Oh, please. Dishonest = bad intentions.

I guess the the extended guest was upgraded to that particular suite as well and the hotel unwilling to "sacrifice" another of their suite for these "freeloading elites"

While I do understand that these preupgrade is not set in stone and property can change them as they see fit, I still believe that when a property preupgrade their guest, they should commit to it or if they cant, not preupgrade the elites altogether is the better options.

Then again, all upgrades will be based on local management policy, and Marriott will not bother make noise if these elite upgrade policy is not followed by the customers.

I suspect this is staff juggling room assignments and they're not really focused on the fact that sharp-eyed guests will be checking their reservation in the app and will spot the temporary upgrade. It's also possible that one staff member assigned the upgrade and that someone at the front desk later changed it to accommodate a guest who was right in front of them. I recall once at the Monterey Marriott I arrived very late at night and was assigned a horrible room . . . the next morning I followed up about the room assignment and the Director of Rooms said "that's not the room I assigned you" and moved me to a very nice bay view junior suite. Bottom line, I would definitely not assume any kind of malice here.

Similar happened to me at an airport Hyatt. Had a nice suite upgrade that I did OLCI and later in the day I showed up and it was something like a 1 cat view upgrade. The lobby was overrun with people that were overnighting from the airport when I got in late so I'm guessing that had something to do with it. I got 10k Hyatt points for it though so whatever.

Agreed.
Usually I take those preupgraded rooms with a grain of salt until I personally checked in.

I am having difficulty understanding the tone with which you addressed Ralph4878’s concerns. At a minimum, it is widely acknowledged that there are varying expectations across different sectors and jobs. The hospitality sector is known to be a broad component of the service sector, in which it operates per the fundamental principle that all guests are not merely deemed consumers but, in most cases, registered members, and in this case a return guest/elite member who over the years have demonstrated a brand loyalty via patronage and continued financial commitment.

Such loyalty, as demonstrated by members like ralph4878, is often cultivated over an extended period, that is, many years in the making, which should warrant recognition and reciprocity. When an elite member benefit, such as a room upgrade, is permitted per stated hotel policy and also explicitly requested by a guest, and under the condition that there is availability and occupancy level permits it, then failure to honor such benefit should reasonably be perceived as deceptive or, at a minimum bad faith business practice. In the highly commercialized world we live in today, businesses may have a financial incentive to withhold some member benefits for various reasons, including but not limited to attempting to upsell the better guest room to other guests, which in turn effectively disadvantaged elite member like Ralph4878.

No possibility of an honest mistake or oversight in there somewhere? Do you ever make honest mistakes? I do.

Agree. It is disappointing if not troubling when an associate w/ a base pay of $15–$20 per hour (approx $33,000–$43,000 annually, within the lower income quartile) undertake action that appears deceptive or dishonest toward a guest paying over $200/night.

Assuming a 20% effective tax rate, that amount represents approx 17 hours of work for the associate. So a deceptive or dishonest conduct by an associate clearly demonstrates a disregard for the guest’s financial contribution + failure to understand the basic principles of business ethics. That’s why I appreciate and hold in high regard those who perform their duties with integrity, dedication and professionalism and find deceptive or dishonest conduct unacceptable.

Again, you haven't considered the possibility that someone made an honest mistake. It happens. Everyone makes mistakes, regardless of their income level. Ever heard the phrase "benefit of the doubt"?

Without some evidence of malice, I don't assume it. Apparently you assume malice or fraud as your default explanation of errors. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

The term “honest mistake” is vague and very broad. When someone forgets to tip a valet because he/she believed a family member had already done so, it is a minor oversight or perhaps an honest mistake rather than deceptive business practice or potential misrepresentation.

When a guest who has just traveled +10 hours on a transatlantic flight and is paying +$400 night to celebrate a special occasion. Then if an associate told the guest no upgrade is available and/or claims that the Bonvoy app room availability isn’t accurate - when in fact it is the established business practice of the property to withhold or “reshuffle” higher-category rooms and suites in a belated attempt to avoid honoring elite upgrade benefits. Such conduct cannot reasonably be characterized as an honest mistake. It is deceptive practice + a complete failure to uphold basic business standards in good faith.

Please do not misunderstand and no disrespect is intended here. However, I have encountered too many properties, unfortunately mostly in N America, that appear to engage in games or practices designed to circumvent elite and upgrade benefits. This includes falsely asserting that no upgrades are available or that your Bonvoy app displays outdated availability, when in fact the property, often through room controller or a manager overseeing guest room inventory, withholds or manipulates room inventory of higher-category rooms and suites to avoid honoring elite benefits.

I don't see anything dishonest or particularly deceptive here.

Bear in mind that the app does not push information regarding these pre-upgrades in any way. You have to look for it proactively. This is very different from, say, Hilton where I seem to remember that one sometimes receives an email a day or two in advance, saying that you have been upgraded - I would consider that much more definitive.

In case of Marriott, it seems clear to me that what you see in the app is based on an administrative action in the background (which, reasonably, happens to be linked to the app data) which isn't primarily intended to inform the guest. I look at it similarly to an airline blocking a seat next to a status customer. This is useful because staff will try to avoid assigning such blocked seats to someone else, but obviously, if it is ultimately needed, they can and will. I assume that it's the same with room upgrades a few days out; to me, this means that someone or something has provisionally assigned that room to me, perhaps implying that the front desk won't easily give it to someone else, but if someone books that room (category) or it's otherwise needed, it can be changed. That sounds better than if the upgraded room hadn't been earmarked for me at any point in advance.

As to the front desk conversation, I am not surprised that the FDA does not have easy visibility of the room assignment history for that booking and, as such, is unaware of the alleged "downgrade".

Personally, I would prefer if FDAs would more frequently offer a choice in case of early check-ins by saying "You can get the room type that you booked right now, or if you want to wait, we can upgrade you to [whatever] after 4pm." I think that would be best because, personally, I might decide differently based on my plans and preferences for each stay. But it is not totally unreasonable (and certainly not "dishonest") to work on the assumption that a guest's preference is to get their room when they show up.

Of course I agree that the (non-) upgrade practice of many hotels, particularly in North America, are not in line with the spirit of the Bonvoy benefits and, as such, should rightfully be subject to criticism. But that's not the same thing as the specific scenario of a reversed upgrade in the app which I find (quite literally) harmless.

Sadly these practice not just limited to those "North American" hotels.

I experience this many times and in every regions, including Asia that supposedly was very good to honour elite benefits.

Oh, please.

1. Does your long travel day mean that the FDC couldn't possibly have made an honest mistake? There's no cause and effect. Your long travel day and the FDC's action are unrelated.

2. It's an established business practice of that property? Do you have any factual basis for that assertion?

I really don't get where you're going here...the OP said that he believed that there was a room available that was better than the one they had previously been UG'd to...I simply asked if they asked for that room as a way for the property to make it right, or if they just wanted to leave because they felt the property was being dis-honest...pretty reasonable question I think.

This great leap to dis-honesty and deception without really any proof seems a bit outlandish, and as others have tried to point out it could have been an honest mistake or brought about by other circumstances that wouldn't be considered being dis-honest. Also it seems a sample size of 1. If there were more data points from other dates or other posters about said property I'd be more inclined to think there was something shady going on, but this seems to be being presented as one-off.