Originally Posted by
s0ssos
I'm not sure about that either. On the wikipedia page it lists:
The definition of "extraordinary circumstances" will be further clarified to include natural disasters or air traffic control strikes, and to exclude technical problems identified during routine maintenance
Originally Posted by
Annalisa12
Because you don't want to be there. Why should the hotel make a profit forcing you to stay there.
I think most would only charge a "cost" rate.
Originally Posted by
jmastron
This is the distinction as I see it:
If *I* break a leg or get sick and *I* have to stay in a place for longer than planned, then of course I expect to pay, potentially via whatever insurances I carry to cover things that happen to me.
If the *entire hotel* is locked down and I am prevented from leaving because the hotel allowed an infectious disease on site (which may or may not be their fault/negligence, but certainly isn't mine), there is a 0% chance I will pay the hotel extra.
Yes, there were posts (perhaps joking, was hard to tell) at the beginning wondering what rate the Diamond Princess passengers would be charged for their quarantine. Of course that was a ridiculous idea too, and Princess not only didn't charge extra, but refunded the entire cruise (which had been mostly complete by that point). A hotel that tried to do the same would be (rightfully) widely roasted on social media and probably in court.
Yes PR wise, bad move. Legally though it's a sound move
Originally Posted by
ft101
The "extraordinary circumstances" get out will remove any right to compensation, but it doesn't remove the duty of care obligation.
Whether it's applicable here is another issue.
Incorrect . Duty of care ALWAYS applies under EC261. The stated exclusions are in regard to compensation. However I dont think EC261 applies here. The flight is still operating , the airline isnt refusing carriage, the government is the preventing you from even getting to airport.
Originally Posted by
Stickboy46
It's simple if you are not allowed to leave, you don't pay. The entity is on the hook for paying is the one requiring the lockdown. The hotel takes it up with the government after it's all over.
If it's on lockdown, they aren't making money from that room whether you stay or not so really it comes down to costs. You minimize costs.. eliminate extra amenities during the lock down if needed. Cut back housekeeping if needed. Cut back free food etc
Legally you are the one on the hook to pay hotel if government doesn't. Absent a law saying the government assumes the liability, the liability is yours. I don't agree with government not paying, but that is a governmental decision.