dcstudent

In what may be a vain attempt to pull this back on track before it gets locked....

Yes, the hotel owner may have overreacted. We don't know as we don't know the hotel's side of the story and we have no way to judge the veracity of the OP.

What we do know:

OP expected quite a bit as a GOLD

OP got upgraded from basic room type

OP was frustrated with speed of water draining from sink/shower

OP was frustrated with wifi

What the OP says the hotel did:

Sent up plumber and I.T. person

When that didn't work a supervisor offered a different room which OP refused

After OP refused, supervisor offered choice from 3 (3!) different rooms the next day!

Hotel offers wine tasting or 50 minute spa treatment for 2 (not cheap)

Hotel sends up free cake

OP responds to all of this by making a nasty post on TA.

I'm really not trying to be an apologist here, but prior to the tossing-out, what else could the hotel have done to try to make a service recovery? They sent up repair persons, when that didn't fix the issue they offered an immediate move to a different room. When that was refused they offered the choice of 3 different rooms the next day. And, in return, all they got was a nasty review on trip advisor, that didn't even mention what they hotel had tried to do for him.

taipeiflyer

SIMPLE: THE HOTEL COULD NOT HAVE PUT HIM IN A ROOM IT FULLY KNEW TO POSSESS THE PROBLEMS IT DID!!!! Why is that continually being overlooked? That was the butterfly effect that started this whole fiasco. The HOTEL KNEW THE SINK AND BATHTUB DIDN'T DRAIN AND ASSIGNED THE ROOM REGARDLESS! ...?!?

GUWonder

I don't smoke -- never have -- and I only drink water when traveling (as I'm now). And I've read this thread in full and very carefully repeatedly.

The attribution of the American OP's behavior to his connections in India is fundamentally bigoted and based on stereotyping people based on their or their family member's ethnic/religious/national origin affiliations.

People are free to hold their own prejudices, but no one should be surprised to have posts called out for selling prejudices, especially when those prejudices are trying to be used to criticize an FTer for an incident that doesn't even require selling prejudice in order to criticize what happened or what some may want to imagine happened.

The hotel failed from the start by assigning a room with a sub-par bathroom.

NYCtraveler

This OP Expected too much as a Gold for sure and too much in general in a small island hotel .....He got Upgraded, He refused the room with the "properly" working shower....too small and the view not as nice....he HAD the change option...but refused, though offered other rooms the next day. He was offered for his inconvenience a couples massage or wine tasting....neither are inexpensive....Wifi was working after the booster came within 5 hours. They sent a cake and tried to make amends.....And Then he wrote the review entitled ""Pure Garbage".....HELLO.

Now as a Trip Advisor user, I always discount the best and worst reviews especially when the OP has only one review.....These reviews are generally useless and usually spiteful.....Which appears to be the way the OP took care of his anger management issues....

The hotel handled this poorly, I said this before....But If I was that owner, I can't say I wouldn't have read that review and done the same thing.... In my business if customers are going to be too high maintenance, we often cut them loose....it's just not worth the time/$$ balance. This OP had already done the damage....

I have seen many nuts in hotels raging on a variety of topics....It is refreshing to see the owner took a strong stand. Right or wrong....It puts a smile on my face. I only wish I was there to see it. Cheers!

Safe travel and no evictions wished to all! NYC

NYCtraveler

Why does this OP title this thread How Low can SPG go?

SPG is a marketing organization who had nothing to do with the OP's Eviction. This was purely the hotels issue/decision.

FYI.

dcstudent

That's a fair point. Also fair, we don't know the extent of the problem. If both didn't really drain at all I totally understand and agree that the hotel should have taken the room out of service. If it drained but drained slowly, there are people who aren't going to mind that.

For example, I was at the Sheraton Sand Key two weeks ago and the shower drained, but not as quickly as water got into it. By the end of my showers the water was slightly over my ankle. Annoying, yes. Annoying enough to me that I complained, no. But, again I totally get another customer finding that unacceptable.

But, even if we assume (and that's really what we're doing on all sides because none of us were there and we only have one person's side of the story) that the room should have been taken out of service, the hotel did pretty much everything they could to rectify the situation afterwards, no? The OP did refuse to move to a room with working plumbing, does that not mean something? And they did offer to move him to any of 3 rooms that would become available the next day.

