Priceline guests get a bad rap? How to fix?
 

I recently checked into a 2.5* hotel which asked me to sign a "yes, you may authorize my card for $250, and if you kick me out because of noise, you'll charge me $250 for the privilege" statement.

I've seen this before, but what stuck out was the general manager's statement that he only does this to priceline (and maybe hotwire) guests. He explained that he's had problems with priceline guests trashing rooms: smoking in non-smokng rooms, stealing TVs, etc. He said that some priceline guests were using prepaid credit cards for the bookings which then were useless when the hotel needed to recoup some damage cost.

So as someone who's been using priceline to great benefit lately and doesn't trash rooms: how do we keep this reputation at bay? Any hints as to what might be going on?

(One idea: this property is part of chain that typically shows up on priceline at the 3* level; I'm wondering if he's getting more riff-raff at 2.5 and should be trying to fix that rating.)

Was that actually what the statement said, word for word? If so, I would report the incident to Priceline. It seems a little over the top to do this for only a Priceline reservation because as you probably know hotels run your credit card to cover incidentals now matter what your room rate or channel you booked through. If this property is imposing higher restrictions just for Priceline guests, then perhaps they need to review the contract they signed with PL. Part of the contract for hotels to participate with Priceline includes wording that they are not to discriminate, but rather give them "equal or better" treatment than any other guest. Part of all this is to ensure the guest has a positive experience which translates into the hotel "branding" the customer for a repeat visit by booking direct with them.

Although I've personally only experienced Priceline "attitude" maybe 1% of the time, if/when I ever do again, I will be quick to remind them of their contracted committment to Priceline, not to mention that the hotel itself decides the rate they will sell rooms for, not Priceline. Also, nobody is putting a gun to a hotel to sell rooms via Priceline. They sell the rooms at the price they dictate and they do so voluntarily.

No, but it's the substance. I imagine that reporting the hotel to priceline would just give the manager another reason to dislike priceline bookings (and guests), so I'm still inclined to help him try to fix the underlying problem, if there is one. I'm doubting his theory about the link between priceline guests and damage (confirmation bias, anyone?), but I figured I'd ask for others' experiences and expertise...

It's reasonable & appropriate for the desk to ask for a credit card to cover incidentals, since they don't have your info. But the wording you describe is outrageous. PL users are already subject to abuse from some hotels. I've been in quite a few rooms through PL that are probably hard to sell otherwise - small, by the ice machine or elevator, no window, etc. But I'm not aware of reports that PL users are unruly. I think you just got a dumb hotelier.

Re: the 2.5* vs 3*. I can't believe that's it. I often prefer 2.5* over 3*, particularly in some cities. 2.5* PL includes things like Hilton Garden Inns, Residence Inn, and others that have in-room kitchens, free breakfast, free internet, free parking, etc.

"a dumb hotelier"

More likely a cranky out of sorts one. Chronic or acute is anyone's guess.

Its a BS story. Not the original post. But what the manager said. Pure and total BS as far as PL guests being a major problem for hotels.

It can also include Howard Johnson's Motor Lodges, Days Inns, etc. 2.5* is a mighty big tent. The only times I've encountered the "Priceline Attitude" at a front desk is at these lesser, sketchier properties which are inclined to regard ALL their guests as potential enemies / trouble anyway. (At 4* and 5* properties I've been booked into a lowly room now and then, of course, but always with courtesy.)

As others have pointed out the hotel mentioned by the OP is explicitly violating PL terms of service and can have its PL affiliation blown up as a result.

Last month I won a 3* on Priceline that had never been reported to the bidding boards before. The hotel manager checked me in and I mentioned to him that I stay in the zone regularly, usually via Priceline, and that I'd never won his hotel before. He told me the hotel just started using Priceline two weeks ago.

I asked him how Priceline was working out for them. He said "We're getting a lot of business but we're getting some problem customers too". I didn't probe for details.

My winning 3* bid was $35. The Motel 6 up the street was $49.95. When you can get an almost new Hyatt Place, Courtyard, or Hilton Garden Inn on Priceline for less than the walkup rate at Motel 6 or Super 8 then word gets around, especially if the low rate is available for extended stays, and your hotel will attract some of the "cheapest place in town" crowd and the problems that can go with.

In LA and San Diego, and probably other cities, there are zones where you can live in Priceline hotels for less than a decent apartment costs, with no security deposit, utility or cable bills, and maybe free breakfast. Sometimes I see families of 6 or 7 staying in one suite at a Residence Inn and I wonder to myself if they're not there courtesy of Priceline.

