Starwood Lurker

That's not how the sentence from the T&C's actually read. It reads:

"3.2 Rooms at SPG Participating Hotels. An SPG Member may redeem Starpoints for single or double occupancy rooms at SPG Participating Hotels including, without limitation, for Free Night Awards."

There is no "and/or" in that sentence.

Still to be determined.

I guess I remember this differently. It was me, not SPG, that suggested that this is what was meant by the word "request" and SPG clarified that all that was necessary was to make the request and the hotel had to follow suit.

We will see what SPG says about this particular situation when the answer comes, but it also says this under Free Night redemption terms:

"Starpoints rates listed and no blackout dates are for Free Night Awards only and apply to standard rooms only (as defined by each property) ."

So the hotels are given some latitude in the room types chosen for Free Night Award usage, with guidance from SPG. We'll soon see if it passes muster or not.

Best regards,

William R. Sanders
Social Media Specialist
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

[email protected]

schley

I'm surprised that SPG allows this for participating hotels. Perhaps never recognized before and since it isn't widespread it was thought of to maybe be tolerated. However when you are part of a group with a certain brand standard is the standard really being met allowing a property to only make single occupancy rooms available for points? Heck no I would passionately argue. It is decisions like this that people will get irritated and generate tons of bad publicity not only for the property but for the SPG brand in general. It isn't reality that people speak about, it is their perception of reality.

MSPeconomist

Then could a hotel also insist on double occupancy during award stays? If someone shows up alone, no room. There could be an incentive for the hotel to do this if there was a resort fee or something similar that was assessed on a per person basis or just if the hotel believed that two guests were significantly more profitable because they spend more money at the property compared to the cost of that additional person in the room.

Oxon Flyer

Just to clarify :

The Master T&Cs say "or".

The Free Night Awards T&Cs (as quoted by Christina above) say "and/or".

HTH.

Starwood Lurker

Thanks. I will certainly bring that discrepancy to SPG's attention.

Best regards,

William R. Sanders
Social Media Specialist
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

[email protected]

azepine00

.....

Land-of-Miles

Let's be clear here if this policy is upheld it doesn't restrict points redemptions to single rooms what it does is limit "standard points redemptions" to single rooms and effectively inflates the amount of Starpoints required to get an acceptable room.

You get to a point though when you have to look at the logical definition of "standard room", and what would be reasonably understood by a normal customer in using that term, rather than whatever weasel definitions are dreamed up by hotel chains/individual properties to give the impression of wide benefits for PR purposes but a somewhat different reality. I think you can hold abstract definition of a "standard suite" however egregious that is however I think it is much harder to uphold that for a standard room, because "standard" has a literal meaning too.

In some jurisdictions a property of 200 rooms which defined only 5 of them as standard would run up hard against against local consumer protection/unfair contract terms rules.

cactuspete

Beyond the word-smithing, what do you suppose is the reasonable expectation of most (perhaps all?) loyal SPG members?

Flying Lawyer

This language is governing the relation of the guest with the hotel. The award is good - based on the choice of the guest - for single or double occupancy. A standard room needs to accommodate two guests. This language does to my clear believe not allow a hotel to restrict the number of guests to only one.

SAN-man

To add a little more context for those who may not be familiar with the Pulitzer:

The "classic room" is the smallest, most basic room at the hotel. It has 1Q bed, and measures a whopping 161-215 sf. 161 sf is absurdly small.

The "deluxe room" is the next category up. It can have 1Q or 1K or 2 single beds. The smallest of these are not exactly huge either, at 194-344 sf.

I have no issue whatsoever with the hotel deciding that the classic is suitable only for 1 occupant. What I have an issue with is that they no longer define the "deluxe" room as "standard" for the purposes of redemption. Especially when they used to.

To make matters worse, I checked about 20 random dates through the end of the year. Some single night stays, some multi night, midweek, weekend, it didn't matter. Literally every single time, every rate, this deluxe was only €10 more than the classic. Didn't matter if it was €199/209 or €368/378. For €10, they need to make them both redeemable for points.

Starwood Lurker

I think that most loyal SPG members here are reading it as being available for double occupancy or there would be no need for me to follow up, right?

Best regards,

William R. Sanders
Social Media Specialist
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

[email protected]

cactuspete

Right. Then why the unreasonable position by SPG and/or the hotel?

SanDiego1K

I expect that we will learn this was a simple programming error. I, myself, stumbled on the problem a week back when I was attempting to give an award room to two friends, but wasn't bright enough to realize it was a systemic problem. Let's give Starwood time to sort out the issue.

Starwood Lurker

I don't remember posting the result of our inquiry yet. Why don't we wait until that comes back before we call something unreasonable? For all you know at the moment, SPG could be in agreement that the room needs to be double occupancy.

Best regards,

William R. Sanders
Social Media Specialist
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

[email protected]

3Cforme

We can expect properties and SPG to comply with applicable law in every jurisdiction where they operate. We can't expect to cherry-pick law.