Credit card - refusal to help

meer53

For future reference, Section 75 or Chargeback wouldn't have got you a refund in these circumstances, the room was available, YOU decided not to use it, the hotel would be entitled to charge you for it.

eco_warrior

There are circumstances where leaving a hotel early could result in a successful claim under s75, it’s not as cut and dried as the room being available and therefore the merchant isn’t at fault. Safety issues being the main one I can think of.

A failure to provide a basic duty of care could be viewed as a breach of contract.

Generally speaking claiming against hotels/holiday providers is a very long shot at best, although customers trying to claim is hugely common.

redux

grocerjack wrote: »

When downstairs in the bar my wife was refused service. It was done very publicly and she was humiliated. We had all had a drink but none of us were badly drunk. I did take this up with the so called duty manager but he refused to budge. The irony was others were refused service (not from our party) and the bar looked very much closed.

I can't see any irony here.

You weren't served, perhaps a staff member said it was closed, perhaps loudly enough so several might hear, you say nobody else was served, and you say it was closed.

It seems to me your main possible complaint is that the people upstairs weren't aware that downstairs would be closed.

Nothing to do with credit cards.

I asked in a motorway services shop abroad whether he could add a 50c coin or token for the toilet to the food I was buying. He wouldn't or couldn't. Did I complain that my sandwich should therefore be free, and escalate this to the credit card firm? No.

tempus_fugit

grocerjack wrote: »

I've just looked at some of your replies to other posts. That tells me all I need to know about you. Now, this situation is resolved so you can take your trolling and unhelpful judgments and find someone else to try and dig out.

Jeez, chill out man.

Craig1981

do you expect people to not make their own judgements on the information you have provided through all your posts?

i dont believe any person at the hotel would have told you that staff have been referred to HR for disciplinary action based on what happened, the best i have ever heard is - that "it is or will be dealt with internally"

why change your review on trip advisor? because you were given some money? staff and service they provide is one of the main things for service industry reviews, like hotels, restaurants etc so why not be honest with your entire experience instead?

just because you were given compensation/refund doesnt mean the staff were in the wrong and you were in the right - they offered you a good will gesture to alter your review, which you accepted - they paid to remove some bad advertising

chattychappy

meer53 wrote: »

For future reference, Section 75 or Chargeback wouldn't have got you a refund in these circumstances, the room was available, YOU decided not to use it, the hotel would be entitled to charge you for it.

With respect, I disagree with this. A hotel sells itself on its facilities. Imagine if you booked a room in a hotel advertising a swimming pool, but on arrival there was no swimming pool. In this case you would have a S75 claim on misrep/breach of contract. Saying that somebody chose not to use the room despite it being available wouldn't cut it with a judge.

Of course this situation is more of a grey area. It is common practice for bars to reserve the right to refuse a customer. And then there are the he said/she said/she was drunk/no she wasn't evidential issues.

It would be interesting to know exactly what the written response from the management says about the staff disciplinary issue. But it seems it's been resolved now.

MEM62

chattychappy wrote: »

It would be interesting to know exactly what the written response from the management says about the staff disciplinary issue.

I expect that is says nothing. Any disciplinary action would be a confidential matter between employer and employee. Despite the OP's claims, I cannot see the hotel breeching this confidentiality.

redux

chattychappy wrote: »

Of course this situation is more of a grey area. It is common practice for bars to reserve the right to refuse a customer. And then there are the he said/she said/she was drunk/no she wasn't evidential issues.

There needn't be any discussion of alleged drunkenness in this case, and there may not have been.

The OP says the downstairs bar was closed, and nobody else was served either.

breaking_free

Is anybody else dying to see the TripAdvisor review the OP left? Wish he'd post a link.

Nasqueron

chattychappy wrote: »

With respect, I disagree with this. A hotel sells itself on its facilities. Imagine if you booked a room in a hotel advertising a swimming pool, but on arrival there was no swimming pool. In this case you would have a S75 claim on misrep/breach of contract. Saying that somebody chose not to use the room despite it being available wouldn't cut it with a judge.

Of course this situation is more of a grey area. It is common practice for bars to reserve the right to refuse a customer. And then there are the he said/she said/she was drunk/no she wasn't evidential issues.

It would be interesting to know exactly what the written response from the management says about the staff disciplinary issue. But it seems it's been resolved now.

A hotel falsely advertising facilities is different to a person believing they were treated poorly in the hotel bar (which is a complaint about the staff). If the bar was shut and the staff refused to serve them that's not a miss-sale or misrepresentation by the hotel so no S75 claim.