Sssh! Don't tell anybody! Actually the person checking in next to you at the Hilton Garden Inn is paying $230, they have no clue that anybody could possibly book a room there for less than $230, or that there is any way to buy hotel rooms other than asking "how much," and if you tell people they could have paid $42 they will just become angry with you.

PL is way better than apartment rentals in many situations and I guess it was inevitable that people would find out.

"Sometimes I see families of 6 or 7 staying in one suite at a Residence Inn and I wonder to myself if they're not there courtesy of Priceline."

Famlies sometimes end up in hotels because of the goodness of the state. Sometimes because they have a cc and just pay the going rate.

Spend enough time on biddingfor, FT, TA, Betterbidding, etc and you start to think that the whole world must be bidding.

Not so IME.

I am still amazed at the seasoned travelers who have never used PL. And how many that do have never heard of any of those aformentioned bidding or travel sites.

For a random family needing a place to stay because they have no home.....not all that likely I think.

Back to the OP's question, I think it is going to have to be a PL initiative to seek out and eliminate hotels that treat PL guests differently.

I stayed at a downtown hotel on Easter Sunday night a couple of years ago on a PL res. Easter is one of the slowest days of the year for hotels, and I would bet that the place I stayed had maybe 25 of their 250+ rooms occupied. They still stuck me at the end of a long, long corridor, obviously one of the rooms they use for PL customers. No big deal in a 4* but it's this kind of attitude that makes me hesitate to go for 2.5 or 3* places.

I would use PL more if this stuff didn't happen, and it's in their interest to wipe off the smudge.

Back some years ago the Park Hotel in Amsterdam got a lot of PL action. Maybe as much or more than any other 4 star at the time.

But they had a new wing and a bad old wing. The old wing rooms were smelly and damp. And hot in the summer.

And boy did PL guests complain on line. But they must also have complained to PL.

Its now been five years or more I am guessing since I have seen the Park come up as a PL win.

I do believe that PL laid the big hammer on them for their shoddy treatment of PL guests.

As they should have.

In my own experience I have never gotten a sub par room nor been treated like a 2nd rate guest. In fact I was upgraded my last two AMS PL stays. NH hotels they were.

As my company does not do business with Priceline (other than via their standard GDS booking engine), I can't confirm your link, but knowing what people are like, I would actually tend to believe the hotelier's side of the story.

Most people not in the retail/travel sector have no idea just how shady many people are--especially those that try to get around the system by using prepaid cards or even debit cards. There is a reason those cards come with heavy restrictions in the hospitality/rental sectors (if they're even accepted at all)--they represent an extreme risk for the vendor.

If I were to guess, I would guess this hotel authorizes all customers' cards for the same $250, so they really are not treating PL customers any differently than direct retail bookings. However, it would not surprise me if PL guests had a higher chargeback rate due to them disputing additional charges when problems did happen. The fact that the booking channel is opaque may make it slightly more difficult for the merchant to defend against a chargeback, so the merchant likely has them sign the paper just for a little extra defense. (When a customer disputes a charge, the merchant had better have every single t crossed and every last i dotted--one tiny flaw and the card-issuing bank will automatically rule in favor of the customer.)

"(When a customer disputes a charge, the merchant had better have every single t crossed and every last i dotted--one tiny flaw and the card-issuing bank will automatically rule in favor of the customer.)"


Protections for the consumer? Good for that.

When I book PL NYOP the only thing I expect to pay for is what I bought at the hotel after I arrived. Drinks. Breakfast. That sort of thing. I do not expect to see any charges whatsoever that do not belong there.

No double billing for the room I already paid PL for. Something hotels have been know to try either on purpose or through incompetence. No breakfast I did not eat. No extra nights I did not stay. No room service I did not order.

They darn well better have ever T crossed if they are going to bill me. Because I refuse to pay for stuff I never bought.

In this I am the same whether I paid the hotel direct or booked through NYOP. And I expect ever other FT'er is the same when it comes to this.

I think part of the problem is that you have 3* hotels offering $35 PL rates. If they're doing that, then they're getting a $35 customer. The $35 PL customer is often times more demanding than the biz travelers and often times more apt to trash a room. I can completely understand why hoteliers don't like the PL customer, but it's their fault for willing to take such low rated business.

