Credit card - refusal to help

grocerjack

elsien wrote: »

And if you responded to the "so-called duty manager" in similar fashion it's not surprising you didn't get very far.

I'd chalk this one up to experience and let it go.

I came on here for advice on a transaction , not a lecture on behaviour from people who have no idea how I conducted myself. For your information, I did not swear, I did not raise my voice. I challenged the decision in a very clear, very slow and very polite way. I know how to do this as it's part of my job. What I cannot take is unfair treatment, and it would be wrong for me to do so...or are you advocating that when treated unfairly we should all just sit back and let others do as they wish?

grocerjack

Ergates wrote: »

The hotel stands on the point that regardless of what the "staff upstairs" said, the bar staff are not in any way ever obliged to sell you alcohol. The bar staff get final say in this and what the non-bar staff upstairs said is totally besides the point.

Free tip for the future: If/When bar staff refuse to tell you more alcohol, demanding to see the manager and trying to argue him/her down isn't going to work. Ever. Doing that is just confirming they made the right decision in the first place.


Go back and read that again. Do you realise how petty and self-important that makes you sound? "My several thousand twitter followers"? Seriously? Did you also yell "DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?" at the bar staff?

There is a difference between 'arguing' and 'challenging'. I might have used the wrong word here, but challenging decisions is a part of everyday life, or do you just accept poor or rude service when confronted by it?

I have this amount of Twitter followers due to my job, and I will use it to socialise bad service from poorly trained people. I also use it to socialise excellent service and products/places. it's a sort of 'wings and roundabouts' tool. I think you'll also find this is quite legal and normal these days.

I've had lots of rude answers on here from people forming opinions without knowing me, the situation on the evening or the people I was with. Therefore you can only judge by the post I wrote, which I thought was clear and well worded. I tell you what I have learned so far though......there's a lot of Daily Mail readers on this forum ready to jump guns and count chickens.

grocerjack

thriftylass wrote: »

Playing devil's advocat here. I think you will have to pay the bill. Even if they didn't act in a decent manner it might have just been a case, sorry too late bar is shut.

We did pay the bill for the bar, it wasn't that high because despite what other seem to think on here, we're not great drinkers. Two early bottles of San Pellegrino for the room did come to over £10 though! We paid for them with cash......

grocerjack

elsien wrote: »

And if you responded to the "so-called duty manager" in similar fashion it's not surprising you didn't get very far.

I'd chalk this one up to experience and let it go.

My reply to BoGoF was justified as he/she was making huge assumptions and saying my wife's reaction was OTT. She was very upset about the way she was spoken to. If the bar staff were concerned they could have taken her to one side, but they didn't. She was refused very publicly and very loudly in a very patronising manner.

And again, I came on here for advice on a transaction and not for a judgement on an incident from people who weren't there and therefore would be better served keeping their counsel.

grocerjack

newmover wrote: »

Probably because she was !!!!ed as a newt and everything was made in to a big drama.

But the chap does say none of them were 'badly' drunk, which would suggest they were already drunk, which is reason enough to refuse service.

I'd had 5 pints of Guinness (costing £30 as shown on the itemised bill) over a 5 hour period, plus the toast. My wife had 5 pints of Becks Vier and the toast over the same period (around £30 as well) Our daughter had 2 Gin and Tonics at £12.50 (yes they were fancy new gins). Out toal bar bill for the evening from 6pm until 11:30 was £90. Hardly excessive.

How about this, we weren't fit to drive, but were more than OK and nowhere what people might describe as 'drunk', more socially relaxed. We're in our 50s, 2 of the party refused service are mid-70s and one is 80. We're not teens so I think it's fair to say we know how to behave, especially at a relatives wedding.

grocerjack

bris wrote: »

Seriously, this is a real thread?


Drunk people being refused drink because the bar was closed, I've heard it all now.


They have the right to close the bar and the right to refuse to sell to people the believe have had to much, in fact isn't that pretty much encouraged or even the legal thing to do?


You have no claim, the CC knows this so it isn't a refusal to help, it's just not a breach of contract so there is no help they can give.

