FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Most Bizarre Cancellation Policy Ever?
View Single Post
Old Feb 23, 2014 | 7:25 pm
  #42  
sbedelman
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,309
Originally Posted by Horace
sbedelman,

Did the Hotel Adagio, Autograph Collection in San Francisco charge a one-night penalty to your credit card?

Or is this an issue of wasted time due to poor communications and lack of concern by the staff and GM of Hotel Adagio?
It could have been the former except for my efforts which resulted in the latter.

Let me precisely explain the sequence of events.

I tried to cancel the reservation via the web site. I was logged in an pulled the stay up from my list of upcoming stays. The site gave a warning I might be charged a cancellation penalty.

At this point I called the Platinum 800 number. The agent got the same message and was confused. She went away, consulted her supervisor and both of them agreed it was wrong but said I had to speak to customer service.

She forwarded me to customer service, but after around 20 minutes hold time no one had come on the line and there was no hold music so I thought I might have a dead line so I hung up and called back. When the customer service agent came online she said she couldn't help and I needed to speak to Autograph Collection customer service. I was on hold waiting for them a very long time, more than half an hour, and when someone finally picked up I was greeted by an agent with what he believed was the appropriate attitude for the brand. He would only say that the cancellation time was "generally around noon." The fact that no time was given in the reservation and that it would be impossible to know when one had to cancel to avoid a fee simply didn't register as an issue for him. He was clearly focused on projecting what he saw as the proper european-esque image...unhelpful to and disdainful of the customer.

At that point I was left with no alternative to call the hotel directly. Someone at the front desk agreed to cancel the reservation without penalty but made it clear that this was an extension of courtesy (i.e. that cancellation penalty was due). She did not know what the cancellation deadline actually was.

At this point I left a message for the general manger. When he didn't return my call I left a second. When he still didn't call I called the concierge asked him to personally deliver the message to the GM that I wished to speak to him. He called and promised to call again once he had resolved the issue of why the system apparently was charging or at least threatening to charge a penalty at 4 pm the day prior to arrival. He has never called back.

In summary the front desk agent confirmed that a penalty had been assessed but then agreed to waive it, not because it wasn't due, but because I was a good customer. She didn't know what the actual deadline to cancel without penalty was.

As far as I know the hotel has made no changes to its policies and anyone in the same situation as I was would be charged a penalty unless they call the hotel directly and they agrees to waive it.

In all it took me around an hour and a half to cancel the reservation in a manner that wouldn't incur a fee. I spend another hour plus trying to bring the issue to the attention of the GM so others wouldn't be charged.

Snotty without service would be the way I'd sum up both the Autograph customer service and the Hotel Adagio. Completely the opposite of my experience at the Algonquin but of course they bring years of hotel experience to the brand. I would have chalked it all up to a series of unfortunate events had it not been for the hotel's general manager. Bad stuff happens. Low level phone agents are dweebs. Front desk managers aren't the ones to fix this kind of problem. Which is why I made the effort to make sure the GM knew.

But that it took three calls, the third of which was a senior member of his staff having to collar him directly to even get a return call during which he made a promise to fix the problem and follow up with me, a promise he has not kept.

There may be sins of omission in the computer system, but what is going on at this property is either a deliberate effort to snooker people or a deliberate effort to ignore that people are being snookered which at this point amounts to the same thing.

Last edited by sbedelman; Feb 23, 2014 at 8:43 pm
sbedelman is offline