I doubt that the problem of unwashed riff-raff renting PL hotels is widespread, and in the case of the OP it was probably conflated with the teens-rent-room-for-beer-bash problem. (They used a debit card! Oh my!) Presumably any serious misbehavior on the part of a PL guest will get back to PL who will then simply not accept further bids from the customer.

"The $35 PL customer is often times more demanding than the biz travelers and often times more apt to trash a room"

I am curious as to what data or experience you base this on. Because in my experience its just the opposite.

Someone paying $200 for a $200 room expects $200 worth of value. All you have to do is spend a few hours reading the TripAdvisor reviews to see how unhappy people can be when they pay a lot for a room and do not get a lot in return.

The person who pays say $75 for that same $200 room IME has a much more forgiving attitude. And the TA reviews bear this out.----"sure the room was small-----but I was paying so little I can't complain"----being very typical of what I have read in those reviews and experienced in my own stays.

And the reason hotels take a discount PL customer is because that room will sit unused if they do not. So not only do they get $35 instead of nothing they get someone who may, like me, also buy breakfast or lunch or drinks.

Something being better than nothing.

This trashing of rooms claim with PL customers I do not believe for a minute. I find most PL posters to be experience and seasoned travelers. At least that is my experience and impression.

Sure it may happen now and then. But it can also happen now and then with full rate paying customers-----some no doubt who become irate because they paid $200 for a room and got $75 worth of service and value.

Doc

Quite a bit of experience actually. I was a consultant for the hotel industry for several years and am very familiar with the ecommerce and OTA side of the business. There is a contingency of PL travelers who are in fact business transient guests, but there's a greater contingency that is not. The business traveler, or frequent traveler, IMHO, is more likely to publically participate in this and other forums as they are the more involved in the travel world - however, a great many travelers that use PL will never post on or refer to a travel forum at all - so you likely don't get their persepective.

If you actually buy breakfast, lunch, or drinks (and I'm not talking about a soda from their market area), then you're an exception to the majority of PL travelers.

The profit margin on a $35 room is minimal at best. An average 2* hotel (non-unionized) probably has a CPOR (cost per occupied room) of about $20 - a $3* non unionized is probably about $25-$30, and a 4* is about $30-40. Unionized hotels are generally higher. So, yes, anything above their CPOR is technically profit, but there's also wear/tear on the rooms.

Also, the majority of 2.5* and below hotels do offer breakfast inclusive rates & likely don't have lunch or bar service. Many 3* hotels also offer complimentary breakfast these days as well. Pretty much the only hotels that don't offer complimentary breakfast are independent hotels, full service chain hotels, casino hotels, resorts, and some limited service brands, like Hilton Garden Inn and Courtyards (many of which qualify for 3* ratings on Priceline) - and with the exception of HGI & CY hotels, those are mostly 3.5*+, which you generally won't find for $35 unless you have a desperate hotelier who has no concept of yield management.

One other point to make is that, IME, the traveler paying $200 for a room is less demanding than the traveler paying $75 for that room, who generally has a higher sense of entitlement. You'd think its the other way around, but ask any general manager of a hotel & they'd rather that the less high-maintence premium travelers (who travel more & therefore understand that things happen when traveling - ever notice that the people who are complaining at the airline counters are rarely, if ever, the experienced biz travelers? Same thing goes at the hotel front desk).

****

Total side note...by "trashing of rooms", I don't necessarily mean like a rockstar trashing a room - I mean other things, like smoking in the room in a non-smoking hotel, spilling beer on the carpeting that now makes the room stink of alcohol and carpeting/desks being overly sticky with residues & requires a deep cleaning so it doesn't mildew, leaving bloody towels, broken glass that can injure housekeepers, stealing towels, etc, etc...these are just small examples of things seen in the hotel world. For what its worth, many hotels no longer take cash paying guests unless they have a credit card for incidentals because cash paying guests are usually even worse...it's okay to pay cash at checkout, but many won't take cash at check-in because of things like this.

Not likely, unfortunately. PL won't flag someone's account because they've done bad at a hotel...and if they were to do that, all the person needs to do is sign up under a different email addy...

It's not because the $200 traveler is more understanding. It's that the $75 or $45 traveler is spending his or her own money.

Hotels voluntarily participate in Priceline and Hotwire. The purpose is to sell distressed inventory to cover the cost of an empty room. Every night a hotel room goes empty that inventory can never be recovered and it is lost revenue. I don't see what gripe hotels would have with the majority of Priceline customers - we're doing them a favor!

