GUWonder

F&F rate legally is a revenue rate. The Danish government consider it to be so too.

The issue isn't one about legal entitlement to the rate as much in this matter as it's about the customer-unfriendly attitude faced by at least some of those who have even legitimately booked this rate plan at the property.

And I am entitled to this rate plan, even as I rarely use it for my own stays --all despite being at hotels around the area multiple times a month.

trooper

Agreed about what the issue may well be... but the OP simply is NOT one of those people...

What sort of "friend" doesn't know your name?

GUWonder

Lots of people don't know all of their friends' full legal names. Who goes around telling their friends: "I need your full name as recorded on government issued ID before we can be considered friends."?

Plenty of people even have cousins whose legal name as issued on government-issued ID is unknown amongst some or all of the person's other cousins. It's really not beyond the realm of normal of being friends or even relatives with some people without requiring presentation of ID.

"Oh, you're a school friend of Barry Soetero (sic)? You knew him back when he had a cool gibbon at home?" "No, I don't know any Barry Sotero, but I did go to school with an Obama who said he had a gibbon around his house as a kid there."

nacho

I have a friend from early childhood, she has a nick name (everyone in the neighbourhood calls her that) and even 35 years later I still don't know her real name.

Again both GUWonder and I are not judging what OP is doing - he has every right to do whatever he wants and whether that's his friend or not it's not my business. We just want to point out that the front desk of the hotel is not the best in this world.

RTW1

But that's exactly the issue..... the OP used a rate he wasn't entitle to (if it can't be verified you are not entitled) and that's what sparked the discussion with the hotel.

From what I've seen here both parties in that conversation were being rude. But the hotel didn't start this thread :-).

craz

If its a legit rev rate in Denmark then that leaves the hotel in a worse situation. Thusly I dont blame them 1 bit then in making sure everyone who uses it is doing so properly and is entitled to such a low rate.

As for the attitude I agree it should be customer friendly and any gripes should be with that employee that is spreading it worldwide. But if the hotel feels that its being abused and is in fact catching alot of folks who are not entitled to be using it, I can understand where their attitude is coming from.

Not the best example, but if a person takes the cops on a wild goose chase when they are finally caught I highly doubt the cops will treat them with kid gloves, I dont mean physically I mean in the way they speak to them. And if they usually get attitude from people who are bald eventually they will see all bald people the same way.Not saying its right only why things maybe are as they are.

But Kim shouldnt be on a war path with everyone and must admit to themselves at times some folks will slip thru or that an employee has spread it far and thick to use their info for F&F, then Kim should take it up with Corp to see if anything can be done.

I understand some folks want to put the blame on Kim alone, I 1stly place it on all those using F&F when they arent entitled to. And could be mgmt wants Kim to do what they are doing. Answer is if a person doesnt like the way a hotel (or anything) operates dont stay there. I have a few dont stay places or rent from places on my list

GUWonder

The issue isn't exactly that. It's also the hotel/hotel employee's attitude toward customers.

There is no proof in this thread that the OP used a rate to which the OP wasn't entitled. Unless the OP has engaged in misleading fabrication -- and there is no proof of that presented in this thread -- the OP seems to indicate that the OP can be verified as being entitled to use this rate plan. It's the hotel that seems to have failed to verify that which can be verified and has struck back with hostile attitude against the OP for its own failing.

The FOM got mad again, this time due to being caught as "too smart for his own good" and tripping on his own suspicions about a booked customer? I would not be surprised. Unfortunately for customers of this hotel, this tone is set up by the top and this FOM has his back covered.

RTW1

Being asked "Please have the employee of Carlson Rezidor Hotel Group to contact us at [email protected] prior to your arrival in order to confirm otherwise Friends and Family Rate cannot be honoured" and then the employee conveniently being unable to do that (and later denying any knowledge of the friendship) is proof enough for me... The lack of any attempt to have the so called Carlson friend contact the hotel at a later date only confirms this.

The rest is probably just a result of that and dealing with numerous similar cases. Not the greatest interaction, but nothing too shocking either.

GUWonder

Circumstantial evidence and presumption like that isn't proof of lack of entitlement to the rate.

The rate eligibility wasn't set up with a requirement for employees of other Carlson hotels to be required to contact the hotel prior to the employee's friends or family being entitled to use a F&F rate. Carlson chose not to have it done this way, but the hotel and FOM decided to do its own thing for its own reasons. Fortunately, other Carlson hotels aren't all so hostile toward customers entitled to use the F&F rate.

craz

Exactly

GU why hasnt the OP posted the email they sent to Kim as a reply to Kims 1st email which wasnt condesending, they obviously sent one.

Regardless of how Kim is, if people wouldnt try and use codes or F&F when they arent entitled then they wouldnt run into Kim. If the hotel wasnt inudated with F&F they wouldnt be running shotgun over it, as it wouldnt be worth their time and effort.

I see nothing wrong in any company no matter the industry simply making sure that anyone obtaining a discount is entitled to it. If a person wants to see if they can get by I dont have a problem with that just be ready to be asked for proof. And thats where our OP comes in they were ticked that after no questions asked 5 previous times (dont know it they were all at the same hotel, but they stayed and paid F&F rate) and felt Kim had no right to ask that the so called employee contact the hotel and confirm everything with them, since it wasnt written down on the list

craz

I disagree, if the hotel was able to call and reach the employee then the OP could have as well, thats if they were indeed friends. By the OP not contacting their so called friend and having them call the hotel says enough. The OP did post that their friend was away for the weekend and not reachable, then how did the hotel reach them?

Innocent till proven guilty is not worldwide, and in many locales its the opposite.



As for how the rate was set up, and what Corp requires doesnt mean any 1 hotel cant add their own restrictions on top of that. And if they do and someone doesnt like it then go to Corp and complain.

RTW1

It would be for me when I ran a property and gave people a discount...calling the mentioned employee and having them denying knowing the friend would be the icing on the cake.

But what is it that you dislike so much about this property that makes you take sides no matter what?

GUWonder

Nothing. I just don't try to be an apologist for the customer-unfriendly attitude this hotel and its FOM gave the OP and others.

Hotels can't add their own rate rules for rate plans set up by corporate arrangements. That's part of the legal arrangement applicable to this hotel too.

According to the OP, the employee friend was on a trip with a partner. Calling such people for such kind of thing isn't always all that possible or even all that ideal for the person on a trip with a partner. If the OP knew the friend was on vacation with a partner, that speaks to a more than a casual acquaintance relationship, a relationship of a sort that doesn't make the person ineligible for the corporate-arranged rate to which the hotel is legally bound.

For the hotel to hassle another hotel's employee on their vacation with a partner, just over a F&F rate issue? It seems not only petty but also unnecessarily intrusive. It doesn't speak well of professional courtesy to intrude on formal vacation time of professional colleague while "out of the office" -- when it is over a matter like this.

craz

Hotels can and in fact do as they want. Then its upon us to call them on it by contacting Corp.

Often1

If OP's legal name is "Harry Simmons" but is known to most, including his F&F benefactor as "Skip Simmons" it is still somewhat over-the-top suspicious that when contacted by one's employer to verify the legitimacy of the use of the rate, that one does not draw the connection between "Harry" and "Skip".

After all, just how many "Simmons" has one authorized to travel on F&F to a specific property in a specific city overseas on a specific weekend who share the same last name?

Whatever the relationship between OP and the property, the benefactor and Kim are co-workers after a fashion and there are presumably consequences for the benefactor in all of this if it is not above board.