Doppy

Platinum elite, upgrade received before arrival.

At check-in, the agent said the hotel policy is no guests who live within 50 miles of the property. Apparently this is how many hotels in the region try to keep drug dealers/users out.

Both the hotel and IHG customer service agree that the hotel did not disclose the 50 mile radius rule in advance; not mentioned anywhere in booking process or on website.

Impossible to talk to anyone at IHG customer service who could provide any resolution or advice. Hotel's only advice was to find another hotel without the rule.

What is reasonable compensation for a situation like this, and what is the best way to contact IHG to get said compensation?

guv1976

While the "no locals" policy is not that unusual, the hotel's failure to disclose it on IHG's booking site is pretty outrageous, especially since:

1. it would be easy for the property to do so; and
2. the property does disclose the policy on Travelocity's site:

"Only bookings from non-local guests are accepted; guests whose residence is within 50 mi (80 km) of the property will not be allowed to check in"

Source: https://www.travelocity.com/Roanoke-...el-Information

(Scroll down to "policies.")

In terms of compensation, I think that that would depend upon how badly you were inconvenienced, and whether you had to pay more for accommodations elsewhere. And I would make the point to the IHG representative that if third-party booking sites have more accurate information about an IHG property than the IHG website or app does, that will only encourage travelers to book through third-party sites. I'm pretty sure that IHG would prefer that travelers not do so.

Good luck, and please let us know the outcome.

Chinatrvl

​​​​​​How sad is that...

GUWonder

Some of us check in with passports or passport cards and make our loyalty program account addresses on file to be in different jurisdictions than the residences. Greatly reduces the chances of this hitting in the US. If the hotels with such policy insist on a driving license, then that could complicate the matter for some.

nicolas75

I sometimes stay in Paris - my own town - to enjoy a suite in a palace.

Thank God this policy does not apply in the City of Light. 😊

HadesNL

That's sad,
Also sloppy not being mentioned on their website

You could say you want to escape the summer heat and move into a hotel because of the airconditioning....
Likewise in Amsterdam more locals have fled into the hotels because of the scorching summer

Reasonable compensation in your case is the amount of points you would need to have to
make a booking:
at this hotel or at your alternative choice

mecabq

Agree that checking in with a passport seems like a simple solution. Do hotels routinely mandate a state-issued ID if one tries to use a U.S. passport? I doubt that the hotel has access to the address on file in one's loyalty account, right?

There have been a lot of discussions about these policies on FlyerTalk. They are unfortunate but I suppose I have some empathy for the business decision that properties make. It seems like quite a heavy-handed solution to a problem that presumably only arises with a small minority of guests but, in America's highly litigious society, it's a way to avoid discrimination claims from people arbitrarily denied check-in.

If you were a hotel owner and felt compelled to institute such a policy, would you exempt travelers with elite status? This would seem like a good solution that would avoid discriminating against protected classes. It seems unlikely, though obviously not impossible, that a miscreant would have elite status (a hooker might have top-tier status in every hotel chain if she could convince her customers to book the rooms in her name), plus the property would theoretically be able to obtain more information about the identity of a customer with elite status once the customer committed a crime. I guess a sophisticated criminal would fake data in the rewards program. Interesting cost/benefit analysis for the hotel.

Ghoulish

RE: Passport - Surprised the thread hasn't been overrun with accusations of "fraud" and " omg you're breaking the rules poor hotel" etc etc.

northinsouth

This rule is complete bunk: last Spring, I had to completely replace the roof of my house and the entire upstairs looked like a bomb hit it. We stayed at a local hotel for a few days and then at an Airbnb for a few more. Locals do have legit reasons for needing these accommodations, especially if one lives out in the distance suburbs or small towns and spent the night living it up on the town.

Ghoulish

This and many other perfectly legitimate reasons, more than the unlikely point runs they're trying to avoid.

I can think of at least several mistresses worth of reasons...

beachmouse

I suspect locals doing remodeling or repairs to their homes are a noteworthy minority of all guests at extended stay hotels. If the project would be completed quicker by turning off the water for a couple of days, then hotel it is.

Jaimito Cartero

HIE is not an extended stay chain.

estrela

This shows what a run down place the US became. Very sad.

Ghoulish

deleted

Single_Flyer

This is so strange. Is there really that many people booking a hotel room at, what, $85 a night, using their credit card to check in and showing photo ID, and then using it for a crime that disrupts the hotel operations?

And if there are actually that many disruptive criminal acts happening, does their policy of not letting someone with a home address within 50 miles actually stop it?

EDIT: I'm still thinking about this. Maybe it is IV drug users and they are leaving needles that are a safety risk to the hotel employees?