ZenWorld

I thought OP's problems at the hotel, while unsatisfactory, but not un-liveable.
A smaller room with working drainage in shower, or a bigger room but ankle water logged, slow drainage problems are not things that you will want to flog the hotel till the point that it looked like it is a place unfit for humans.

I think if it is indeed an unsatisfactory stay, and be calm and speak to SPG Corporate for a resolution at the end of the trip, but enjoy the holiday. SPG Corporate is a team you can trust. I believe most of us here can vouch for them. Perhaps a refund of some of the points may be offered, and give the hotel a chance to upgrade their drainage problem after their trip.

But what I think was wrong on the hotel part was to throw the guests out. Unless the hotel can prove the guests are a danger to the hotels staff and/or fellow guests, it would probably have violated contractual laws and perhaps local innkeepers laws. That is one legal area that Starwood Properties should avoid. The guests may have gone too far in voicing complaints over tiny issues, but throwing guests out over this, simply aids the guests argument that the property may not have handled certain things professionally.

I think it is very hard to find many people being sympathetic to the hotel after the hotel evicts the guests forcefully, though I will be sympathetic to the hotel if the hotel puts up with the guests despite the guests being whiny and hard to please.

The service staff are trained to be professional, to manage difficult customers. A good hotelier can not just manage difficult customers expectations, but even meet and surpass their expectations. That should be the aim, and not "it is my way or the highway". Very unfortunate that it has occurred here.

The eviction should never have happened, though I thought OP should have shown a bit more restrain in posting remarks in TA. If it is so un-liveable, OP should have walked. And if it is not so bad (at least we knew OP did not want to leave), then perhaps the complaint has been a bit too strong, but no excuses for the eviction action.

whimike

Why do you think the review on TA posted instantaneously?!

In the OP it was stated that the TA review was posted sometime around 7:30 PM the day of arrival, and the OP was summoned to see the owner at 11:30 AM the following day. This would have given at minimum 12 hours for the post to show up on TA from the point it was submitted.

Dr. HFH

I think that "probably" may be a bit of a stretch. I don't know anything about the law in Greece. Do you? The law in Greece may well favor innkeepers in questionable situations. Greece has had several different types of governments over the years; and we (at least I) don't know how the legal system evolved.


Agree completely; but our analysis is hampered by only having one side of this story.


Well, without hearing the other side, I suggest that we don't actually know this to be true.

Flyingmama

I suspect what pushed the hotel owner to kick out the OP was not so much the TA review - although that may have been the final straw - but rather the OP's treatment of the supervisor who tried and tried to remedy things for him.

As the OP states:
The OP acknowledges the first time she came he went "crazy with her statement." and later "I had lost my control and asked her to come down again." By his own admission, the OP was extremely confrontational with the supervisor and possibly quite nasty. I am of the opinion that when the owner learned about what had transpired with one of his staff that this prompted him to kick the OP out.

And frankly, I don't blame him.

Land-of-Miles

I really wanted to stay at this property. However the way the OP was treated is unacceptable even if they haven't helped themselves. It is understandable to be upset at an alleged 'luxury" property, where basic functions are not properly working and where the staff offer excuses rather than solutions.

Flyingmama

The offer to immediately move him to another room with functioning drainage and/or a choice of suites the following day when they are vacated aren't solutions? What do you regard as a "solution" then?

craz

Especially since lets not forget this hotel has all of 22 rooms, - #15 (1st room given with the problems, and - #14 the OP didnt want it leaves 20 its not usual for the hotel to be sold out. Im sure #14 isnt the only room of that type so the OP would have KOed the others as well if they were available.

I could imagine if the OP and or his wife comes from a middle to high caste level back in India that in fact that may have resulted in how they spoke to the underlings (low class) employees when they didnt get what they wanted when they wanted it. Been around too many of those arguments in my life. It might have worked back in India but not outside of it

GVA

I'd really like to hear from Starwood or the hotel.

Until I do, I will give the benefit of the doubt to the guest, as I do not see any reason for a hotel manager to kick out a guest. However, there may be more to this story, which is why I'd like to hear their version.

remymartin

Check-in was on 27th May and the TA review is dated 27th May. Whenever I've submitted reviews they've taken days to show up. As OP has only posted 1 review you would think there were more scrutiny for first-time posters, yes?

Land-of-Miles

Indeed ^

sbrower

I have been on FT since it started. This is the only time I remember hearing about an owner personally kicking out a guest on the first day of a multi-day stay. I am going to go with experience and intuition and say that this is NOT a common occurrence and therefore I don't "assume" that the guest was right.

christianj

We have a stay there in the next two week and I am not changing a thing and personally think your overreacting to this one experience. I think most of us agree that basic functions should be a given at any level of hotel and especially a luxury hotel. Would I be upset about a tub that doesn't drain and wifi that doesn't work...probably but I would not make a scene to the extent of the OP. I would voice my displeasure and if I wasn't happy with the solution offered I would take it up with SPG Customers Service after my stay. I would imagine that a satisfactory solution like a partial points reimbursement or something else would be worked out. I personally would not ruin my entire vacation due to some water in a tub!

Being kicked out of a hotel is completely unacceptable but we are not getting the full story here so who knows if it was warranted or not.

GUWonder

Not familiar with figurative language? The OP's choice of words (which you quoted) are not prima facie evidence that the OP behaved in a clinically crazy manner or in any manner that is considered unlawful or even vocally noticeable from outside the door or windows of the room. Getting bothered by something doesn't necessarily mean that a person is obnoxiously and/or otherwise verbally abusing the hotel staff.

The point may be that a hotel that markets itself as a high-end luxury hotel shouldn't be having it such that the hotel initially assigns guests a room that can't get the basics right -- the basics include having fully functional drains in the bathroom.

The hotel started things on the wrong footing (by not getting the basics right) and it ended things on the wrong footing by giving the guests a boot. In between check-in and eviction, the hotel staff tried to improve things but then the hotel owner put an end to any further service recovery attempts. Hotel fail.

craz

I agree with you concerning the non draining of the water, especially since its a knwon issue to the hotel and probably why a person on a pts stay was given the room over a paying customer. But they did offer room #14 that from the OP didnt have the same issues, but wasnt to the OPs acceptance due to size and not as good views. Hotel but a ^ on recovery, especially when they offered nicer suites for the following night

Kicking the OP out Hotel since none of us was there and the OP most likley left out tons of info, no different then did with their TA review compared to the one on FT.I dont know how anyone can say Hotel fail .

The hotel may have been very correct in giving the boot. I do wonder which room the OP stay in that night #15 or #14, he turned down #14 and had his stuff in #15, so in the end did he decided to keep the larger room with the better views and draining issues and WiFi issue, Ive had WiFi issues in many hotels especially when in the sticks , it can come and go ,but the hotel fixed that as well with a booster, so was it still not good enough to skype to India? Ive had that in many places as well when wanting to use my magic jack connection

Sorry but I cant help but feel that the OP hasnt told us everything that went on and that was said and what he demanded to fix everything. but just from how he posted here and on TA, Im siding with the Hotel and dont blame the hotel for wanting to get rid of him if he was so demanding and unhappy

And SPG needs to remove this hotel and others from the LC brand since they arent a luxury hotel and needs a *W Collection brand to put them into, that wouldnt change its cat, only the perception that folks may have of what to expect before walking in. Instead of expecting 'luxury' they will expect 'uniqueness' which this hotel would be 100%

Dr. HFH

The only thing I assume here is that there's more to the story than we have been told.