"The property abides by whatever their local innskeeper laws say are appropriate"

[Flying Lawyer]

No, in this instance, the property abides by whatever their local innskeeper laws say are appropriate. If the hotel is acting within their prescribed innkeeper law, then that policy overrides all others.

Best regards,

William R. Sanders
Online Guest Feedback Coordinator
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

guest.forum@starwoodhotels.com

The title says everything. This statement from our very much beloved Lurker stroke me. For those who did not read the Mauritian thread, the story is easy to tell in a nutshell: A Starwood hotel did no honor a reservation for very private reasons of the owner and the guest was to my impression left standing outside in the pouring rain....

I have no problem to deal with "local innskeeper laws" for all the issues that may become relevant during a stay in a different jurisdiction. If it comes to thefts, to problems with restaurants and other "minor" issues. These are all issues that can be solved.

Howver, I use the Starwood reservation platform to make sure that my reservation is honored the way it was made and I am not willing to deal with "local innskeeper laws" if it comes to the main obilgations and entitlements under my reservation. When booking with Starwood I have (have had in the past) the trust that I have a contract and this contract will be honored according to the language of the contract: Room, Rate, Availability.

If Starwood cannot/is not willing to guarantee this any longer, I will have to consider booking via a tour operator: They are bound by (in my case) German law and my complete stay would be under German law without any possibility to sneak out with a "local innskeeper laws" argument.

[CNWO4LIFE]

Using local innskeeper laws to not keep your promise is only a way to cover up your lie.

[AJLondon]

A quick question: If I book on spg.com, is my reservation contract with Starwood or with the actual hotel?

And if it is not with Starwood, then exactly how far does Starwood's responsibility go in ensuring a basic-level satisfactory stay as per what was booked.

[LonLH]

Originally Posted by Flying Lawyer

The title says everything. This statement from our very much beloved Lurker stroke me. For those who did not read the Mauritian thread, the story is easy to tell in a nutshell: A Starwood hotel did no honor a reservation for very private reasons of the owner and the guest was to my impression left standing outside in the pouring rain....

I have no problem to deal with "local innskeeper laws" for all the issues that may become relevant during a stay in a different jurisdiction. If it comes to thefts, to problems with restaurants and other "minor" issues. These are all issues that can be solved.

Howver, I use the Starwood reservation platform to make sure that my reservation is honored the way it was made and I am not willing to deal with "local innskeeper laws" if it comes to the main obilgations and entitlements under my reservation. When booking with Starwood I have (have had in the past) the trust that I have a contract and this contract will be honored according to the language of the contract: Room, Rate, Availability.

If Starwood cannot/is not willing to guarantee this any longer, I will have to consider booking via a tour operator: They are bound by (in my case) German law and my complete stay would be under German law without any possibility to sneak out with a "local innskeeper laws" argument.

This is the mistake I made as well. Instead of booking on spg.com, if I had booked it through my UK Travel agent, I would have been protected by UK law and could have sued the TA on small claims court for the difference paid for a comparable property (which I am told is defined in rather wider latitude than just star rating) plus expenses and cost in case the reservation was not honoured.

To be on absolute safe side,my new MRU reservation is being handled by Amex UK rather than the MRU starwood reservations for two reasons:

1. Amex has got me 20% cheaper than the best rate the Starwood guys could get for the alternatives offered/ available
2. I don't trust MRU starwood any more-in case something happens with the new reservations at least I have some recourse if I book with Amex.

[Flying Lawyer]

Originally Posted by AJLondon

A quick question: If I book on spg.com, is my reservation contract with Starwood or with the actual hotel?

And if it is not with Starwood, then exactly how far does Starwood's responsibility go in ensuring a basic-level satisfactory stay as per what was booked.

Taken from their fineprint (and shortened to make it readable):

"In order to offer the services ...and fulfill reservations ... Starwood may use third party suppliers. You ... agree that, the ... hotels ... may be independent contractors, and not agents or employees of Starwood....