It's most likely the hotel manager begrudges renting the room at such a low rate and doesn't realize the purpose behind it.

Ironically, I have been treated extremely well when traveling using Priceline and Hotwire. Many times we have been upgraded to the Club level if the hotel has one or a deluxe room, or a room with a view. On the other hand, I recently booked a stay in Atlanta directly through the hotel's website and was given a great deal of grief because I took advantage of the site's advance booking discount as well as a corporate discount that was legitimately available directly from the chain! My wife and I were completely embarrassed at check in to say the least (they treated us as though we were stealing the room from them). So, it's not just Priceline customers who get discriminated against, it's really just low rate bookings that experience problems at some hotels.

I'm not saying that a company should win a valid dispute.

But too many times I've seen the bank give the money back to the cardholder because there were six blanks to initial and the customer forgot to initial one blank. Anything can happen--coffee can spill on the receipt and blur the signature, the person can sign slightly differently than normal (and the bank will contest it's not a valid signature), or any number of other minor technicalities where the business truly is due the money and a sleazeball customer is just looking to get out of paying for something.

As far as you expecting to pay only for the room--well, when the wallpaper is torn, the towels are missing, the TV glass has a crack in it, or even if it's as simple as you want to stay another night, isn't it only fair that the hotel expects you to pay for those things? Those are the things that extra $250 security hold is to cover. If the hotel charges you for that damage and you then dispute those charges on the grounds you were only told you'd have to pay what you paid Priceline, the merchant is simply covering his you-know-what with that form that he can produce to the credit card issuer when they demand to see proof the customer authorized those charges.

"As far as you expecting to pay only for the room--well, when the wallpaper is torn, the towels are missing, the TV glass has a crack in it, or even if it's as simple as you want to stay another night, isn't it only fair that the hotel expects you to pay for those things? Those are the things that extra $250 security hold is to cover. If the hotel charges you for that damage and you then dispute those charges on the grounds you were only told you'd have to pay what you paid Priceline, the merchant is simply covering his you-know-what with that form that he can produce to the credit card issuer when they demand to see proof the customer authorized those charges."

Fair that I pay for that stuff? Depends.

If I am already back in my home country and I get a bill for 3 missing towels I am going to raise holy heck. If they claim that the TV is now broke and I am the one responsible I am going to raise holy heck.

Because I do not steal towels nor break TV's. Did not do so when I traveled on the companies dime do not do it now that I use PL. But except for my CC folks backing me up what recourse do I have?

If I trash a room then arrest me on the spot if I do not pay. Otherwise turn it into your insurance. Because its just as likely that the maid or a previous guest did whatever you want to now charge me for.

I do understand how someone who spent a career in an industry will see the industries side of things. Just as I a traveler see the travelers side of things. Just human nature.

But "slezball customers" says a lot to me. It reminds me of the people I saw that worked to long in public health clinics that came to see their customers or clients as the enemy. Not all of those PH workers for sure. But far to many.

And as far as extending another night while on a PL reservation? Cannot be done. You either bid again and win. Or you take out a new reservation from the hotel while you are there and pay in full for it.

I for one think the CC company backing me up against hotels that want to bill me for products I never bought or damage I never did to be one of the really great reasons to use a CC.

Good for them for doing their job.

Can you please use the quote function on FlyerTalk? It makes it difficult to separate your response without it.

If the hotel is billing you three weeks or three months later, then that is an issue. But even if the hotel catches the damage during the daily servicing of the room, by the time it's reported to management and sent to accounting, even if they get that done the same day you check out, you're long gone. Doesn't matter whether it's three hours or three days later--the situation is still the same: you did it; you owe the money.

Did I say you did? No. But there are people out there who will. (bhatnasx testified it is a real issue and does happen.) There are people who steal cars from rental car companies, too.

Hard to arrest you on the spot if you're 50 or 500 miles away from the property by the time they find out.

And I highly doubt a hotel carries insurance on a TV set. Many may very well be self-insured for this type of room damage. Rental car companies self-insure their fleets, so they can't just "turn it into [their] insurance" when a risky customer steals a car. I'd imagine hotels operate similarly.

Did I say all customers were "slezball" (sic) customers? No. Far from it. The vast majority are respectable, upstanding citizens who would never intentionally do something to hurt the property and, if something happened on accident, would own up to it and pay for any issues without dispute.

But the hotel and rental car industries are in a sector of the retail industry that deals with an element of risk. Your grocery store does not have risk when you buy milk. Your favorite restaurant does not have risk when you sit down for dinner. Your preferred department store does not have risk when you buy a shirt or shoes. Before you walk out of the door, you pay for the item in full. If payment is an issue, the store simply takes back the item you were attempting to purchase--done deal.

But with a hotel room or rental car, the retailer is effectively loaning a valuable asset out to you. (In the case of a rental car, you can walk out the door with an asset that's over a hundred times as valuable as your security deposit.) This forces these retailers to sometimes have to act more as loan officers than customer service providers. You wouldn't go into a bank and then yell at the loan officer that he or she is being unreasonable with asking you to sign a form or provide proof that you are good for the loan. And if a particular subset of a bank's customers--say, those with a bad credit history--are inherently riskier, it is perfectly within the bank's right to require additional things from them before letting them walk out the door with thousands of dollars of the bank's money.

When risk is involved, it is fair to take steps to minimize exposure to that risk. But to keep this on-topic, that's not what we're talking about in this thread. The OP's question was not whether hotels have a right to collect on damages but rather whether Priceline customers fit in that category of riskier customers.

Sorry; I've never tried to do this on a PL reservation, so I did not realize this. It does not negate my point, however.

I'm all for charges being billed fairly. If you didn't break the TV or steal towels, then, frankly, I don't even know what you're getting so worked up about. You should not be charged for any such thing, and if you do, it's perfectly within your rights to not have to pay. And this issue (misbilled charges) was not brought up in this thread, either.

But too often, I've seen someone who is very clearly in the wrong and very clearly should pay for whatever charges he's being charged for escape on a technicality because the merchant did not make it clear enough that he was responsible for those items or because of a bad signature or missed set of initials. That's all the hotel mentioned in this thread is trying to do, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with what he's doing. The only question is whether it is fair to apply that extra step specifically to Priceline members, something that I can definitely see could be the case, although we really need data to back that assertion up.

"If you didn't break the TV or steal towels, then, frankly, I don't even know what you're getting so worked up about. You should not be charged for any such thing,"

*********************************************

Trust me if I knew how to quote only a part of your response I would do so.

I just do not see how we can have this both ways. I stay on a PL stay and the hotel bills me for 3 expensive towels which they add to my cc I gave them on check in. Its their word against mine.

They claim a daily breakfast x 7 of which I ate only one. They add those charges for that to my CC. Its their word against mine.

Except I have AMEX or Visa ready to fight for me.

So unless that is exactly my signature authorizing those breakfast charges I will not pay. And I do not see that as some minor technicality that the signature is smuged or a little messy, or coffee stained.

That messy or missing signature becomes the difference between me paying for something I did not order while being at the mercy of a hotel chain that has already billed my cc and not paying at all.

The 3 missing towels? Thats just too bad. I will not pay for those. They can just deal with that as part of the cost of doing business. Self insurance or insurance company. I could care less. Just not me.

You seem to make a big distinction between charges I should pay and those I should not. When the hotel bills me they only see it as charges I should pay.

Me saying I am an honest person despite being a lowly unwanted PL customer you think will carry a lot of weight?

If the hotel needs a clearly readable unsumgged non coffee stained signature on my charges they better get it.

Otherwise they can talk to my CC company.

Doc

Click the "Quote" button in the lower-right corner of the post you want to reply to. In the resulting screen that displays, the quote will be inside quote tags that look like this:

Edit out what you don't want, making sure to leave the QUOTE and /QUOTE tags and the brackets on either side of those tags (i.e. [ and ]) intact.

As to the rest of your post, we're talking on two different wavelengths about two different issues. Since I've said everything I can in response to your challenges (which, I'll note, are separate from the question posed by the original poster), I'll leave it for the rest of the FT community reading this post to make their own judgments about our discussion and to continue the topic as originally introduced.

The takeaway: In the hotel and rent-a-car businesses, because the thing being rented is so valuable compared to the rental fee, hotels and RACs risk having their rooms/cars damaged/dinged/beer spilled in them. Conversely, guests of hotels, and auto renters, risk bogus charges on their CC bill. Both camps have stories to tell. But no one here has offered even anecdotal evidence that people who purchase lodging or travel through PL are more likely to damage property than are users of other distribution channels.

