cbob

You sure disturbed a nest of hornets on this one.
Maybe you would not care for the 'handicapped' room at any price.

My experience was with the Pittsburgh Hilton a few years ago. I arrived to find that as a Gold, I was not offered an upgrade -indeed when I examined my regular "2 double beds" room, there was still trash in the baskets and hair-covered soggy soap in the bathtub.
When I complained to the desk about my "King Bed Non-Smoking" booking, they offered to move me, but only an 'accessaable" room was available because the basketball team (I'm sure all HHonors members) was taking all available rooms.
The accessable room was horrific! (for a non-wheelchair bound person). Open tiled bathroom like a shower room at the Y. (and smelled like a locker room too)
Counters at crotch level. Twin beds.
That musty residue that indicates that the room was only recently made non-smoking.
I asked for my original room back, and that houskeeping clean the bathroom.
Nobody at the desk cared to even say "sorry", but the next day one of the staff suggested I write HH.
I did. Nobody acknowledged my note, but man did I ever get good service at Hilton properties for the reat of the year.

I eventually tried the Hilton again (when they turned the DT into a Mariott) and there had been a marked difference in the level and attitude of service. My "regular price" booking was upgraded to a nice King suite, and the room was superior in every way. Maybe more than one person complained about the "upgrade to accessable".

Commander Bob
Hoping that folks in wheelchairs normally get better rooms than the one I saw.

mikey1003

There may be laws....But the same "handicapped" people who need the parking spot, need the room.

While not illegal, I believe totally wrong to deprive someone who really needs the raised toilet, the tub rails etc.

The real question is why these rooms are showing up for less? The min rate at a hotel should be the min rate....

wakko11

It's a money issue because that is how Hilton treats it. They do not want to have unoccupied accessible rooms, because they don't make money when they're empty, so they offer them to everyone at the lower rate.

Is the hotel being unethical for offering the accessible rooms to non-disabled customers? The hotel wants to make money and the customer wants to save money. The hotel knew he was not disabled, yet they allowed him to have the room.

The disabled customer got screwed because Hilton decides to sell the accessible rooms to non-disabled customers.

pdhenry

Without some evidence that a disabled guest was ever forced into a non-accessible room because of Hilton's practice of letting anyone reserve an accessible room, this is an extreme statement.

squeakr

and comment on particular posters and their actions, I will be forced to close the htread

squeakr
Mod hilton

myk

As a poster who got chewed out for having an accessible room and complaining about it, here are my 2 cents, and please do not take any of them the wrong way:

I think it's great that accessible rooms are available for those that need them.

I do not think that those who require an accessible room be given preference for a room IN GENERAL at a hotel:
- Scenario below -
200 regular rooms - $99/each - of which 2 are accessible
20 suites, $200/each


June 10, 199 rooms are booked for June 15, but 1 accessible room is available, as are the 20 suites.

John H. Public comes to hilton.com, needs a room, sees $99 rate, one room left - he books it. It is accessible.

June 11th, John Q. Accessible comes to hilton.com, needs an ACCESSIBLE room. All that are left are $200 suites. He missed the room he wanted by one day.

I'm under the impression that John Q Accessible, knowing he has special needs, should have reserved that accessible room on June 9th instead of waiting until June 11th.


Hotel rooms sell out, flights fill up. When I NEED to be at a meeting, I schedule my flight in advance - planes fill up, just like hotels....

kipper

To play devil's advocate, what if he doesn't find out until then that he needs a room at that hotel?

My thoughts on my own question: I think that in that case, John Q. Accessible should find a different hotel, just like if John H. Public did not want to pay the $200/night rate, if booking on June 11th, he would fnid a different hotel.

wakko11

I didn't say that a disabled guest was forced into a non-accessible room. I mean that disabled customers can end up without an available room since Hilton sells accessible rooms to non-disabled people. It is a risk that Hilton chooses to take and the consequences fall on the disabled customer.

myk

I was going to try to bring this out in my post but could not phrase it correctly. I think you did a good job with it ^

cordelli

Why on earth do people feel the need to personally attack people in a healthy discussion?

I have seen many situtations where it was the only room being offered, and I have seen many situtatations where it was way more then a few dollars cheaper then the next room listed.

I don't for a minute believe any person who deserves these rooms has ever been denied one because the hotel gave me one at checkin (and I've been given them way more times then I've reserved them).

The situtation is simple, at times they have way more accessible rooms then they do people using them. Should the hotel never give them out waiting for the people they know aren't coming to take them? Of course they shouldn't. The only way there are accessible rooms above whatever the law requires is because the hotel knows they could use them if they needed them.

Why do they at times cost so much less? I asked that once and was told that most people don't like a room with the accessible bathroom. Don't have a clue as to why that is, but when they have more accessible rooms then they do handicapped people needing them, they keep lowering the price until they fill some of them up.

But again, I don't for a minute believe that the hotel putting me in one of those rooms has meant somebody who needed it was turned away because they didn't have more available.

To compare it with a handicapped parking space is just silly, it's totally different things.

Let the name calling begin.

pdhenry

In my experience the accessible room has a larger bathroom, which takes up some of the bedroom space.

pinniped

Also, at smaller hotels, with only 1 or 2 accessible rooms, it will inevitably be a room on the first floor fairly near the lobby. To me, that's the biggest reason I avoid them. At Hampton Inns, I like top floor far away from elevators or other foot traffic.

kipper

Same for me - I'd rather pay a bit more, but have a better chance of being on a higher floor, away from the elevator. However, I don't complain when I'm upgraded to the jacuzzi suite, and it happens to be on the ground level, near the elevators.

MeNoSay

The truth is that in a perfect world, Hilton could sell these rooms for less than the going rate when they thought they wouldn't be full. And that, should a situation arise when they were down a room that was needed for a person with special needs, they could make arrangements with a person who was in one of those rooms and didn't need it.

That system breaks down when able-bodied people cling onto rooms out of spite toward the hotel.

If you book an accessible room, you shouldn't be surprised when you get "stuck" with one. If you book an accessible room and don't need it, you shouldn't be surprised if the hotel asks you to move.

If, however, you book an accessible room at a cheap rate, and are unsuccessful in demands to a different room, you should be willing to move at a later date (in essence, getting your way) when a person who actually needs the room shows up. Just my opinion.

The most appropriate analogy would be that handicapped parking was cheaper than non-handicapped parking, but that the parking facility allowed non-handicapped persons to park as a courtesy in those spots when they were unneeded.

pdhenry

Does this thread remind anyone else of a certain episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm?