bosman

Hopefully they'll look into rental car companies next. I hate all the "Facility concession" fee and "Tire disposal" fee or whatever they're called, etc.. They are all a part of doing business and to charge additionally for them is maddening.

flyerCO

Number of occupants has always been a figure in room cost. It's why you input that info before searching, just like you input number of passengers before searching for a plane ticket.

Most of these are government / regulatory fees. The tire/battery disposal fees are generally state imposed.

CPRich

And the lawsuit isn't about what they charge, it's the fact that these charges are not shown in the rates. The discussions about who decides what to charge and who has to approve it doesn't seem relevant to the charge that the presentation of the total cost is deceptive to the consumer.

And tipping is completely optional.

pinniped

I conceptually agree with you about the scourge of tipping and how it has been leveraged by the restaurant industry in the U.S. to alter the labor demand curve in a way that the customers basically pay the staff directly.

But it probably wouldn't go far in court because tipping is technically optional. A diner can legally leave zero tip and walk out. Even those of us who don't *like* tipping don't do this because of the implied social contract we've entered into (that is, I know before I sit down to eat that tipping is expected, so using my philosophical opposition to tipping as justification to stiff the waiter isn't really fair).

Even restaurants that automatically add tips, a practice which I detest, will remove it if asked.

Tire Disposal is sometimes a regulatory fee. Facility concession sounds like it isn't - it sounds like the rental car agency's cost to rent space at the airport. I do wish it was at least required to tag on your receipt exactly which line items go to the government and which stay with the rental agency.

Agreed. The family room at a hotel usually costs more than a twin room. I don't find that unusual. The difference is sometimes zero or minimal in the U.S., but even here there are times when a 2-queen room costs a little more than a 1-King room. In Europe it can be a much bigger difference as many hotels have very few quad rooms. (Or none at all.)

As long as it's all fully disclosed on the first page of search results, I'm okay with that. When you search for 4 people on Marriott.com, it should do this. Even though we travel often with 4, I sometimes search for 5 or 6 just to force the search to filter out everything except 2-bedroom suites.

Old Hickory

I've never been challenged with these fees but if the purchase process can get less complicated like the airlines had to do, then I'm good with that. Now, don't get me started with the mini-bars...

samwise6222

The difference is rental companies don't hide them.

Now can someone sue these Vegas racketeers please? I can't believe internet, boarding pass printing and unlimited local and toll free calls cost $125.

nequine

I was just going to post I hope the DC AG has a word with the AG in Las Vegas (Nevada) where its almost rare to find a hotel that doesn't scam you for resort fees! From what I read on other forums, NYC is heading that way too so I hope that all chains take heed of this action.

SoroSuub1

I think the thread is going off-rails a bit because we've lost focus on what this is about.

What this is not about is the existence of resort fees. I'm indifferent to the room rate vs. resort fee shell game (except some jurisdictions like NYC where the hotels take the position that hotel tax only applies to the room rate, in which case it's actually a bonus for us).

The complaint is about how the prices displayed during the search process is not the pricing inclusive of all hotel fees and government taxes, additional fees aren't shown until the booking process is commenced and how some fees are misrepresented as government fees. It's like how airfare pricing pre-2012 was all wild-west and now everyone's showing the full all-inclusive airfare including taxes and fees.

SNA_Flyer

Asia has had something similar called a "Service Charge". Inflates the rate by 10-20%, including food & beverage. And it rarely goes to the staff serving you.

This is what needs to happen. Certain countries/municipalities require that. Check the price for a hotel room in Australia, for instance.

samwise6222

The Good Old Days of

"Fly to Paris for $49*"

* Taxes and Fees Apply. Fuel Surcharge of up to $850 apply. Carrier Surcharge of up to $550 apply.

HNLbasedFlyer

This is such an uphill battle - the biggest hurdle by far is the court would have to find it can overrule the Federal Trade Commission which has jurisdiction on Resort Fees much like DOT with the airline industry.

That'll be the first thing brought up by Marriott.

wetrat0

I mean, think of the value of unlimited toll-free calls! Without that useful resort fee, you'd be stuck paying the exorbitant charge of $0 to make a toll-free call.

(yes I'm aware that some hotels used to charge and maybe still do for you to call a 1-800 number, but if you have to pay to call a number, it's literally not toll-free).

s0ssos

You mean Marriott "condones" the resort fee.

s0ssos

I do hate those too, but they aren't as high as the government fees/taxes. To help pay for the convention center, etc.

hotturnip

In my experience, this is rare. Almost all rates are for one or two adults in the room, and most chains do not charge extra for kids with existing bedding.

In contrast, when I worked at Hyatt in the 80s, rack rates were $20 different between single and double occupancy.

I'm not sure where you're getting this "extra person fee" thing.