Not drunk people. People who have a had a drink. There's a difference. Poor and rude service is poor and rude service. We tried to challenge on the night and decided to go home and follow the proper and formal complaint method. No fuss, no hassle. I came on here to ask where I stood legally not have people like you moralising on an incident involving people you don't know and therefore can't judge.

grocerjack

onlyfoolsandparking wrote: »

grocerjack wrote: »

However it is still a perception. The staff upstairs did not think there was an issue, and we were told by them we could buy drinks downstairs and we could buy drinks to take to the room. Just a point of logic there really, you can buy drinks for the room, but not for drinking in a quiet area of the bar? And if one person refuses service, but another doesn't...where does the hotel stand then? I've torn them a new one on Tripadvisor and put the word out to my several thousand twitter followers not to stay there. It's not a lot but it's something that makes me feel better.[/QUOTE]


How incredibly unfair to the Hotel and staff to write such a review,as if their job isn't hard enough dealing with general public!! And before you quite rightly say 'You weren't there' writing a nasty review to make yourself feel better displays to me that the Hotel staff really had a lot to put up with on the night in question. Live and let live!

How is it unfair to write a review on the experience of the hotel and some of it's staff?

Are you not aware of Tripadvisor? Part of its 'raison d'etre' is to allow people to write reviews, good or bad, on aspects of somewhere they have visited. I never mentioned the staff by name either. But I have every right to write a review based on my experience and most of my reviews have tended to be very good, with criticism applied in a constructive manner.

Go and look Tripadvisor up, you might find it useful if you ever decide to eat/drink/stay or visit anywhere of interest.

grocerjack

redux wrote: »

The time to conduct the dispute about not paying for the room was before leaving the hotel. (We've been so mistreated we want to check out right now).

Even then it might not succeed, as they could hardly relet the room that late, but that's a hypothetical and irrelevant matter now.

This subject really isn't anything to do with credit cards, but if you insist upon arguing the point as above, you don't actually need to as you already have the right to ask at any time to close your account.

That's precisely what we did do, we told them we had been mistreated and checked out there and then. We did tell the night manager we would not pay the room bill, but would honour the bar bill. On the evening I didn't consider debating the payment as the manager had been so intransigent. It would have been more wasted effort . And I think you'll find the original post was asking for advice on the credit card charge rather than asking people on here to judge an incident they did not see involving people they do not know.

FlameCloud

You seem to be a person who takes everything as a personal slight irregardless of what has been said. Presumably you simply came on here looking for vindication of your views and are annoyed when people haven’t agreed.

grocerjack

Deleted_User wrote: »

You're talking about section 75, which can be very useful - so don't go binning your cards, whatever you do.

Section 75 gives you the same rights against the car provider as the retailer.

However, in this case the retailer (the hotel) was able to provide the goods, but you chose not to use them. That's not a failure to provide, so you will have to prove that the goods were sub standard under the circumstances, which is going to be a challenge to say the least.

A goodwill gesture from the hotel would be more likely, although that is unlikely to reflect the cost of the room.

Thank you for the answer. It was exactly what I wanted rather than judgments on how the situation came about. I will remember section 75 and bone up a bit on credit card advantages and disadvantages. We only have the one card as we usually pay everything on a debit card except where protection might be needed.

I did email the hotel in question, and the woman (I think she might be the hotel manager) who advised me the staff had been investigated has today responded with an agreed waiver for the room/breakfast charge as we did honour the drinks bill. She has been nothing but helpful from the outset. She also offered a voucher for a discounted stay, but I have politely refused that as I just can't see us wanting to return, and also because it is only 10 miles away and staying was merely a convenience to allow everyone to have a drink and not worry about being the nominated driver.

The hotel manager has asked if I could alter the Tripadvisor review from the single star rating, and I have edited the review to review the facilities alone rather than any aspect pertaining to staff or service. I am happy to do this, as I accept that things can be poor, either service or product, and what counts is how things are corrected. In this case the hotel manager has gone out of her way to rectify this to the best possible result for both sides.