Priceline only requires $100 hotel deposit by credit or debit card, or $200 for cars. Some RACs require you to show a return ticket to use a debit card. Hotels have the right to not accept debit cards for incidentals, but I have never heard of this happening. Usually the hotel just charges the amount of the incidental deposit to the debit card and refunds it later.

Priceline hotels are not allowed to charge or authorize a $250 deposit to ensure against beer-keg-blasts or non-smoking-room smokers.

Bzzt! You can often extend your Priceline stay, at the same price, and usually an extension can be requested until 11:30 AM the day of your scheduled departure.

You sound like a good Priceline customer, ReconDoc, but you're not who this thread is talking about. The first post is about a hotel manager who complained about Priceline guests trashing rooms, stealing TVs, and smoking in nonsmoking rooms. And actual damages couldn't be recovered due to credit card trickery.

Even if room trashing and TV stealing are very low frequency events, and probably they are, they can involve large loss amounts, so hotel managers have to remain vigilant to the possibilities. The Priceline system, like all systems, has its vulnerabilities and there are always a few people who will try to exploit if they can.

If Priceline and Hotwire customers have a reputation among hotel staff for being difficult or demanding I think it's not so much about trashing and stealing, but more because PL/HW guests probably do make more requests than others, and PL/HW guests actually are dissatisfied more often than other guests because they have to be told "no" more often.

A guest who books at retail, whether through the hotel or another agent, will reserve his preferences---smoking/nonsmoking, 1 bed/2 bed. If the hotel is sold out on his preferences he'll book someplace else. Same thing with walkin customers.

It's only the Priceline and Hotwire customers who don't know if they'll be getting smoking or nonsmoking, 1 bed or 2. They have to negotiate it face to face with the reservation agent at checkin, and they might not get what they want, even if they called in ahead and asked that their preferences be noted. Sometimes the agent has to give a smoking room, or charge extra for a second bed, and if a customer doesn't understand the charges or thinks it's unfair the exchanges can get heated.

I think these little struggles with PL/HW customers over room placement/bedding are a pretty common event, maybe an every day event at some hotels, much more than the room trashing/stolen TV scenarios. And probably they happen with Priceline customers more than Hotwire customers (since you can reserve 2 beds on Hotwire), or Orbitz/Expedia/Travelocity customers, since those can reserve smoking and bed preferences too.

mbstone, you are correct you can extend through PL before you get to the hotel. But you cannot extend at the hotel once you are staying there. And some people do try and then get upset the hotel offers them the hotel rate and not the PL rate.

But for the hotel this just looks like any two prepaid reservations. No additional money at all due the hotel for this.

Colfax I do try ;)

And it funny you mention this. Because I follow only one city in any depth as far as PL----Amsterdam. And I do a lot of walking people through PL bidding over on TA.

And I am so happy with the decisions that NH (the biggest player at 4* by far) has made relative to PL NYOP as far as their hotels that I bend over backwards to be a good guest. Better even than when I was paying full price on the companies dime.

I even go out of my way to buy one or two of those $28 -$30 dollar breakfasts:( each week I stay there as a small way of giving back to them.

We have saved a lot of people a ton of money the past 13 or 14 months via PL bidding. And so far it seems to have worked well for our members and for the hotels.

Doc

That's true as well - but that's also part of the reason why the $200 traveler is more understanding.

A common misconception...hotels rarely, if ever, charge an incidental deposit to a debit card. They only authorize the card to that amount. That authorization, because it's a debit card, removes the amount from someone's available balance, but the hotel never took possession of the money. They release the authorization at checkout and the bank usually takes a few days to process it - hence the reason you never use a debit card to book a hotel room & most rental car companies don't even take debit cards.

With a credit card, the authorization is still requested, but it doesn't remove available funds from your credit line because it's a credit line & the merchant has an agreement with the issuing card provider. Debit cards are issued by individual banks (regardless of the fact that they are Visa check-cards or the like).

I still do not see this at all. Going back to my example of PL and Amsterdam bidding. There is one 4 star that shows up fairly often. The NH Amsterdam Centre (not the NH Amsterdam City Centre).

The reviews on TA are pretty much like night and day.

The fights with front desk people over whatever, the complaints about the small rooms, complaints about this and that and this and that. Its virtually 100% from full paying ($200+ a night) guests.

And more often than not the statement-----I paid to much for this room. (it is in fact a very nice hotel---I will attest to that having just spent two weeks there)

The PL guests and there are many are almost without exception happy campers. Delighted to have such a nice hotel. And if they do point out short comings its almost always followed with-----"but at the price I paid I cannot complain"

In this instance, and you can check the reviews for yourself, there is a relationship between being more understanding and price paid. But opposite of what you allege.