YOU AGREE THAT STARWOOD IS NOT LIABLE FOR ... SUCH THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS ... STARWOOD HAS NO LIABILITY AND WILL NOT MAKE REFUNDS FOR ANY DELAY, CANCELLATION, OVERBOOKING OR OTHER CAUSES BEYOND STARWOOD'S DIRECT CONTROL, AND STARWOOD HAS NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY ADDITIONAL EXPENSES RESULTING THEREFROM."

Any further questions? The property abides by whatever their local innskeeper laws say are appropriate. Fortunately this is not what is our daily experience with the Lurkers appears to be. However, from a legal point of view the reject all responsibility.

[Shantanu]

Originally Posted by Flying Lawyer

Taken from their fineprint

When I make a booking on the Starwood site, I do not expect problems, hence, I do not read the fineprint expecting future problems. I just have reasonable expectations......doesn't everyone else, or, am I just being naive?

I am a little shocked seeing these abridged terms which seem to state that we have no rights whatsoever! Is this true for most of the common websites that the majority of people use for booking hotels, travel, etc.?

[CIT85]

Originally Posted by Flying Lawyer

Any further questions? The property abides by whatever their local innskeeper laws say are appropriate. Fortunately this is not what is our daily experience with the Lurkers appears to be. However, from a legal point of view the reject all responsibility.

I think we've all expected and experienced no problems with reservations made on SPG.com and with SPG reservations agents until we saw the Mauritian fiasco unfold. Now it appears that the legal disclaimers disavow any responsibility for whatever happens, natural or manmade. Does anyone knows what are the innskeeper laws in Mauritius and do they cover this situation?

What is apparent from this incident is that the hotel can unilaterally cancel all reservations without recourse. That is what has all of us wondering just what can we expect when we make our reservations with Starwood hotels. Of course there is the distinction between SPG frequent guest program and Starwood, but what we want to know is if we make a reservation at a Starwood hotel, what can we expect? I know I cannot cancel a pre-paid reservation without forfeiting my money. But a hotel can cancel my reservation without any penalty to the hotel.

In my case, I make plans for my big vacation trips almost 1 year in advance (especially if I want to get business class award seats to Asia and Europe). I then research the hotels and make hotel reservations months in advance. The last thing I need is to be told that the hotel canceled my reservations and I'm SOL. This may not be a Starwood only problem, but a Starwood franchisee happens to be the one causing all the problems right now.

[AJLondon]

Originally Posted by CIT85

Of course there is the distinction between SPG frequent guest program and Starwood, but what we want to know is if we make a reservation at a Starwood hotel, what can we expect?

Bingo! We are not talking about "benefits" like upgrades / late checkout etc in terms of what to expect. I've often read here that bed type and smoking preferences are guaranteed on paid reservations. Forget that, it now seems that even the room itself as booked is not guaranteed!! With no recourse.

[3Cforme]

Originally Posted by Shantanu

I am a little shocked seeing these abridged terms which seem to state that we have no rights whatsoever! Is this true for most of the common websites that the majority of people use for booking hotels, travel, etc.?

It is. Starwood is 'no worse than anybody else' is their quest for excellence.

Of course a denied room is the responsibility of the hotel, whether on site at 2AM or weeks in advance. Yes, I expect Starwood/Marriott/Hilton to have standards (and higher than Choice or Wyndham, by the way), and influence, but there are limits to compensation that can be demanded, and at some point the hotel will prefer remedies in the law.

[Flying Lawyer]

Originally Posted by 3Cforme

It is. Starwood is 'no worse than anybody else' is their quest for excellence.

Of course a denied room is the responsibility of the hotel, whether on site at 2AM or weeks in advance. Yes, I expect Starwood/Marriott/Hilton to have standards (and higher than Choice or Wyndham, by the way), and influence, but there are limits to compensation that can be demanded, and at some point the hotel will prefer remedies in the law.