To me at least, the OP was making a mountain out of a molehill and needlessly escalated the situation. At least wait until you've seen the 3 rooms the next day to post a review (and best to wait until you've left).

supatight80

I've been in situations where tubs did not drain well, wifi was painfully slow, or something was just not working. If it was intolerable, I would politely request for a new room, and they would happily transfer me to a different quarter.

I believe this property has done the same to the OP. Provided him options and/or solutions.
But an error made by the property doesnt warrant for someone to "go crazy" and "losehis control" like in OP's own admission.

There are only 22 rooms int his property. Read on t.a. that noise insulation isnt that great. I wonder if other guests have complained...

taipeiflyer

NO... DCStudent did not "nail it." If I go to a restaurant and see oysters on the menu, and I order them and they bring out 5 day old oysters and I complain, and they offer to fix it by bringing out 3 day oysters, that is not a fix. Nor is, but if you want to come back tomorrow, we will have fresh oysters. The oysters never should have been on the menu, and i never should have had to order them in the first place only to have to send them back and wait for fresh food.

The original room never should have been in inventory- the hotel admitted they knew about the problem. Had they originally assigned him room 14, I would not have had a problem... but they already inconvenienced the OP by putting him in room 15 on his anniversary, which they knew to be substandard, thereby forcing him to call a plumber, send a supervisor, etc. As such, they should have tried to make the OP's stay better, not punish him for simply wanting something as simple as a fully functional sink and tub- that is usually how customer service goes.

taipeiflyer

the only acceptable solution in my opinion would have been for the hotel to IMMEDIATELY offer to fully refund OP's points for the first night, move him to room 14, and then the next day, give him the better suite for the rest of the stay. Outside of that, the hotel failed by giving him room 15 in the first place.

Dr. HFH

Come on, GWU. We may not like to talk about it or admit it, but racism is alive and well in India, just as it is in the U.S. Do you know that the OP wasn't raised to believe that he is better than others due to the caste system (which exists in India pretty much openly but not in the U.S.)? No, I didn't think so. And remember, no one said that that is the basis for OP's behavior, merely that it should be considered as a possibility due to India's strong and long history with caste.


No, not selling prejudice. The ugly truth is that racism exists, whether you ignore it or not.


It did, no question. But from the OP's description of what happened, he overreacted, especially given that the hotel made a good faith and diligent effort to recover. It's not as if he walked into the room to find a dozen rats climbing over the bed and consuming the cake. There were problems with internet access (which were solved), and slow drains in the bathtub and sink. It may well have been a mistake to keep the room in sellable inventory, especially if the hotel knew of these problems and didn't advise the guest in advance, as appears to be the case here. (While most people will find a stopped bathtub drain completely unacceptable, many will find a slow drain suboptimal but tolerable. I make no judgment on the fact that the OP found the drain unacceptable. I have no doubt that he tolerates things which I would not.) But it wasn't a war crime.

It appears that the hotel's mistake significantly affect the OP's anniversary vacation for which he had saved for quite some time, and that must have been very disappointing to him. I do hope that he and his wife were able to enjoy at least part of the vacation.

angatol

Why? Because of 1 in a 1000 people who get hysterical over a slow draining shower? People who pretend they can't wash their hands in a slow draining sink? Give me a break.

dcstudent

Seriously? The hotel offered a new room with everything in working order, and offered to comp spa treatments or wine tasting. Sounds like comping the dessert and replacing the entree with fresh oysters. May still be a reason to give less stars on Yelp, but one star and no mention of the service recovery?

Also, to be fair to both sides, we don't know the extent of the problem. Yes, it was too much for the OP and we should not discount that. But, it also does not mean that other customers would have found it a bother. None of us, except the owner and the OP (and others who stayed in the same room) know the extent of the issue with the drains and i.t. Just because it was a huge problem for the OP doesn't mean it was a problem for most guests.

taipeiflyer

Absolutely in full agreement regarding we don't know the whole story, but until the hotel gives their version of events, I am going to take the OP at his word. Another forumite sent an email to the GM of the hotel- they should take the time to clarify the events- silence means no clarification is needed and OP was being forthright.

Fizzer

Based purely on a third hand statement reported by the OP, who has lost at least some credibility, in my eyes at least , through his OTT reactions and hyperbole.


Or they could choose not to engage for a variety of reasons, other than an acknowledgement of guilt.

taipeiflyer

The plumber of the hotel and te manager on duty admitted as much.