Doc

Respectfully Disagree. If discounted rooms are available, you will be allowed to extend on the PL website until 11:30 AM the day of check-out. I've done this lots and lots of times. The hotel might not offer extensions except at a higher rate, and whether you get upset or not is nobody's problem but your own. If PL does let you extend, you will have to visit the front desk, re-check-in, run your CC again, and get a new key.

If you are unsuccessful in extending your stay at the same property via PL, and you are feeling lucky, you can always re-bid the zone and maybe you will win your own hotel again, in which case call the front desk....
.

I have extended my stay on Priceline on the day of checkout on a couple of occasions.

I will also say that we have had success extending a stay through "direct negotiations" with the front desk. After all, if they sold the room through Priceline, they generally have rooms to sell. An offer that is $10 more than what you originally bid is usually enough to get it done.

Actually, an authorization does remove available funds from a credit card's available credit line. That's the whole point of an authorization: it "reserves" that amount of money for the merchant's use (whether the merchant posts the charge at the close of that business day when processing the batch or whether it is processed a week later when the customer checks out or returns their car).

When doing training with new employees, I often use my card for test authorizations so they can see how the process works. After four or five test rentals, I have gone into my card to see my available credit is now $1,000 lower. ;) (My BofA AS Signature card takes it one step further and actually shows the pending charges itemized separately.)]

Also, there is little to no way for a merchant to "release the authorization" at check-out. An authorization is valid for a time period specified by the card-issuing bank. For my BofA Visa, unclaimed authorizations tend to fall off in about a week. It varies by card-issuing bank--some release it in just a couple of days, whereas others hold onto it for up to 30 days.

Regardless of the card-issuing bank's policy, a merchant generally has (by right of the merchant agreement they have signed with their acquiring bank--merchants only have agreements with their merchant banks, not with any cardholder banks) up to 30 days to claim funds from an unused authorization. (This can cause issues for cardholders: if an authorization "expires" and the funds are released back into the cardholder's available credit, and the cardholder subsequently maxes out his card, the rental agency/hotel can still submit a charge against that authorization after the cardholder has maxed out the card, which would then cause the cardholder to go over his/her limit [and incur associated overlimit fees/penalties]).

In any case, most car/hotel authorizations are, in effect, released--because the merchant submits a charge against the authorization at the close of the transaction. A few days later, when that charge makes it through all of the interchange networks and back to the card-issuing bank, the card-issuing bank sees that a $125 charge was posted against the $325 authorization #03225C. At that time, most banks will reconcile those two things together and convert the authorization into the charge, releasing the extra $200. I have seen a few banks continue to hold the $200 difference out of the customer's available credit until the authorization expires, however.

But--in the case of a prepaid transaction, where the merchant places an authorization on the customer's card that may never be used (assuming no incidental charges come up), that authorization just floats out there in cyberspace until the card-issuing bank decides to expire it. The merchant has very little control over that authorization once it has been made. If this causes an issue for a cardholder, the merchant has a couple of options:

• Process a $1 charge against the authorization and subsequent $1 refund to cause the bank to release the authorization, but this will take several business days to work through the system
• Contact the cardholder's bank directly and attempt to have them void the authorization (some banks make this difficult, and there is no standard procedure--some will accept the merchant's request over the phone, some will require a fax on company letterhead, and others simply won't do it at all)
• Some Point-Of-Sale systems--but not all--allow the merchant to manually release an authorization through the Visa network only, but only Visa--MasterCard, American Express, and Discover do not have this functionality [actually, rather than delete the authorization, the POS software requests that Visa change the authorization amount to $1]

Because of the difficulty, most RACs (and, I would assume, hotels) just leave the authorization out to expire. Given that it's a relatively small number of people who walk out with an unclaimed authorization and only a fraction of those people are affected by the loss of access to credit, it's not worth the hassle. If someone has need for the authorization to be released, they can contact the merchant and have the merchant try the above methods to void the authorization--but that is a relatively rare occurrence (I would estimate it's less than 1% of total transactions).

Regarding debit cards: from a purely technical standpoint, they function pretty much like credit cards, with one exception: banks usually only retain unclaimed authorizations for a couple of business days. While the merchant can still claim funds against an authorization up to 30 days later, people who have only debit (and no credit) cards also tend to be living paycheck to paycheck and have a small buffer in their accounts--meaning overdrafts due to expired authorizations are a definite possibility.

