it very unlikely that they could be held to account for breach of contract. It would be clear to any reasonable person that the numbers could never have been accommodated. Whilst this is an extreme example, I am using it to demonstrate why I have asked how many people you are trying to fit into the room, and how many did the hotel state it could accommodate with the layout of round tables.

daska

tooldle wrote: »

I have mentioned the numbers before, and cannot get away from these being significant. If the venue had agreed to host a party of 75 people in a room that clearly only accommodated 4, I think it very unlikely that they could be held to account for breach of contract. It would be clear to any reasonable person that the numbers could never have been accommodated. Whilst this is an extreme example, I am using it to demonstrate why I have asked how many people you are trying to fit into the room, and how many did the hotel state it could accommodate with the layout of round tables.

As I understand it the hotel knew the size of the guest list and advised they could accommodate the entire guest list in one room using the fork layout which would give them the 10% increase over the number of guests they could accommodate using the round tables. It's the venues legal responsibility to know the maximum number of guests they can accommodate to comply with planning/health and safety.

Either they can or they can't do what they promised. It's that simple. Demanding actual numbers is just nosy, not relevant.

tooldle

The reason I mention it Daska, is that the hotel said yes the guest could be accommodated in one room. It is perfectly possible that they meant the big room (two rooms into one) and to them it may have been very apparent that this was the only way. Misunderstandings do often occur and neither party may have realised that they were at cross purposes with the other. Without numbers you can't rule this out as an option. With numbers you can. The approach to the venue to resolve the problem should consider if the parties being at cross purposes was a possibility.
As in your signature, I am questioning what I have read, and in turn what the OP has read in the correspondance with the hotel.

schneckster

Tooldle,

I know where you're coming from. And what you're saying is exactly what the hotel is saying (now!)... we thought you meant both rooms. The fact is, they know we didn't mean both rooms and have said as much on email before we booked. Plus, the layout they suggested would not work through the partition (which, remember, is only about half the wall) so once again, it's a nonsensical response (from the hotel, that is, not you).

If it was a question of getting too many in the room, then they should never have said yes to begin with. So why did they, other than to secure a booking and try to beat us down on numbers afterwards? It certainly isn't our fault as they knew the facts up front. And the capacity of the room is their responsibility, not ours.

So once again, the numbers do become a moot point. They either can do what they say or they can't.

Cheers,

Schneckster

sassyblue

schneckster wrote: »

So why did they, other than to secure a booking and try to beat us down on numbers afterwards?

Fire regulations?

A mistake or misunderstanding has been made with the booking, and if you're only wanting the one room then you have to comply with fire regulations for that room. They're not being awkward there if that's the case.

OR, it's because they cannot accomodate due to the layout you want...

You have to get past the mistake if you still want the venue and your options are:

1. Reduce numbers to get the layout in one room.
2. Change the layout and have two rooms.

schneckster

daska wrote: »

I suggest you ask them for a plan of the room detailing the 'fork' layout and how many people would be seated at each table - demonstrating that they can in fact meet your requirements.

And I'd ring your credit card company and establish what you need to do in order to secure a refund. That way, if they don't come up with the plan you'll know where you stand.

They have come up with one, but it isn't brilliant. So, to get it moving again, I've also done one (I have some experience in room layouts). It's with them to see what they think, but I got the full number in. Of course, they want the files (CAD and 3D) I've produced but I've already told them we can come to some arrangement for it as it is something they should already have it . Given the money they'll get out of it, why should I do their work without getting something in return?

I haven't spoken to the credit card company yet. Shouldn't be needed. Quiet chats with other non-involved staff suggested they had done it before and were surprised we were having trouble. What do they say in the army? If you want to know what it's really like, ask a sergeant not an officer! :rotfl:

Cheers,

Schneckster

schneckster

sassyblue wrote: »

Fire regulations?

A mistake or misunderstanding has been made with the booking, and if you're only wanting the one room then you have to comply with fire regulations for that room. They're not being awkward there if that's the case.

OR, it's because they cannot accomodate due to the layout you want...

You have to get past the mistake if you still want the venue and your options are:

1. Reduce numbers to get the layout in one room.
2. Change the layout and have two rooms.

1. Surely then they should know this beforehand? I'm surprised a venue does not know it's absolute maximum capacity for a room in every layout.
2. They suggested the layout in order to get our number in the room, so once again, surely they'd know whether it contravenes fire regs. They are saying it's a misunderstanding, yes, but before they said that, they denied we'd ever said one room only, yet we have an email from them saying it.

As for the options, given the price, neither are acceptable. We have to invite that full number and while we're sure a few won't be coming, what if they do? This is why we're angry about it all.

However, they have since shown us a layout that will fit everyone in, though it's not a good one. So clearly, fire regs are not an issue and it can be done. See my previous post, but I've also given them a CAD based layout, too.

Cheers,

Schneckster

Amanda65

What a nightmare for you however on the plus side you have their confirmation in writing and they now seem to be working on a solution, albeit with you doing the leg work!

My only comment would be if they are this difficult so early on, I'm not sure I'd trust them to run my wedding! As you said in an earlier email that you have time to find another venue if necessary I would be making enquiries elsewhere to see if I could find somewhere slightly more accommodating and appreciative of my business (assuming you could secure the refund of course!)

schneckster

Amanda,

I think the problem is that the ones dealing with the bookings, are not the ones who will be preparing for and running the day itself and, therefore, do not have the in depth experience of the facilities that they should have. They said themselves that the managers think our requirements are OK, but since they haven't seen it themselves they are backpedalling on us, hence the current situation.

If we thought it was indicative of the venue as a whole, we'd have walked. But it does seem like the people doing the job know what they're doing, whereas the people selling it are not so sure.

Cheers,

Schneckster