Dr. HFH

Good customer relations. Doesn't change the facts of what actually happened here, however. You didn't really expect a GM to call you out for gaming the SNA system, did you?

And now that it's all in the past, I still would love to hear why 1) the two separate rezzies 2) with SNAs only on the first one.

troytos

deleted

UKTraveller4Fun

I have been reading this thread on and off while travelling like many and I like many on here have issues with how things have been done! The things that jump for me are:

So much information was left out at the start, from what I can tell now the op used SNA's on the first reservation and then had a back to back reservation, not a extension of the original stay as it originally appeared. Also the SNA's were never mentioned either!

There are thinly veiled mentions of racism, but not actual facts / reasons and overall not sure it adds anything to the thread more just makes me question what I read as being accurate more.


The overall impression I get is that the hotel agent who allowed the op to stay in the room was in the wrong. I do not however considering the number of evolutions the story has taken have confidence that the op did not aim to manipulate keeping the room and the way they phrased something to the front desk could have helped their situation and as such when the manager found out what had happened (been agreed) they spoke to the op saying they needed to move.

End result is due to the way the op has presented information on this thread and almost tried to manipulate the FT community, even admitting the upgrade game "I don't know how you roll this game but this is how I roll and I learn it from here" makes me actually side with the hotel even though it seems like the front desk agent probably did get something wrong! It also makes me see if this is the type of behaviour hotels are dealing with no wonder they don't give out upgrades and often really don't make an effort for Elites.

gengar

Not once in my posts have I suggested otherwise - on either assumption you've presented above. If anything, my point in my response was precisely that making universal generalizations from limited personal experience lacks prudence. I'm certainly not the person in this back-and-forth who has made those generalizations.

wolf72

Just to clarify as this has gotten me confused but...the gentleman had a room for x number of days and had checked in. He extended his stay and informed the staff at the front desk that he had extended and they confirmed it BUT during that time, another customer had booked and requested that particular room.

The issue is he was unhappy after he extended his stay he was informed he had to vacate said room but was moved to a room of the same standard he had paid for due appease the request from customer who was about to check in.

Or did I get it wrong?

dsquared37

Upon extending the stay all was fine but the next day he was asked to change rooms.

Canada101

I think what happened was OP had a reservation and used SNAs for an upgrade. The SNAs cleared and at some point either before or after his original check-in, he made a second reservation for consecutive nights.

At the end of his first reservation, he went to the front desk and told the associate that he had "extended" his stay and had a second reservation WITHOUT SNAs and told them he wanted to stay in his upgraded room. The front desk associate looked at her rooming allocations and said that there was some type of group block and informed the guest that they did not have any other suites. OP then takes out his phone and shows the associate that there were, in fact, suites available for booking. The associate incorrectly relents and says that the OP could stay in his room. The associate checks OP out then checks OP back into the same room. The next day, the FD calls OP in his room and asks him to move. The OP moves to the exact same upgraded rooming type but on a lower floor. The OP did not like the tone of the request and posted on FT seeking advice.

OP was vague (you can read the OP yourself) and left off key details. Upon being asked, OP's story "evolved":
1. When challenged, OP admitted that it was an extension
2. OP insinuated that the treatment he was afforded may have been due to his race
3. OP admitted he was in an upgraded room ("a junior suite")
4. OP admitted he used SNAs to obtain his upgraded room for his first reservation
5. OP changed his story from an extension to back-to-back bookings
6. OP admitted he also played the "DYKWIA" card
7. OP admitted that this is a game he plays (his words) at other chains as well with sometimes similar results

The OP has successfully gamed the system in the past with the use of SNAs to obtain upgrades for stays and is likely to have used a minimal number of SNAs to obtain an upgraded room for a longer stay. When his "gaming" didn't quite work out, he got upset and then started looking for reasons to complain such as playing the race card or claiming that the associates he dealt with were rude and lamented the need to pack up and move to another upgraded room on a lower floor.

I don't think anyone disputes that the associate who allowed the OP to stay in his original room for the first night of the second back-to-back reservation made a mistake. Judging by the way the OP has played the race and DYKWIA cards on this thread, it would probably be a fair assumption that the OP was trying to intimidate or coerce the associate into keeping his upgraded room without having to use SNAs. Many Plats know that upgrades are much harder to obtain for longer stays at any property.

Ultimately, OP is the type of guest that makes it more of a challenge for the vast majority of other guests to obtain the benefits for participating in loyalty programs.

UKTraveller4Fun

Was it an extension or in the end a back to back reservation in the end? I had believed it was an extension but then turned out to be back to back reservation with SNA applied to only the first reservation?

travelswithmyself

<Deleted>

Dr. HFH

Bingo.

clublounger

tsk tsk for putting words in my mouth. I've neither thought, nor said that it doesn't happen. It's the hyperbolizing that I object to.

You've made MY point - we've gone from it being "all too common" to "this situation quite often" to "a select few".

Thank you, tsk tsk.

Flying Lawyer

Sorry, it does not make any difference at all. He was checked-out and checked-in again. This would have been the point in time for the hotel to react, not in the middle of the new stay.

Keyser

i have no clue whether its 'all too common' or 'this situation quite often' or 'a select few'....the fact is that it happens....the op has admitted to doing so & my friend has confirmed he sees this often....you can put that in whatever category you have mentioned above....if a 'select few' do this 'quite often' then it can become 'all too common'....

your response was pretty rotten....that's all there is to it....

Flying Lawyer

I agree, it has nothing to do with racism in the strict meaning of the word.

However, being a middle aged overweight important and very Irish looking man in a suit driving expensive cars and booking expensive suites myself, I have experienced more than once that I am treated by far differently compared to a young Asian, Afro-American or Latino man (who probably might have deeper pockets than I have).

You may now speculate whether

• "middle aged",
• "important looking",
• "overweight",
• "booking suites",
• "driving expensive cars",
• "Irish looking" or
• "suit"

makes the difference. Maybe it is because my attitude is stricter, probably I am pretty much clear in what I want and what I don't want - but there certainly are differences and so more there might well be differences in Douglas County, Nebraska, in the Midwest - a community with close to 90% Caucasian (incl. Hispanic) population (and little to none Asian population).

troytos

deleted