Clarification on "Stays" for two accounts
Hello
It will help to distinguish between two scenarios:
Scenario 1
Situation -- Member A has a booking for 1 night in his account and also a separate booking for the next 1 night in the same account.
Outcome -- This is the normal case whereby the two bookings should naturally be combined into a single Stay of 2 nights, with only a single arrival amenity. This also applies if there are two pax in the room, as the two back-to-back bookings in this case are still under the same MR account.
Scenario 2
Situation -- Member A has a booking for 1 night in Member A's account for 2 pax, and Member B has a separate booking for the next 1 night in Member B's account for 2 pax. A+B both occupy the room together on both nights. Member A checks out and closes the first folio after 1 night, and Member B checks out and closes the second folio after the other night.
Outcome -- So long as the first night booking and check-in shows only Member A's account number, conceptually Member A's account should be credited for 1 Stay of 1 night with arrival amenity; and likewise, so long as the second night booking and check-in shows only Member B's account number, Member B's account should be credited for 1 Stay of 1 night with arrival amenity.
Problem -- If the registrations for both bookings include both account numbers, this would confuse MR system and result in only one Member receiving the combined credit of 1 Stay for 2 nights and only a single arrival amenity. Some countries require passport registration for all occupants, which is fine, but this should not require having each occupant's MR account number for bookings under a different Member's account. Can a hotel or MR properly insist on imposing the known MR account number of an occupant who is not the principal guest of a particular booking ?
Issue -- From the MR Terms & Conditions, it seems natural to interpret the issue of "Stay" from consecutive nights as being addressed within the implied context of a single Member's account. (i) Is that understanding correct? or (ii) Is the intended policy really to treat physical occupancy (even under another Member's account booking) as equivalent to a Stay for the purpose of earning credit in a Member's own account?
Thank you