Add in most peoples' unfamiliarity with the concept of an "authorization" (they think that money is pulled out of a credit card or debit card instantaneously) and lack of attention to the difference between the "balance" and "available" columns on their online banking page, and now all of a sudden, the merchant is the recipient of angry phone calls claiming that the merchant caused the customer to overdraft or that the merchant held onto funds too long or whatever and that the merchant should pay the customer's NSF fees. (Believe me--I've been on the receiving end of those calls.)

So, many merchants in this sector (who even accept debit cards at all) have developed a policy with debit cards: CHARGE the deposit (don't just authorize it) and refund the money when the transaction is done. While refunds can take awhile to post, at least this way, the customer knows up front just exactly how much is being held and cannot complain about confusion over nebulous authorizations that may or may not even be visible.

Both because debit cards cause customer service issues ("What?! You're going to hold $500 of my hard-earned money?!) and because they are an indicator of risky customers (i.e. people with bad credit), many agencies simply don't accept them as collateral for a $30,000 vehicle--a wise, IMHO, course of action.

As for PL's vendor agreements regarding credit/debit card acceptance and deposit amounts, I can't speak to that because we don't do business with the opaque side of PL/HW. Were I to guess, though, I would guess that PL opaque customers are at least slightly more risky than full retail customers, simply because being someone looking to save money tends to also be someone who has less money (not always, but usually). Someone on an expense account or with a Centurion card and whose time is more valuable than money likely has the resources to pay for incidentals, whereas someone who is looking to spend $35 on a motel room probably has fewer liquid assets floating around.

While it may be against PL's vendor agreement and may not even be supported by factual data, I can definitely see the OP's hotel owner's line of thought.

A related question: if a hotel's standard policy is to authorize $200 on every guest's card (regardless of booking method), is that hotel still held to Priceline's requirement to only authorize $100? That would be one thing that would potentially turn me off from accepting PL bookings.

Direct negotiations with the hotel for an extension at the PL rate?

Yes I have heard of this happening. But it is a direct violation of the agreement the hotel has with PL. In fact if I knew a hotel doing this I would report them. And I am far from a reporting kind of guy.

Under the agreement the hotel has with PL they are in any way forbidden to have your PL bid made public even to the paying PL guest. In short they cannot even tell you what you paid PL.

This is the sort of slight of hand that honest hotels should not engage in IMO. PL is already a great system that saves many lots of money. And fills many hotel rooms that would otherwise be empty. Why try to gin the program?

Interesting on how long you can extend that PL win with an additional nights stay. I always thought it was until your trip started. Now I have learned something new.

It is in fact though not really an extension. It is a new win, at the old bid price, without having to bid, with a new PL fee added in.

It does save you from the worry of re-bidding and maybe ending up somewhere else.

EDITED: IMO its a short step from this direct negotiations to what happened to my brother when he checked in a hotel on a PL rate. Without asking the hotel said that they would give the PL rate he got plus the PL fee for any further booking he may want do do with that hotel if in the future he would book direct with them.

Borderline crooked and dishonest?

I would take out the word----borderline.

Yes, but the guest knows what he/she paid for the bid. So if the hotel says, you can book directly with us for $6 more (or whatever) per night than the amount you bid, why shouldn't the hotel be able to do that?

A hotel (or RAC) can set any rate it wants. Granted, I haven't seen the terms a hotel or RAC vendor signs when accepting PL bids, but in many places, a hotel clerk or rental car salesperson have full authority to decide what rate to extend to a walkup customer or someone booking a reservation--how possibly can PL prevent a vendor from doing that (short of forbidding the vendor from accepting a customer for a consecutive period of time without going through PL)?

I certainly agree its tough for PL to police hotels that are skirting the rules. And using your PL rate to get a direct rate is IMO a skirting of the agreed to rules between the hotel and PL. Not really between the customer and PL since we sign no agreement.

And that example my brother ran into is not a skirting. That is just flat out wrong.

Kind of tough to argue that the hotel is doing right or gets a pass by doing this on a thread that was started about guests not doing right by the hotel.

If that hotel is offering the same PL rate plus $10 to everyone that walks in off the street then fine. If they are just doing it to PL customers in an attempt to cut PL out of the loop then not fine.

Follow the agreed to rules and be honest. Seems like such a simple thing.