Well, if it is a TA's website (eg expedia.de) and they sell it as part of a tour package (eg hotel and car or similar) you are protected at least in the EU countries (I don't know about the US). However, the big chains obivously legally act as agents for the individual hotels and so do the website when selling rooms only. I always expected this from the "independent" websites, however, I have been a bit stroken by surprise to find language like this in Starwood's fineprint.

[Bondiboy]

Originally Posted by Flying Lawyer

Howver, I use the Starwood reservation platform to make sure that my reservation is honored the way it was made and I am not willing to deal with "local innskeeper laws" if it comes to the main obilgations and entitlements under my reservation. When booking with Starwood I have (have had in the past) the trust that I have a contract and this contract will be honored according to the language of the contract: Room, Rate, Availability.

Flying Lawyer is to be congratulated for raising this issue which is of critical importance for those who lock into non-refundable travel arrangements.

Starwood has never canceled one of my reservations, and I have nothing but praise for the way in which Starwood handled the Tahiti, Moorea, and Bora Bora reservations when Hilton assumed management responsibilities for those properties.

I have however been dumped by Hilton on three occasions. One last year at Hilton Tobago and two the previous year for properties in Italy. Hilton never even told me of the change in management.

It might be worth while to document any other cases when reservations have been canceled by Starwood and maybe we can make a convincing case to Starwood that they should introduce a policy.

Any thought??

[Land-of-Miles]

Originally Posted by Bondiboy

Flying Lawyer is to be congratulated for raising this issue which is of critical importance for those who lock into non-refundable travel arrangements.

Starwood has never canceled one of my reservations, and I have nothing but praise for the way in which Starwood handled the Tahiti, Moorea, and Bora Bora reservations when Hilton assumed management responsibilities for those properties.

I have however been dumped by Hilton on three occasions. One last year at Hilton Tobago and two the previous year for properties in Italy. Hilton never even told me of the change in management.

It might be worth while to document any other cases when reservations have been canceled by Starwood and maybe we can make a convincing case to Starwood that they should introduce a policy.

Any thought??

I would have thought that this whole incident is turning into a PR disaster for Starwood. Frankly given the amount of time which has passed since the original issue was raised in respect of the MRU properties it really seems to me that if Starwood were prepared to stand by their reservation process the OP's issue would have been satisfactorily resolved by now (we are I think over 2 weeks into the issue). The fact that Starwood have not resolved this issue or given a clear statement on their position speaks volumes. This issue doesn't only affect how I now view the MRU properties (where I have previous experience ) it is beginning to strongly affect my view of Starwood.

This certainly makes me think that using SPG to make reservations for critical stays is really not to be relied upon adn that it is better to make such reservations via third party agents even if this does mean giving up some SPG points and benefits.

There is nothing more fundamental for a hotel chain to get right than to ensure that reservations are honoured. When unexpected events happen then the test of a good property (and chain) is how these issues are handled. For a well planned event to result in guests being denied their reservations is frankly unacceptable. From the Starwood T&C's it seems we are now expected to be well versed in the local hospitality laws of each country we visit since we may need to rely upon them for satisfaction should things go wrong. Isn't avoiding just this situation the reason why many of us book a chain property in the first place, foregoing perhaps more intimate and genuinely local properties in favour of reliability?

[GUWonder]

It sounds like the EU laws should be adjusted to expand to include hotels booked via Starwood reservation facilities.

[GUWonder]

Originally Posted by Bondiboy

It might be worth while to document any other cases when reservations have been canceled by Starwood and maybe we can make a convincing case to Starwood that they should introduce a policy.

Any thought??

Do you want to include or exclude reservations like those where the Starwood rates marketed and booked provided extraordinary value at the likes of the LeMeridien Khao Lak in Thailand and the Lanesborough in London?

[BobbySteel]

I sympathize with the Lurkers, but Starwood management really shoots themselves in the foot with these sorts of things. It baffles me why they don't act more appropriately - the human time in dealing with calls as well as the negative perception surely account for more than the incremental cost of moving the guest to another hotel and eating the cost. This and the "Honey Money" episode show some serious lack of concern at the top in Starwood's management team.