Originally Posted by ZenWorld

Dear Lurker,

Going by your explanation, how are we able to uncover"

"If your friend is caught not giving complimentary select standard suite upgrades to Platinum members when they check in and the suite is available for occupancy, then she's going to catch a formal complaint that will come with some severe consequences to her bottom line. ", IF

"That being said, checking for suites available for sale online is a very poor indicator. Most of the time, it turns out to be a false positive." ?

It would appear that we have to call the Hotel's bluff by doing what OP did. Getting a friend to book a real Suite and checking in within 20 mins. Cos if seeing availability is not good enough, then only booking it and check-in immediately would be.

If there is a better way to prove it, I hope Lurker would share it, as I believe the source of unhappiness is indeed, people are seeing plenty of availability, and yet is hearing "sold out", and when calling the bluff, like in OP's case, it's SOLD! And check-in is successful, on a previously unavailable, sold out property for Suites!

Originally Posted by ZenWorld

Unless you want to be the lawyer of Starwood, or you are a witness to the incident, you should not speculate if there is another side of the story (unless there are inconsistencies in the OP's statements, which beltway pointed out rightly - take it apart).
If there is any other side, the Hotel, or the Lurkers could share it, if OP is unfair in his statements.

What you are doing is simply undermining OP's integrity. Why go into that sort of thing?



The rest has been said by beltway. ^

Originally Posted by ZenWorld

"Forcing the upgrade by booking a suite (and promising to pay suite rate per reservation) and then calling SPG to get it as a free upgrade is just wrong in my opinion." Huh?

I remember reading that in the T&Cs, Plats are entitled to upgrades, including Suites, if available. The Hotel's Front Desk Agent said no Suites available, and the OP called the Hotel's bluff by doing so, especially since the Lurker said there is no way to prove inventory is indeed available, except by booking and checking into a Suite thereafter.

Now you are saying what OP did is wrong? Why?
Should not it be the Hotel is wrong to lie to OP instead? OP is simply frustrated and decides to be bold and he did a BET with his own pockets, to book a Suite to prove his case? And he is wrong to stand up against lying tactics?

And remember, OP also said that the Hotel later said that they were trying to sell the Suites, and hence denying OP the upgrades. And you think the Hotel is right to do so? If so, then all Hotels does not need to upgrade Plats to suites and try their best to sell it or simply leave it empty. Take that benefit off the T&Cs then.

Originally Posted by ZenWorld

Unless you want to be the lawyer of Starwood, or you are a witness to the incident, you should not speculate if there is another side of the story (unless there are inconsistencies in the OP's statements, which beltway pointed out rightly - take it apart).
If there is any other side, the Hotel, or the Lurkers could share it, if OP is unfair in his statements.

What you are doing is simply undermining OP's integrity. Why go into that sort of thing?

The rest has been said by beltway. ^

Originally Posted by jammanxc

There is only one possibility...... the Fantastic suite the friend booked had just gotten finished cleaning, therefore it was available at that time......


yeah right.......

Originally Posted by CLEguy

I think you missed my

Originally Posted by ZenWorld

For people who claim there is still another side of the story, pls share it.

Originally Posted by FD1971

Several posters have explained the situation now multiple times...

Nobody lied, but the OP's story with his friend booking a suite right behind him is probably the closest thing to a lie in his thread...